> It's an unpopular opinion, but I believe the pedestrian caused this situation by putting themselves in a dangerous situation and not paying attention.

That doesn't mean that the Uber system wasn't dangerously defective and that a fit foservice self-driving system would have noticed in time to react (which may not have been sufficient to avert a collision, and may not have prevented a fatality, but given the speeds involved would have significantly reduced the risk of fatality.

That the pedestrian should not have entered the roadway where and when they did may relieve Uber of legal liability for this collision, it doesn't stop the failure to react at all from being evidence of a critical safety flaw.

And, had the same thing happened at an equally poorly lit, not specially marked, intersection in many jurisdictions (including California, not sure about Arizona), Uber would be legally at fault because of pedestrian right of way. If Uber's system can't see and react to people in dark clothes at night, it's not even remotely suitable for use, at least at night.