The world isbeing rebuilton new machines.
- The shift
- Processes re-platformed onto novel technology
- The exposure
- The interfaces that appear at the seam
- The response
- Eliminate, control, then price the residual
Insure the residualfailure, not thetechnology.
1B does not take a position on whether a technology will succeed. It takes a position on what remains after the failure modes have been eliminated, controlled and allocated, and prices that.
The great majority of a new exposure can be removed before anyone prices it. What is left is small, economically meaningful, and insurable.
- L5Respond
- L4Operate
- L3Underwrite
- L2Model
- L1Signal
Evidence returns to the model, the portfolio learns from every event
Four seams,one architecture.
- Artificial intelligenceA decision moves from a person to a model. The model fails probabilistically, in the tail, and the chain from developer to deployer to operator has to be resolved before the loss, not after it.
- Digital assetsValue stops being a balance and becomes key material and a register entry. The loss event is a single signature: instant, irreversible and global.
- Robotics and autonomyA task moves to a machine that decides and moves. Insurance was built around a person operating; when the machine operates, liability, evidence and the unit of loss all change.
- CryptographyAn encrypted secret rests on mathematics a future computer may break. Data captured today can be decrypted later, which makes the exposure a present one.
The machinesare alreadyin the room.
Autonomous machines are the clearest case, because the change is physical. A robot behind a fence is an equipment risk. The same machine working beside a person is bodily injury, product liability, employers' liability and software failure in a single event, across a fleet that learns.
- IndustrialOperating profileFixed cell behind a separating safeguard, defined tasksWhat drives the lossMaintenance and intervention, the moments the fence is open
- CollaborativeOperating profileShared workspace, contact intended and force-limitedWhat drives the lossThe match between the risk assessment and the deployment as built
- HumanoidOperating profileFree movement in space, in proximity to peopleWhat drives the lossFall, misnavigation, fall energy and an energy-dense battery
- Autonomous vehiclesOperating profileIn-facility or public-road operation inside a defined envelopeWhat drives the lossDistance travelled inside the envelope, and every metre outside it
None of these is a version of the others. Loss frequency, loss severity and the governing standard differ by class, which is why a single blended rate would over-price the fenced cell and under-price the fleet that walks.
The rules are arriving
- ISO 10218-1 and -2:2025, industrial and collaborative robot safety, revised
- ISO/TS 15066, biomechanical limits for intended human-robot contact
- ISO 25785-1, safety for mobile and humanoid robots, in development
- European Parliament report 2015/2103 (2016), proposed a motor-analogous compulsory liability for robots. No mandate exists yet.
A machine thatmoves needs aninsurer thatwatches.
The motor market answered the same question a century ago: whoever keeps the machine carries the operating risk, liability covers third-party loss, and a hull module covers the machine itself. That structure is available again, this time with telemetry, so the exposure is read continuously instead of declared once a year.
Sources
- ISO 10218-1/-2:2025, ISO/TS 15066, ISO 25785-1, ANSI/A3 R15.06-2025
- European Parliament, report 2015/2103 (2016)
Standards are cited as published, including those still in development. 1B does not underwrite a market forecast, it underwrites a bounded residual per machine.