dungeon_master
Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
- Messages
- 9,615
- Reaction score
- 1,174
Future job is to Lim Bei, while AGI provides all the thinking, moving, entertainment, strategy for the human race, until the humans become insignificant.
New jobs will emerge with transition to autonomous vehicles: Acting Transport Minister
- Thread starter dambio
- Start date
All tis companies actually inside very happy 1.
Next time no need to deal with unions if do retrenchment.
No need fear drivers overworked n exhausted.
No need fear they take mc or urgent leave.
No need pay bonus or up their salaries but still can up fare.
lifeisinforashock
High Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 42,171
- Reaction score
- 5,134
More hospital jobs coz too many accidents with autonomous vehicles ?
wongminmin
High Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2014
- Messages
- 29,998
- Reaction score
- 15,074
Campaign start liao. hahaha
about 100k+ jobs from transport sector. i doubt jeffrey able to find 100k suitable salary job for them. lol
Source : phv community (facebook)
Who Really Benefits from AV (Autonomous Vehicle) Investments?
As governments and platforms push for AV adoption, we need to ask:
Who gains the most — and who gets left behind?
⸻
Who Benefits
1. Tech Companies & Investors
• Own the patents, platforms, and fleets
• Profit from subscriptions, data, and AV-as-a-service models
• Giants like Grab, Baidu, Waymo are betting on long-term dominance
2. Platform Companies (e.g. Grab, Uber, Gojek)
• AVs don’t sleep, unionize, or complain
• Slash driver costs, boost profits
• Gain tighter control over pricing and supply
3. Governments (maybe)
• Project innovation, attract foreign investment
• Promise of safer roads and smart mobility
• But… do they fully grasp the long-term social cost?
4. Fleet Operators / Car Manufacturers
• Lease or sell AVs in bulk
• Secure long-term supply contracts (e.g. Toyota, BYD, Hyundai)
⸻
Who May Lose
• PHV & Taxi Drivers — Risk job loss or steep income drops
• Rental Firms & Small Dealers — May not survive an AV-dominated future
• Consumers (eventually) — Less competition, rising fares
• Public Funds — Taxpayer dollars may subsidise private platforms
⸻
But What’s the Real Cost?
Before we call this “progress,” let’s consider what AVs actually require:
LIDAR, radar, sensors — all expensive hardware
Constant AI training and software updates
Dependence on stable 5G+ networks
High-definition maps of every road
Complex liability, insurance, and legal frameworks
Human teams to monitor, maintain, and intervene
Multiply this by thousands of vehicles — the cost is huge.
⸻
So we ask again:
Is this a fair transition… or a shift that risks leaving working people behind while tech and capital take the lead?
We’re not anti-tech.
We just want a future that leaves a seat at the table — and a rice bowl — for the drivers who built the system.
Some may say this sounds paranoid. I get it — AVs seem far away, and everything still feels ‘normal’ today. But that’s exactly how disruption works — it’s quiet at first… until it’s too late to act.”
“This isn’t fear. It’s foresight. We’re not trying to stop tech — we’re trying to make sure people aren’t left behind in the name of progress.”
about 100k+ jobs from transport sector. i doubt jeffrey able to find 100k suitable salary job for them. lol
Source : phv community (facebook)
Who Really Benefits from AV (Autonomous Vehicle) Investments?
As governments and platforms push for AV adoption, we need to ask:
Who gains the most — and who gets left behind?
⸻
Who Benefits
1. Tech Companies & Investors
• Own the patents, platforms, and fleets
• Profit from subscriptions, data, and AV-as-a-service models
• Giants like Grab, Baidu, Waymo are betting on long-term dominance
2. Platform Companies (e.g. Grab, Uber, Gojek)
• AVs don’t sleep, unionize, or complain
• Slash driver costs, boost profits
• Gain tighter control over pricing and supply
3. Governments (maybe)
• Project innovation, attract foreign investment
• Promise of safer roads and smart mobility
• But… do they fully grasp the long-term social cost?
4. Fleet Operators / Car Manufacturers
• Lease or sell AVs in bulk
• Secure long-term supply contracts (e.g. Toyota, BYD, Hyundai)
⸻
Who May Lose
• PHV & Taxi Drivers — Risk job loss or steep income drops
• Rental Firms & Small Dealers — May not survive an AV-dominated future
• Consumers (eventually) — Less competition, rising fares
• Public Funds — Taxpayer dollars may subsidise private platforms
⸻
But What’s the Real Cost?
Before we call this “progress,” let’s consider what AVs actually require:
Multiply this by thousands of vehicles — the cost is huge.
⸻
So we ask again:
Is this a fair transition… or a shift that risks leaving working people behind while tech and capital take the lead?
We’re not anti-tech.
We just want a future that leaves a seat at the table — and a rice bowl — for the drivers who built the system.
Some may say this sounds paranoid. I get it — AVs seem far away, and everything still feels ‘normal’ today. But that’s exactly how disruption works — it’s quiet at first… until it’s too late to act.”
“This isn’t fear. It’s foresight. We’re not trying to stop tech — we’re trying to make sure people aren’t left behind in the name of progress.”
Medicated Oil
Honorary Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2011
- Messages
- 146,643
- Reaction score
- 60,191
He should walk the street of city he visited and observe for himself how many driver-less buses and cars are in operation.
Dun be bluffed by the one doing the presentation slide.
Was watching a local uncle doing live podcast just now.
His viewers highlighted that the driver-less cars and buses are not seen in their busy tiong city that they are staying.
I dunno whether it is true or not.
If it is, then some one will become some goon-du by the end of 2025.
Dun be bluffed by the one doing the presentation slide.
Was watching a local uncle doing live podcast just now.
His viewers highlighted that the driver-less cars and buses are not seen in their busy tiong city that they are staying.
I dunno whether it is true or not.
If it is, then some one will become some goon-du by the end of 2025.
zzangiefzz
Arch-Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2017
- Messages
- 11,408
- Reaction score
- 2,208
just hire 1 driver all problem solved - 30k annual salary vs 300mil tech that dont work
Medicated Oil
Honorary Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2011
- Messages
- 146,643
- Reaction score
- 60,191
The insurance companies should be the one happy.
I dun think the dream will become a reality.
It will remain successful as shuttle bus in all the institutions.
wongminmin
High Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2014
- Messages
- 29,998
- Reaction score
- 15,074
Singapore’s high population density, mixed traffic (cars, cyclists, PMDs), tight streets, and "occlusions" make real-world perception and navigation tough for AVs
Underground car parks are a significant problem: GPS often fails underground, and sensor systems struggle in low-light, enclosed spaces .
Determining fault in accidents—whether due to software, hardware, user, or infrastructure—is legally unclear and complicates insurance cover .
Without strong user trust, ridership may lag and AVs may fail to reduce congestion or shift commuters from public transport
The strong focus on safety will result in the biggest benefit that AVs could bring to the land transport network: Saving lives.
Each year, human errors in traffic accidents kill 1.3 million people worldwide. Researchers have estimated that a road transport system with no humans driving under the influence of substances, distractions from mobile phones and entertainment systems, or with fatigue and stress, could reduce traffic fatalities, injuries and damage to vehicles and infrastructure by more than 90 per cent.
A driverless public transport system will save commuters money not only from the drivers’ salaries, but also from having to pay for driving lessons and getting drivers’ licences.
If AVs operated by fleet owners were shared by commuters, there would be fewer cars parked and waiting for their owners to drive them. As compared to today’s vehicles that remain parked more than 90 per cent of the day, shared AVs operating in fleets could be fetching passengers and delivering goods more than 12 hours each day.
While labour costs are reduced and the productivity of transportation and logistics industries go up, many drivers and transport coordinators may lose their jobs. Having safer cars and fewer accidents would also impact workers in the vehicle maintenance and repair business. High unemployment arising from the widespread adoption of AVs is perhaps the number one concern amongst workers’ unions, researchers and policy makers.
Low cost robo-taxis could sway commuters away from using mass public transit (such as buses and the MRT). This could result in a lower utilisation of mass public transport systems such that taxpayers might have to provide further subsidies for them to remain operating. Furthermore, the convenience of being picked up at the door and dropped off at the door could generate additional commuter demand which is likely to result in traffic congestions.
Underground car parks are a significant problem: GPS often fails underground, and sensor systems struggle in low-light, enclosed spaces .
Determining fault in accidents—whether due to software, hardware, user, or infrastructure—is legally unclear and complicates insurance cover .
Without strong user trust, ridership may lag and AVs may fail to reduce congestion or shift commuters from public transport
The strong focus on safety will result in the biggest benefit that AVs could bring to the land transport network: Saving lives.
Each year, human errors in traffic accidents kill 1.3 million people worldwide. Researchers have estimated that a road transport system with no humans driving under the influence of substances, distractions from mobile phones and entertainment systems, or with fatigue and stress, could reduce traffic fatalities, injuries and damage to vehicles and infrastructure by more than 90 per cent.
A driverless public transport system will save commuters money not only from the drivers’ salaries, but also from having to pay for driving lessons and getting drivers’ licences.
If AVs operated by fleet owners were shared by commuters, there would be fewer cars parked and waiting for their owners to drive them. As compared to today’s vehicles that remain parked more than 90 per cent of the day, shared AVs operating in fleets could be fetching passengers and delivering goods more than 12 hours each day.
IMPACT ON JOBS
Unfortunately, the benefits mentioned above may also introduce risks and negatives to society.While labour costs are reduced and the productivity of transportation and logistics industries go up, many drivers and transport coordinators may lose their jobs. Having safer cars and fewer accidents would also impact workers in the vehicle maintenance and repair business. High unemployment arising from the widespread adoption of AVs is perhaps the number one concern amongst workers’ unions, researchers and policy makers.
Low cost robo-taxis could sway commuters away from using mass public transit (such as buses and the MRT). This could result in a lower utilisation of mass public transport systems such that taxpayers might have to provide further subsidies for them to remain operating. Furthermore, the convenience of being picked up at the door and dropped off at the door could generate additional commuter demand which is likely to result in traffic congestions.
ramlee
High Honorary Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2007
- Messages
- 179,166
- Reaction score
- 65,792
how about pivot to undertakers?https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...autonomous-vehicles-acting-transport-minister
“(It) may well be you have somebody on board that does different things,” Mr Siow said, noting that this may be to help load luggage, aid elderly passengers in boarding, or lead a tour group.
So like introducing d school bus auntie on public buses?
So many elderlies now n those with trolleys. Will hold up d q behind boh?
Lead a tour grp? Huh?!
RichardXyn
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2023
- Messages
- 667
- Reaction score
- 324
What comes out of the mouth defiles a man.
Y insurance companies happy leh?
Funeral service?how about pivot to undertakers?
EdenHazard
High Supremacy Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2012
- Messages
- 44,968
- Reaction score
- 11,624
We just got to move on with the times. Last time transit from horses to cars a lot of people also lose their jobs. Same with AI, many no value-added positions (mine included) will be made redundant.
EdenHazard
High Supremacy Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2012
- Messages
- 44,968
- Reaction score
- 11,624
Exactly. No need pay the autonomous vehicle CPF lmfao
EdenHazard
High Supremacy Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2012
- Messages
- 44,968
- Reaction score
- 11,624
U think human driving is safe? Every day see so many jokers dunno how they pass TP. So many near accidents
D savings n headaches from dealing with humans r enormous
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.
Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards, Terms of Service and Member T&Cs for more information.
Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards, Terms of Service and Member T&Cs for more information.
