The video, taken from inside the Volvo XC90 sport utility vehicle that Uber has used for testing, shows the vehicle driving along a dark road when an image of a woman walking a bicycle across the road suddenly appears in the headlights.

The woman, Elaine Herzberg, 49, later died from her injuries.

Police have released few details about the accident that occurred on Sunday night in Tempe, Arizona, a suburb of Phoenix, while the SUV was driving in autonomous mode. Uber suspended its self-driving testing in North America after the incident and federal safety regulators are conducting their own probe.

Fall-out from the accident could stall the development and testing of self-driving vehicles, which are designed to perform far better than human drivers and sharply reduce the number of motor vehicle fatalities that occur each year.

The video shows the vehicle traveling in the right-hand lane of a divided four-lane roadway. The vehicle’s headlights illuminate a woman directly in front of it who is crossing the SUV’s lane with her bike. The woman appears to be jaywalking as she is not in a crosswalk.

A photo released by safety regulators on Tuesday showed that the impact occurred on the right side of the vehicle.

The footage also shows a view of the vehicle’s interior and the driver at the wheel. The driver appears to be looking down, and not at the road, for two periods of about five seconds each. Just before the video stops, the driver looks upward toward the road and suddenly looks shocked.

“The video is disturbing and heartbreaking to watch, and our thoughts continue to be with Elaine’s loved ones,” Uber said in a statement. “Our cars remain grounded, and we’re assisting local, state and federal authorities in any way we can.”

The video is likely to be a key part of investigations of Uber’s self-driving car technology and whether it was ready for testing on public roads.

Although the exact specifics of Uber’s technology are not known, self-driving cars typically use a combination of sensors, including radar and light-based Lidar, to identify objects around the vehicle, including potential obstacles coming into range. While cameras do not perform well in the dark, radar and Lidar can work at night.

One question on regulators’ minds will be why the sensors did not pick up on the presence of Herzberg, who would ostensibly have already crossed three lanes of traffic before arriving in the path of the Uber vehicle.

One self-driving car expert, Bryant Walker Smith, said his first impression was of “outrage” viewing the video.

“Although this video isn’t the full picture, it strongly suggests a failure by Uber’s automated driving system and a lack of due care by Uber’s driver (and by the victim),” said Smith, a professor of law at the University of South Carolina.

Another autonomous driving expert agreed with Smith’s assessment.

“The sensors should have detected the pedestrian in this case; the cameras were likely useless but both the radars and the Lidar must have picked up the pedestrian,” said Raj Rajkumar, a professor at Carnegie Mellon.

“Though no information is available, one would have to conclude based on this video alone, that there are problems in the Uber vehicle software that need to be rectified,” he said.

Uber did not immediately respond to a request for comment on its systems.

OVERSIGHT?

The video is likely to renew calls for more oversight in a nascent industry that lacks standardized testing or safety definitions. Lawmakers have had to juggle the need to encourage innovations that promise to dramatically improve safety on roads with current public safety concerns.

Companies including Uber, Alphabet’s Waymo and General Motors’s Cruise Automation have been testing their self-driving technology in Arizona, which has welcomed the industry with a lighter regulatory touch than in states like California, for example.

On Tuesday, Arizona transportation officials said they saw no immediate need to tighten rules on the testing of self-driving cars in the state.

Although some within the self-driving industry have suggested agreeing testing and safety standards for autonomous technology, there has been no concerted effort to do so.

Timothy Carone, an associate teaching professor at Notre Dame University’s Mendoza College of Business whose research specialties include artificial intelligence and autonomous systems, said the question is whether Uber did enough testing before sending robot cars out onto streets alongside humans.

“Did they jump the gun?” he said. “If their testing is found to be inefficient, that cannot be allowed to happen again because these systems have to be ready for road tests.”

source:https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2018/03/22/484132.htm

The council’s spokesperson, Yaser Al-Maarek, urged insured individuals to become familiar with their insurance company’s policy. He also stressed how important it is for them to be aware about the intricacies of the cooperative health insurance system and know their rights.

Fuaad Hawasawi, a health insurance expert, told Arab News: “It’s natural that hospitals are being required to take action now as a service provider. Hospitals are now more in command as they are capable of treating the patient, performing surgeries if needed and after that, they’re required to inform the insurance company of the case within 24 hours. After that, the insurance company can pay the hospital bill and the insured should only pay a specific amount depending on his insurance card, 10 percent of the amount or so.”

He added: “There have been cases before the regulation was passed in which hospitals contacted insurance companies about costly surgeries or a cardiac catheterization case that the hospital deemed as an emergency, but were forced to stop when insurance companies stalled to inquire more and ensure that their policy covered the patient’s case.”

Notably, there are a few treatments exempt from the policy such as cosmetic procedures (except in cases with urgent physical injuries that are not dismissed by insurance policy); injuries caused by self-harm; dental implants or bridges, as well as braces (unless caused by accidents); diseases contracted due to the misuse of certain medications, stimulants and sedatives; and those resulting from use of alcohol and drugs.

As of this moment, you can count the number of cryptocurrency insurers – such as XL Catlin, Chubb, and Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance – on one hand. That’s about to change, however, as various other insurance companies have expressed interest in safeguarding digital currencies.

With Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies recently exploding into the mainstream consciousness following an impressive run-up in the closing months of 2017, insurance companies are clamoring to lead the charge in insuring a largely uninsured market – and are willing to bet big on the unregulated market’s future growth.

This news comes in hot off the hack of Tokyo-based exchange Coincheck’s recent loss of around $534 million worth of cryptocurrency to hackers – which is hardly the first time criminals have made off with digital currencies.

In addition to digital theft, cryptocurrency investors are also subject to technical errors, fraudulent exchanges, and other dangers – and very little protection exists for those who find their holdings have unexpectedly disappeared.

UP TO THE CHALLENGE

Insuring the unregulated sea that is cryptocurrency is no easy feat, and provides a whole slew of new challenges to companies largely unfamiliar with the emerging technology.

According to Christopher Liu, head of the American International Group Inc’s North American cyber insurance practice for financial institutions, insuring cryptocurrency is still in the “exploratory phase” – and adapting an existing model is key. “It’s sort of akin to a digital armored car service,“ he told Reuters. ”If there is a problem – like an accident or a robbery – that’s going to be the accumulation of all these exposures.”

A seemingly endless supply of shady and fraudulent cryptocurrencies also provide problems for insurance companies looking to gain a foothold in the market, as do legitimate exchanges and wallets unintentionally underprepared for the sheer weight of the market.

Many insurance companies are therefore taking a piecemeal approach.

The Great American Insurance Group, for example, only protects Bitcoin-accepting businesses from employee theft, but doesn’t insure against hackers. Other companies will avoid insuring online wallets—commonly known as “hot wallets”—due to the increased risk of outside hackers.

Volatility in the cryptocurrency market provides even more concerns, as the price of Bitcoin and other alternative cryptocurrencies have already seen dramatic increases in very short periods of time—meaning an expensive policy signed one year ago would cover significantly less Bitcoin that it would have in December 2017.

Of course, with any revolutionary new industry comes new challenges, and only those insurance companies bold enough to offer innovative solutions will profit the most. “This whole space is maturing and growing,” Henry Sanderson of Safeonline LLP told Reuters. “If we don’t embrace it now, it’s a missed opportunity for insurers.”

Agricultural losses from weather events in developing nations totaled $96 billion in a decade through 2015, with Asia accounting for half the amount, according to the United Nations’ Food & Agriculture Organization. In addition to climate issues, sectors from forestry to aquaculture face risks from problems such as market volatility, diseases and conflicts, the FAO said in a report.

“This has become the ‘new normal,’ and the impact of climate change will further exacerbate these threats and challenges,” FAO Director-General Jose Graziano da Silva said in a statement.

Natural disasters have become more frequent and intense since the 1980s, presenting challenges for about 2.5 billion people who depend on agriculture, the FAO said. Small-scale farmers, fishermen and other communities around the world generate more than half of all agricultural production, according to the Rome-based organization.

Almost a quarter of all financial losses caused by natural disasters in the decade through 2015 were borne by the agricultural sector, the FAO study showed. About 4 percent of potential output is lost to disasters.

An average of 260 natural disasters occurred in developing countries each year from 2005 to 2016, according to the FAO. Economic losses from climate- and weather-related events have been growing, and while the impact for 2017 hasn’t been calculated yet, the most violent hurricane season on record should confirm the trend, it said.

“The rising incidence of weather extremes will have increasingly negative impacts on agriculture,” the FAO said. Disasters often have long-lasting consequences on agriculture, including harvest and livestock losses, outbreaks of disease and damaged infrastructure and irrigation systems.

source:   

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2018/03/19/483737.htm

The model is result of a collaboration between Lloyd’s, LIIBA, LMA and IUA

The report, which is based on a survey of about 1,000 risk experts, found that 59% of respondents expect an increase in risk in 2018, and only 7% expect a decrease.

According to the report, produced in conjunction with strategic partners Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc. and Zurich Insurance Group Ltd., the top five risks in terms of likelihood are:

• Extreme weather events
• Natural disasters
• Cyber attacks
• Data fraud or theft
• Failure of climate change mitigation and adaptation

The top five risks in terms of impact are:

• Weapons of mass destruction
• Extreme weather events
• Natural disasters
• Failure of climate change mitigation and adaptation
• Water crisis

While economic risks drew more concern in previous editions of the report, those risks have declined in perceived importance as the financial crisis has receded.

Environmental concerns have grown in light of the significant number of hurricane losses in 2017 and the first rise in carbon dioxide emissions in four years, the report said.

In addition, biodiversity is decreasing, agricultural systems are under strain, and pollution is becoming an increasing threat to health, the report said.

“A trend towards nation-state unilateralism may make it more difficult to sustain the long-term, multilateral responses that are required to counter global warming and the degradation of the global environment,” the report said.

Businesses need to better understand how to respond to heightened environmental risks, Marcus Cooper, head of middle markets, North America commercial insurance at Zurich North America, said in an interview.

For example, while many businesses were able to open immediately after the hurricanes and wildfires last year, their customers often were displaced, which led to a loss of business income that was not covered by traditional business interruption insurance because there was no damage to the policyholders’ properties, he said.

“Companies need to understand their risks and their operations and how the changes will affect them,” Mr. Cooper said.

Cyber security risks are also growing, according to the WEF report.

“Attacks are increasing, both in prevalence and disruptive potential. Cyber breaches recorded by businesses have almost doubled in five years,” the report said.

Some of the largest cyber-related costs to business in 2017 related to ransomware attacks, such as WannaCry and NotPetya, which accounted for 64% of all malicious emails last year, the report said.

“Another growing trend is the use of cyber attacks to target critical infrastructure and strategic industrial sectors, raising fears that, in a worst-case scenario, attackers could trigger a breakdown in the systems that keep societies functioning,” the report said.

Most of the losses will be in Germany — where the storm is known as Burglind — France, the United Kingdom, Belgium, Switzerland and the Netherlands, the Boston-based catastrophe modeler said in a statement.

The storm, which was the fifth named winter storm of the season and the fourth to make landfall since December, brought wind gusts of up to 100 mph to Ireland early last week before it passed across the United Kingdom into Continental Europe.

“Structural damage due to strong winds was reported in Ireland, the U.K., France and Germany, where roofs were damaged or blown off, scaffolding was stripped from buildings, and signage was destroyed. Trees were blown down across continental Europe and the U.K., and transportation disruption was rampant,” AIR said.

In a survey of executives at companies with more than $1 billion in revenue with operations in Texas, Florida or Puerto Rico, 64% said 2017’s hurricane season had an adverse impact on their operations, according to the study published Wednesday by the Johnston, Rhode Island-based insurer. Meanwhile, 62% of those affected admitted they were “not completely prepared” to deal with the effects of the hurricanes, according to the study.

In addition, 68% of all respondents said they will make changes to their risk management strategies going forward. For example, 57% said they will put in place or enhance their business continuity or disaster recovery plans as a result of hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria. Meanwhile, 40% will invest more in risk management, property loss prevention and/or reassess their supply chain risk management strategy, and 25% will reassess their insurance coverages or their insurers, according to the study.

“These candid admissions drive home a fundamental truth about catastrophe,” Louis Gritzo, vice president and manager of research at FM Global, said in a statement. “People routinely fail to understand or acknowledge the magnitude of risk until they’ve experienced a fateful event.”

Factors driving insufficient preparation are imprecise terminology about flood risk, an overreliance on insurance and denial of risk, he said.

FM Global commissioned the study through Princeton, New Jersey-based market research firm ORC International, which surveyed 101 senior financial executives at Fortune 1000 organizations in October through November 2017.