Instructions: In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.
Input: At about 10 pm on Sunday evening, a self-driving Uber struck and killed a woman crossing the street in Tempe, Arizona. The crash appears to be the first time a self-driving vehicle has killed someone—and could alter the course of a scantily regulated, poorly understood technology that has the power to save lives and create fortunes. 
  
 The Tempe Police Department reports the Volvo XC90 SUV was in autonomous mode when the crash occurred, though the car had a human safety driver behind the wheel to monitor the technology and retake control in the case of an emergency or imminent crash. The woman, Elaine Herzberg, was transported to a local hospital, where she died from her injuries. The police department will complete its full report later today. 
  
 In response, Uber has pulled its self-driving vehicles off public roads in the Phoenix metro area (including Tempe), San Francisco, Toronto, and Pittsburgh (where the cars also pick up passengers). A spokesperson says the company is cooperating with local authorities. The National Transportation Safety Board and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration are sending investigative teams to Tempe. 
  
 Few Rules 
  
 The deadly crash comes at a critical time for the nascent self-driving vehicle sector, which has spent billions on research and development for a technology it promises will be safer and more efficient than today’s human-driven cars and that it hopes to deploy for commercial service in the next few months or years. But now is the in-between time, the moment when autonomous vehicles are less than perfect, even as they take to public streets in ever greater numbers. So how might this first crash—which will not be the last—swing the safety vs. progress calculus? 
  
 Uber, Waymo, and other autonomous vehicle developers like Arizona not just for the sunny weather and calm conditions but for the near total lack of restrictions on how they test: Self-driving vehicles don’t need any sort of special permit, just a standard vehicle registration. And their operators don’t have to share any information about what they’re doing with the authorities. 
  
 LEARN MORE The WIRED Guide to Self-Driving Cars 
  
 “Although other states have reporting requirements for autonomous vehicles being tested in their state, Arizona does not see a need to implement reporting requirements at this point,” a spokesperson for the Arizona Department of Transportation told WIRED last year. 
  
 Earlier this month, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey signed an updated executive order giving companies permission to test or operate fully driverless vehicles in the state. No wonder, then, that Waymo plans to launch a totally driverless taxi service in the Phoenix area this year. (The Google sister company did not respond to a request for comment.) 
  
 Thus far, only California demands developers make public specific data on their operations, including descriptions of any crashes, how many miles they drive each year, and how often their human safety operators take control from the robot. Even those numbers are less than helpful in understanding the pace of their work or just how well these things really drive. The state will begin allowing the testing of totally driverless vehicles—without safety drivers for backup—on public roads next month. 
  
 Meanwhile, the companies in this space await legislation that would put the federal government firmly in charge of all autonomous vehicle design, construction, and performance, and allow even more testing—as many as 100,000 vehicles per manufacturer—all over the country. The bill, called the Self Drive Act, passed in the House this fall. But the companion Senate bill, the AV Start Act, has been held up by a few senators who wonder whether the young technology needs more aggressive oversight. 
  
 This crash will not help the companies’ arguments, as onlookers ask whether autonomous vehicles should be kept on a tighter leash as their developers iron out the considerable kinks in the tech. 
  
 “This tragic incident makes clear that autonomous vehicle technology has a long way to go before it is truly safe for the passengers, pedestrians, and drivers who share America’s roads,” US Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) said in a statement. “In our haste to enable innovation, we cannot forget basic safety.” 
  
 Knowledge and Power 
  
 Conditions on Sunday were warm, with little wind and 20 percent humidity—nothing that should have given the vehicle’s sensors much trouble. Google StreetView shows the intersection where Sunday’s death took place as the meeting of four five- and six-lane roads—hardly a place built with walkers at front of mind. The Tempe police report the woman was outside the crosswalk when she was hit and killed. 
  
 The death raises serious questions. How safe is safe enough to let driverless cars test on public roads, among people who haven’t consented to be guinea pigs? No one can see the crashes these vehicles avoided, ones that perhaps a cellphone-wielding, drunk, or very tired human wouldn’t have. Humans don’t have a great record: Nearly 40,000 people died on American roads last year. Almost 6,000 of them were pedestrians—that’s more than 16 per day.1 
  
 A lot of the governments are putting a tremendous amount of trust or faith into the companies developing this technology. 
  
 But human drivers kill just 1.16 people for every 100 million miles driven. Waymo and Uber and all the rest combined are nowhere near covering that kind of distance, and they’ve already killed one. 
  
 “This is another major illustration that the technology we’re talking about is evolving over time and not necessarily road ready for wide deployment,” says Bryan Reimer, who studies human behavior and driverless vehicles at MIT. 
  
 Does the safety driver system work? Developers insist their employees are trained to take over from the self-driving software if something goes wrong. But researchers worry that relying on imperfect humans to monitor imperfect tech—and perform flawlessly, under pressure, if an emergency arises—is foolhardy at best. Uber’s crash makes clear this “system” does not work all the time. 
  
 Do the companies need to be less opaque about their tech? Today, developers are loath to hand too much data over to the public sector, for fear that governments could reveal some of their very expensive proprietary secrets to the competition. But maybe the companies need to be more transparent about how their technology works—and about its faults. 
  
 Even if companies hand over more and detailed information about what they’re up to, do local, state, or federal authorities have the expertise to understand it—and create the right safeguards? “A lot of the governments are putting a tremendous amount of trust or faith into the companies developing this technology,” says Bryant Walker Smith, a lawyer who studies autonomous vehicle regulation at the University of South Carolina School of Law. Maybe it’s time for them to investigate self-driving on their own. 
  
 “The future potential of this technology is immense," says Reimer. "But it’s an evolution, not a revolution.” In other words: Maybe it’s time to tap the brakes. 
  
 Alex Davies contributed reporting. 
  
 1Correction appended, 3/19/18, 5:30 PM EDT: A previous version of this story misstated the number of pedestrians killed in the United States. 
  
 Self-Driving Hurdles ||||| Uber’s self-driving car was traveling at a speed of 40 mph when it struck a 49-year-old woman in Arizona Sunday night, and did not show significant signs of slowing down, police said today. 
  
 The pedestrian, Elaine Herzberg, was transported to the hospital, where she later died from her injuries. Herzberg, who was pushing a bicycle across the street, “may have been�? homeless, Tempe Police Sgt. Ronald Elcock said in a press conference. There was a safety driver behind the wheel of the vehicle, identified as Rafael Vasquez, 44. There is no sign that the driver was impaired, police said. An Uber spokesperson confirmed that Vasquez is employed as a safety driver by the ride-hailing company. The vehicle was traveling in autonomous mode at the time of the crash. 
  
 The victim “may have been�? homeless 
  
 The crash late Sunday evening has drawn intense scrutiny by the national media. It was likely the first time that a human pedestrian has been killed by an autonomous vehicle. Proponents of the technology have championed self-driving cars as a potential antidote to the tens of thousands of traffic fatalities that occur each year, while some safety advocates have expressed concern with the speed with which these vehicles are being pushed onto public roads for testing. 
  
 Uber suspended all of its self-driving testing in cities across the country in the wake of the crash. Volvo and Toyota, which have self-driving partnerships with Uber (or were negotiating deals), have declined to comment on the future of their relationship with Uber. 
  
 The crash is the most significant fatal incident involving a self-driving vehicle since a Tesla driver was killed in 2016 while his vehicle was in semi-autonomous Autopilot mode. Arguably this case will be even more scrutinized, as it involved a more advanced vehicle and a more controversial company. The National Traffic Safety Board has dispatched a team to Tempe to investigate. 
  
 “using the crosswalks will definitely limit this from happening again�? 
  
 Herzberg was crossing the street mid-block when she was struck by the self-driving Uber, police said. “The safety of our citizens here in Tempe is of the utmost importance,�? Elcock said. In reminding citizens to use crosswalks, Elcock added, “None of us ever want to go through this ever again, using the crosswalks will definitely limit this from happening again.�? 
  
 Of course, manufacturers often tout the ability of autonomous vehicles to “see�? beyond what normal human drivers can see, thanks to an expensive array of cameras, radars, and LIDAR sensors powering the car’s perception. And safe street advocates often bristle at law enforcement’s description of crash circumstances that appear to place blame on the victims. 
  
 The first non-driver death of the autonomous age and police are already blaming the victim. “Crossing outside of the crosswalk�? was never a valid excuse for traffic deaths, and it provides no cover for autonomous mobility companies. https://t.co/BSCgeTahCv — Janette Sadik-Khan (@JSadikKhan) March 19, 2018 
  
 The crash will likely lead to an intense round of finger-pointing among law enforcement, regulators, tech experts, and the auto industry. And since Uber’s self-driving cars are roving data recorders, there will be high-level interest in seeing what happens to the footage and crash stats captured by the vehicle itself. 
  
 The investigation is going to be similar to those of normal car accidents, Elcock said. Once the investigation concludes, the case will be referred to the Maricopa County attorney who will determine whether to bring charges. When asked to describe what it means to be in “autonomous mode,�? Tempe police deferred to Uber. |||||
Output:
The death of a 49-year-old pedestrian in Tempe, Ariz., on Sunday night is being called the first time a person has been killed by a self-driving vehicle, and Wired provides some perspective: "Human drivers kill just 1.16 people for every 100 million miles driven. Waymo and Uber and all the rest combined are nowhere near covering that kind of distance, and they've already killed one." The Verge has more details on that death, which police say occurred when Uber's autonomous vehicle was going 40mph. Police say there are no indications the Volvo XC90 SUV significantly slowed before hitting Elaine Herzberg, a homeless woman who was pushing a bicycle across the street outside a crosswalk. More: Police do not believe the safety driver behind the wheel, Rafaela Vasquez, 44, was impaired at the time of the crash, which occurred when the car was in autonomous mode. The Arizona Republic reports Vasquez served just shy of four years in Arizona state prison in the early 2000s for attempted armed robbery. The paper notes Uber was fined $8.9 million last year by Colorado after it was determined the company had almost 60 drivers with felony convictions on their record driving there in violation of state law. Herzberg also had a conviction on her record, for drug possession charges a few years back.