REACH - Feedback on PMD

(A) Addressing Social Inequality and Mobility needs

(1) Higher income group can afford cars for their personal mobility.
(2) Likewise, we must address those in the middle income and lower income group - who have similar desire to have the means for personal mobility - and PMDs are the right tools for these 2 groups as PMDs are affordable and can address their mobility needs.
(3) Thus for those who want a ban on PMD - will have to into account this needs.
(4) There are also people who use PMDs as their job delivery tools - like those food delivery, eCommerce delivery - and a ban on PMD will hit these group of people who rely on PMDs for their job.
(5) Cars, Buses etc also will cause accidents or kill people on the road --- do we ban cars, buses on the roads - by using causing injuries or death as the justification?
(6) Given the aspiration of the needs to tackle Global warming and car-lite vision - PMDs are good tools to achieve both of these goals. Thus should we jump into the extreme - to ban PMDs when a few minorities are blacksheep that fringe on negligence, malice, cheap thrill and irresponsible in using PMDs?
Felt that there can be other ways to tackle responsible use of PMDs as well as segregating pedestrians from PMD users which will address later.
---

(B) Reducing accidents cause by PMD against pedestrians

(1) When sharing a walkway by pedestrians with PMD, the chances of accidents will be quite high ---- unless PMD users are particularly mindful to always slow down when approaching pedestrains, notify pedestrians in advance especially when it is coming from behind, and if too crowded - willing to dismount and push the PMD to avoid hitting pedestrians.
Pedestrians on the other hand also need to give way if possible to let the PMD want to go past it.
Mutual respect will greatly reduce accidents by PMD onto pedestrians.
But this may not be often possible. Thus more effective approach should be considered to eliminate or greatly reduced the chances of accidents by PMD against pedestrians.
(2) A separate pathway for pedestrians and another pathway dedicated to PMDs and cyclists - will be the best solution to prevent accidents.
Given that it require time and money and adequate spaces to build a separate pathway for PMDs and cyclists --- the Government should "aggressively" look into ways to build sufficient separate pathway for PMDs and cyclists ---- in order for accidents by PMD to be eliminiated or greatly reduced.
(3) Law, legislation and education :- having say so, law and legislation is another useful means to deter PMD users for being irresponsible and negligence in using their PMDs.
a. Speed kills --- not only for cars but also applies to PMDs.
Law must be effective to deter PMD users who speed (above 10kmph)  that result in accidents - causing serious injuries or death.
Jail, hefty fines, permanent ban from owning PMDs or long term suspension must be considered for PMD users who speed and cause accidents.
b. Malicious, negligence, improper usage, ban zone etc of PMDs usage - should also be subject to severe punishment if their PMD cause injuries or death to pedestrians or other users on the road.
Education will also play an important part in educating PMD users and public at large - to be responsible in using PMDs.
(4) Effective reporting and monitoring of PMD usage (eg. CCTV, public using smartphone to video reccord or take picture or errant PMD users) - will also help to ensure responsible use of PMD.
(5) The onus of responsible usage of PMD - will always fall onto PMD users.
---

(C) Fire safety in charging PMD at home

(1) With ePMD causing many fires at home and in some cases taking away lives ---- it is heartening that LTA has issue an order for owners of all PMD that does not meet the fire safety certification to turn in their ePMD early for disposal and also offering incentive of $100.
This will greatly reduced PMD from overheating - that burnt down flat, and even cause injuries or death to occupants - as well as affecting neighbors.
(2) This is an effective step in eliminating or greatly reducing fire safety at home - for PMD users as well as their adjacent neighbors.
(3) Hopefully the UL2272 is indeed a robust foolproof fire safety standard to certification when charging the PMD battery as well as usage - scientifically and technically.
----

A joke about "ban" :-
- fire kills, ban fire
- knife kills, ban knife
- water kills, ban swimming pool
- car kills, ban cars
- height kills, ban HDB flat
- PMD kills, ban PMDS
- angry man/woman kills, ban man/woman .... oops...
--

A small observation:-

Government increasingly proactive to obtain feedback and get public to actively participate in formulating Government policies.

Whatsapp group (social media tool) - is particularly useful as it can be quickly setup, it can gather a large group of people in a short time - to feel the pulse and get immediate feedback - for emotive subjects that can quickly erupt if not arrested.

Eg. to pre-empt and prevent HK type and Indonesia type of policy induced unrest - where telegram and whatsapp have been used in a negative way by the protestors.

This 1st PMD death may trigger a sudden uproar from the public as it is close to the heart of people - but if properly managed, the issue will not go out of control.

PMD has alot of merits - and should not let one grossly errant user dismiss its used or worst trigger a public uproar.

The REACH quick setup on this topic to feel the pulse of the public response - is good foresight and laudable.
----

(1) PMD is an emotive subject as it is close to the heart of the people - thus people may tend to over-react. 1 PMD death which is very unfortunate - can cause overwhelming emotion to cry for a total ban of PMD which is unwise.

(2) But cars and buses had caused hundred and thousands of death and serious injuries and even trigger 1 little india riot - but no one cry for a ban on buses and cars.

(3) PMDs appeal to the poorer folks and a job tool for the less endow folks - should we find ways to mitigate and reduce accidents rather than cry for a total ban? Ramping up separate PMD path will solve the problem.

(4) We need to solve problem by appealing to both the rational side of the heart and the mind but not the emotional side of the heart and the mind (where statistic of one death versus thousand death don't add up.
And social inequality of cars for the rich versus PMDs for the less endow don't add up too).
----

(1) Social inequality comes about when there are big gaps between the have and the have-not.

This is one of the main reason of social unrest we seen in other cities. eg. HK housing where poorer folks unable to own house.

(2) In Singapore, Government did a good job in housing.

(3) However not many can afford a car.

(4) Thus PMDs is the next alternative to car - an empowerment for the less endow folk. "You have car,  i also have PMD to move anywhere." Thus a total ban on PMD will be dynamite.

(5) Think of mitigation measures to ensure responsible usage, no speeding that kill, mutual respect, law to instill discipline, separate pathway etc will ensure PMD users are not deprive of their "car".

(6) Irresponsible use of cars like PMDs such as speeding, cut into other's lane, beating red light also kill. But no one ban cars. So likewise cannot just say ban PMDs - an easy way out.

(7) Social inequality is the unconscious demon that can erupt if not handle carefully.
----

: Eh why you all must keep typing in pointers ah a bit pekceh
: (1) because you can make reference to the exact point.

(2) it make long text more focus, more structure and easy to read as oppose to novel.
---

(1) Most gov document and tender use pointers.

(2) all business tender and contract use pointers.

(3) all law use pointers.

(4) dissertation and thesis use pointers.

(5) because references can be easily made and focus the readers mind.

(6) any many points can be made modular and self contained within the pointer.
----

(1) in the olden day, bicycle and trishaw is the poor man alternative to cars.

(2) in current day, pmd and bicycle is the poor man alternative to car.

(3) definition of a car - vehicle moving on wheel with engine traversing from one point to another point carrying one or few passengers.

(4) pmd - same definition.
----

(1) pmd - i saw one father on pmd with her daughter standing in front of him and he tie another baby behind.

(2) A pmd can carry few passengers, on wheels, with engine, can travel from one place to another like car.

(3) definition of car = pmd.
----
: Hahaha tie baby
: The baby name Isaac isit
: (1) you should ask his father.

(2) i only smile at him when he ride passed me.
---

(1) he is travelling in slow speed - slightly faster than walking.

(2) i don't sense they are in danger.
---

(1) Actually the pain points is - pedestrians are unhappy becos PMD encroach into their space causing inconvenience to pedestrian.
Soln - create separate pathway, no encroachment - problem solved.
Constraints - need time, money and space.
Thus top level planning become impt.

(2) 2nd pain point - PMD user irresponsible usage that cause injuries and death.
Soln - law and education plus individual sense of responsibility.

(3) This whole PMD saga will not arise if both are adequately address.
Currently is work-in-progress and 1 sudden death that cause this saga.

(4) Like the mrt breakdown with intensive maintenance which has quieten down now - pmd unhappiness will still linger on - until pmd path is adequately built and less pmd accidents happen.
----

(1) i will group bicycles as personal mobility devices except it does not have an engine.
----

: Flying cars
: Hahaha
: We need more self-drivng cars for the last mile.. But still experimenting
: Like blueSG is one such initiative that uses battery
: Or self driving buses
: Incorporating public transport
: Singapore can be successful  bcos of our late founding father LKY a no nonsense politician one he set the rules and regulations everyone  have to obey unlike now we still need to experimenting and educate etc... wasting  times
: Trust me, I'm a no nonsense guy who is straightforward with my initiatives for public transport
What this world needs is more people who would take a no nonsense headliner approach. We have no time for wussies.

----
: (1) Self-driving car need experimentation - because they are autonomous - and how they interact with cars on the road are also different.                  
(2) Autonomous system also need high speed fast network such as 5G, sensors, GPS, AI etc ---- which are all cutting edge technologies ----- which will require more proof-of-concept, experimenting, testing etc to iron-out all teething problem.                                                                     (3) As compare to PMDs, share-bike ---- which is not rocket science --- autonomous cars will be multiple fold more hurdles to clear as it is iOT, computer-on-board, network tech and infra, sensor, AI, off-line data centre remote controlled, cybersecurity centric, malware planted etc ....              
(4) Those in IT can attest to it that autonomous cars ---- is a nightmare if not thorough in the testing.
: (1) Mr LKY had leave tech related and military policies - to technocrat such as Dr Goh Keng Swee. He don't bulldozed policies through on areas he is not familiar.
: (1) For eg. Dr Goh Keng Swee setup hi-tech defence contractors like ST Engineering for military tech and a huge manufacturing base for Singapore. Dr Goh Keng Swee is the brainchild of military tech and manufacturing base for Singapore.
(1) Most important, during Mr LKY times - technologies are less complex.      
(2) Now, technologies are cross-discipline and far more complex than ever before. It is a different era.
--
(1) Basically autonomous cars - sounds like car in the hardware.                
(2) But all the functions are IT and computers --- ioT, AI, cybersecurity, wireless network, remote control etc...                                                          
(3) In fact, car manufacturers are tying up with IT tech giants to develop autonomous cars.                   (4) And everyone knows that computer IT --- can be hacked remotely.    
(5) So thorough testing are required.

----
: (1) Self-driving car need experimentation - because they are autonomous - and how they interact with cars on the road are also different.                  
(2) Autonomous system also need high speed fast network such as 5G, sensors, GPS, AI etc ---- which are all cutting edge technologies ----- which will require more proof-of-concept, experimenting, testing etc to iron-out all teething problem.                                                                     (3) As compare to PMDs, share-bike ---- which is not rocket science --- autonomous cars will be multiple fold more hurdles to clear as it is iOT, computer-on-board, network tech and infra, sensor, AI, off-line data centre remote controlled, cybersecurity centric, malware planted etc ....              
(4) Those in IT can attest to it that autonomous cars ---- is a nightmare if not thorough in the testing.
: (1) Mr LKY had leave tech related and military policies - to technocrat such as Dr Goh Keng Swee. He don't bulldozed policies through on areas he is not familiar.
: (1) For eg. Dr Goh Keng Swee setup hi-tech defence contractors like ST Engineering for military tech and a huge manufacturing base for Singapore. Dr Goh Keng Swee is the brainchild of military tech and manufacturing base for Singapore.
(1) Most important, during Mr LKY times - technologies are less complex.      
(2) Now, technologies are cross-discipline and far more complex than ever before. It is a different era.
--
(1) Basically autonomous cars - sounds like car in the hardware.                
(2) But all the functions are IT and computers --- ioT, AI, cybersecurity, wireless network, remote control etc...                                                          
(3) In fact, car manufacturers are tying up with IT tech giants to develop autonomous cars.                                                                                         (4) And everyone knows that computer IT --- can be hacked remotely.    
(5) So thorough testing are required.
---
(1) Hackers has displayed their skills in hacking autonomous cars in various ways - eg. through GPS, through wireless network --- taking control of the car, stop the car, send the car hurling into a wall, opening the car door etc.    
(2) So without thorough test - it cannot be declared operational.
---

---
: (1) Not to forget to mention that Telcos such as Singtel, Starhub. M1 etc may need to come in - when 5G are involved.                              
(2) So autonomous cars are not just car - they are essentially computer-on-the-road.
---

---
(1) Where Telcos need to do logical segregation, provide priority service and cyber secure the autonomous cars network traffic from other industrial iOT traffic, internet traffic and voice call.                                                                                    
(2) This part i believe is not yet tested - as we have not even decided on the 5G products and vendors to choose - eg. Huawei, Ericson or Nokia.          
(3) So how to bulldoze autonomous car policies through.
---