Well, as far as I remember, the Link 16 was invented around the 1970s where aircraft could share real-time data in a combat zone.

The weather information can easily be transmitted every minute and it can be nicely visualized in the cockpit instead of being crammed into cryptic abbreviations and ancient codes.

Similarly, we are aware of the precise aircraft location and it's intended course, I'm talking about commercial airlines here, so we already know where they're going and what the approach path will be etc.

I find it hard to accept that we're collecting terabytes of telemetry from engines and all the other equipment on the aircraft, but we expect to communicate the weather and traffic information in verbal ways.

There are so many good ways we can solve the underlying requirements, but I think it's all stuck on the cost of implementation and who's going to be making money from it.

Aircraft can already receive traffic and weather information over ADS-B. Larger or more modern aircraft even have onboard collision avoidance systems that supersede ATC when necessary and also carry weather radars themselves.

Additionally, there are human factors to consider. One commonly read-out piece of data is the local altimeter setting which ensures that all aircraft under the control of the same facility have a common reference - you generally don't set your altimeter to the area you're in, but rather to the setting of where you're going. Airplanes already automatically receive that data, but selecting the exact setting requires manual intervention for precisely this reason.

Add in the need to allow older airplanes to keep flying, the need to be robust to signal jamming, and the inherent safety issues with packing an airplane full of gas and hundreds of people, and it quickly becomes clear that full automation is inadvisable.