There are plenty of anecdotes of AVs behaving terribly, but anecdotes are beside the point. Normally when a company wants to introduce a dangerous new product on the market the burden of proof is on them to prove that it's safe enough. For various reasons tech companies have gotten to do this in reverse by testing on the public to find out how safe they are.

What does the article indicate then? Everything working as intended? I am wondering if the pedestrian that was dragged six meters by a autonomous machine felt much safer.

The AVs do not work well in the edge cases - exactly in those situations where humans can apply common sense and behave accordingly. Exactly the cases that sceptics seemed to be worried about, and it turns out that the sceptics were right.

I hope AVs will not be allowed on public roads where I live in the next decades.