ChatGPT / BARD : Expert Views on Transport ?

 

 

Some years ago , I sent my following blog to our Cabinet Ministers :

 

Transport : an Integrated Logistic Plan ?  …. 20 Nov 2018

 

Today , I thought of asking ChatGPT and BARD what are their views on my proposal

Following are their views :

 

ChatGPT  :

 

Your proposal, titled "Transport: an Integrated Logistic Plan," suggests a comprehensive system to address the challenges of transportation and logistics, with the goal of :

# minimizing various kinds of transport,

# encouraging efficient options,

# reducing emissions, and

# enhancing the ease of doing business.

The proposal incorporates various factors to compute a "Harm Quotient" (HQ) for each vehicle based on several parameters and then utilizes this quotient to calculate a "Trans-Tax" which would be automatically deducted from vehicles' accounts.

The aim is to provide financial incentives for using low-harm vehicles and transportation options.

Here are some observations on your proposal:

1.    Complexity:

Your proposal is quite detailed and comprehensive, covering various aspects of transportation, technology, taxation, and logistics. The complexity and scope of the proposal could present implementation challenges and require substantial resources.

2.    Technical Feasibility:

The technical aspects of using satellite-based navigation, RFID sensors, and other sensors to track vehicles and compute the HQ are feasible based on existing technologies.

However, implementing this on a national scale requires careful planning, infrastructure development, and cooperation from vehicle manufacturers, regulatory bodies, and technology providers.

3. Data Collection and Privacy:

The proposal relies heavily on collecting data from vehicles and drivers, including real-time tracking, energy source, ownership details, and more.

This may raise privacy concerns and require robust data protection measures to ensure that individuals' information is not misused.

4.    Behavioral Change:

The proposal's approach of incentivizing low-harm vehicles and transportation options could drive behavioral change among vehicle owners and users.

However, it may also face resistance from those who find themselves paying higher Trans-Tax due to their vehicle usage patterns.

5. Implementation Challenges:

Implementing the proposal would require significant coordination among various stakeholders, including government bodies, vehicle manufacturers, technology providers, and users. Addressing potential challenges and objections from these stakeholders is crucial.

6.    Economic Impact:

The proposal aims to reduce the cost of logistics and improve the ease of doing business. However, there could be economic implications and unintended consequences, particularly for businesses heavily dependent on specific types of vehicles or transportation methods.

7. Transition Period:

Introducing such a system would likely require a transition period during which existing vehicles and infrastructure are integrated into the new framework. Managing this transition without disrupting the economy and daily life is a complex task.

8.    Social and Environmental Impact:

While the proposal aims to reduce emissions and promote sustainable transportation, the social and environmental impact of certain measures (e.g., congestion charges, changes in transportation patterns) would need careful assessment.

In summary, your proposal presents an ambitious and innovative approach to address transportation challenges through an integrated logistics plan.

While the proposal covers a wide range of aspects, its successful implementation would require careful consideration of technical, social, economic, and ethical factors.

It's important to engage with experts, stakeholders, and policymakers to refine the proposal, address concerns, and ensure its feasibility before implementation.

 

 

 

BARD :

 

I see. Here are some of the merits and faults of your proposal:

Merits:

·        It is a holistic and comprehensive approach to reducing transportation emissions.

·        It takes into account a variety of factors, such as the type of vehicle, its fuel source, and its usage patterns.

·        It is designed to encourage the use of more environmentally friendly modes of transportation, such as public transportation and electric vehicles.

·        It could potentially reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality.

Faults:

·        It may be difficult to accurately measure the harm quotient (HQ) of a particular vehicle or transportation mode.

·        The HQ matrix may need to be updated periodically to reflect changes in technology and transportation patterns.

·        The implementation of this proposal could be costly and complex.

Overall, I think your proposal is a good starting point for a discussion about how to reduce transportation emissions in India.

However, there are some challenges that would need to be addressed before it could be implemented.

Here are some additional thoughts:

·        The HQ matrix could be made more accurate by using real-world data on vehicle emissions and traffic patterns.

·        The government could provide incentives for people to use more environmentally friendly modes of transportation, such as tax breaks or subsidies.

·        The private sector could also play a role in reducing transportation emissions by investing in new technologies, such as electric vehicles and self-driving cars.

I think it is important to have a conversation about how to reduce transportation emissions in India.

Your proposal is a good starting point for this discussion.

 

With regards,

Hemen Parekh

www.hemenparekh.ai  /  29  Aug  2023

 

Related Readings :

 

Intelligent Transport System / V 1.0 of Integrated Logistics ? .. ……………19 May 2023

POLLUTION SOLUTION , aka " PollSolv "  ……………….. 30  Dec  2015

Highway Toll Rs 193 Cr / day : Peanuts !  … ………………02 May 2023

Accelerating Transport with Omnipresent RFID …………. 09  July 2021

Revolutionizing Transport ?  …………………………………………. 14 June 2017

Internet  of Vehicles [ IoV ] ……………………………………..     04  March 2017 

 

Can  Technology Outsmart  Traffic  Offenders ? …………. 16  June  2017 

 

Urban Transport Policy  ………………………………………………. 09  June 2017

 

Who says Impossible  ?  ………………………………………………. 31  May  2017 

Leveraging  NaviC ?  ……………………………………………………… 30  May  2017 

From : Harm Quotient / To : Trans-Tax ………………………. 03 Oct 2022

NLP : Integration of Digital Systems  .. …………………………24 Sept 2022

A New Way to E-Way ?........................ ………………….   15  July  2017 

Let Freight Trucks Overtake Cheetahs……………….. …….. 17 Sept 2022

National Logistics Policy : a Curtain Raiser………………..  16 Sept 2022

Unified Interface for Seamless Transport  ……………………. 03 Feb 2022

A Problem worthy of Geospatial Data ?  ………………………. 03 Dec 2021

Gadkariji : From a Vision to a Mission …………………………………[ 17 Dec 2020 ]

Congratulations, Avinash Dhakneji ………………………………………[ 15 Dec 2020 ]

Pigovian Tax for Polluters ?                                              [ 03 Apr 2019 ]

National Clean Air Tax ? – a Pigovian tax ?                         [ 11 Jan 2019 ]

Traffic Congestion ? Finally, a solution in sight ?.................[ 31 May 2019 ]

 FAME II > FAME III > FAME IV………………………………………………[ 05 Mar 2019 ]

Trans-portability Theory ………………………………………………………..[ 10 Dec 2018 ]

PUBLIC TRANSPORT AS A SOLUTION ?..............................[ 15 Feb 2016 ]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Something is better than Nothing

 

 

Context :

Ø  A ‘sound’ innovation in the fintech space …………………… BL  … 27 Aug 2023

Extract :

On a busy Wednesday afternoon, Vivek Gupta, who runs a food kiosk in a corporate locality in Mumbai’s Andheri and prefers accepting digital payments from his customers, decided to do only cash sales. There was a reason for this.

His customers had showed him text messages on their phones confirming the payment. But when Gupta sat down to reconcile his sales and receipts, it didn’t match.

Either a few customers could have cheated him or the payment would have got lost mid-way. Gupta wasn’t alone. Many such merchants who adopted UPI moved back to cash in 2021-22 because of the lack of verification process and, eventually, loss of business. But Gupta realised he couldn’t substitute UPI with cash for long. When he was looking for a viable solution, sound box came his way.

Soundbox is like a point of sales voice system, which confirm receipts of payments made digitally.

Paytm was the first company to deploy sound box, followed by PhonePe and BharatPe. But for companies, which took pride in operating only digitally, what prompted the need for a physical device?

Necessity is the mother of inventions, and it was no different with soundboxes. While the need to win the confidence of merchant is one part of the game, the real intention in upping the soundbox play could also be the critical necessity to post tangible revenues

There was a dire need to ‘think out of the box’ and that birthed soundboxes.

Today, fintech unicorns Paytm, PhonePe and BharatPe compete fiercely to deploy these speaker devices in stores.

The best part is that merchants are willing pay a fee to hear a computerised human voice confirm the receipt of payment.

Merchants can either buy a soundbox from the company or pay monthly or yearly rental charges, depending on the which company’s soundboxes they deploy.

 

My  Take :

 

Ø  How to go Cash - Less ?  …………………. 27 Nov 2016

 

Extract :

 Dear Shri Amitabh :

 Like you ( and of course , Shri Modiji ), I have a great faith in the ability of Indian

software engineers ( local or NRI ) to come up with revolutionary solutions /

innovations !

Just ask Sundar Pichai , Sam Pitroda , Satya Nadela , Sachin Katti , Pranav

Mistry , Sanjay Sarma , Nandan Nilekani etc , if they will help implement the

following :

 ==============================================

 

*  Buyer  buys something worth Rs 100 from a shopkeeper

 

*  Buyer and the Seller , look into their own mobile-cameras ( of  smart phones

   loaded with M-Rup ) for biometric Aadhar identification / linked to Jan Dhan a/c 

 

*  Seller speaks in his mobile : " Muze Sau Rupiah dedo "

*  Buyer speaks in his mobile : " Inko Sau Rupiah dedo "

*  Message flashes in the mobile screen of Seller : " Tumhare account-me Sau

    Rupiah Jamah ho gaya / GST bhi kaat ke Sarkar-ko bhej diya "

*  Message flashes in the mobile screen of Buyer : " Tumhare account-se , Sau

   Rupiah inko Bhej Diya . Abhi balance me teen sau sath rupiah bacha hai "

 

   ==================================================

 

I request all concerned , not to insult our engineers / scientists / geeks , by

doubting if such SIMPLIFICATION ( based on day to day spoken language ) is

possible

 

with regards,

hemen Parekh

www.hemenparekh.ai  /  28  Aug  2023

 

Related Readings :

 

At ( long ) last , voice of illiterate, will be heard .. ………….. 11 Aug 2023

 

BHIM gets a Voice !  ………………………………………………………………30 Oct 2017

 

Voice Payments in Local Language : Seven Year Journey ? .. 14 June 2023

 

Thank You, Sundar Pichai  … …………………………………………………….18 Nov 2021

 

At long last : BHIM to get a voice ?.. ……………………………………….22 July 2021

 

Do Not Stop Here ! …………………………………………………………………. 01 Dec 2016 

 

ToneTag partners with GMO to expand its sound-based payment solutions in Japan  [ 28 May 2019 ]

When BHIM is here, can ARJUN be far away ? ……………………[ 30 Dec 2016 ]

A Matter of Time ………………………………………………………………….[ 03 Jan 2017 ]

JUST ONE MORE STEP LEFT ………………………………………………..[30 Jan 2017 ]

Simplicity : The Ultimate Mobile Wallet ?.........................[ 13 Feb 2017]

Wake Up , BHIM , Wake Up !..........................................[ 16 Mar 2017 ]

BHIM : the……………………………………………………………………………..[ 14 April 2017 ]

A Beerud named BHIM ?..................................................[ 17 Apr 2017 ]

Thank You : Beerud………………………………………………………………..[ 23 Apr 2017 ]

Inching Forward ?...........................................................[ 20 May 2017 ]

Let BHIM get MAD !.........................................................[ 21 May 2017 ]

BHIM , the Impersonator ?...............................................[ 17 June 2017 ]

BHIM : Can You tango with GST ?.....................................[ 19 June 2017 ]

Preloaded BHIM ?............................................................[ 04 July 2017 ]

Closing in on BHIM V 4.0 !................................................[ 05 July 2017 ]

BHIM : the Omnipresent ?.................................................[ 05 Sept 2017 ]

From BHIM 3.0 to BHIM 7.0 ?............................................[ 14 Sept 2017 ]

Not exactly BHIM 4.0…………………………………………………………………[ 19 Sept 2017 ]

BHIM gets a Voice !...........................................................[ 30 Oct 2017 ]

Google, WhatsApp, BHIM ?.................................................[ 14 Dec 2017 ]

BHIM   will  recognize  you…………………………………………………………[ 30 May 2018 ]

BHIM gets friendly with GST …………………………………………………….[ 04 Aug 2018 ]

As per my habit , I sought the opinion of ChatGPT and BARD :

 

ChatGPT  opined :

Observations on "Something is better than Nothing" Blog:

The blog post you've shared discusses the implementation and adoption of soundboxes in the fintech space, particularly in the context of digital payments.

The narrative revolves around the challenges faced by small merchants who adopted digital payment methods like UPI but struggled due to a lack of verification and the resultant loss of business.

The introduction of soundboxes, physical devices that provide auditory confirmation of digital payment receipts, is portrayed as a solution to regain merchant confidence and potentially boost revenues.

Your take on the subject matter introduces a different perspective.

Dated in November 2016, your writing proposes a simplified way of conducting digital transactions using voice commands and biometric Aadhar identification.

This approach relies on day-to-day spoken language and aims to make digital transactions more accessible, particularly to those who may be less familiar with technology.

While the observations in both the blog and your take focus on digital payments and their implementation, they do differ in their specific approaches:

1.     Blog Post Focus:

The blog post primarily highlights the transition from digital payments back to cash due to issues with verification and security. The introduction of soundboxes is presented as a means to address these challenges and restore merchant trust, eventually contributing to increased revenue. The post emphasizes the emergence of physical devices in the fintech landscape and the willingness of merchants to pay for the reassurance provided by these devices.

 

2.     Your Take:

Your take, in the form of a letter, proposes a simplified method of conducting digital transactions using voice commands and biometric identification. This approach targets accessibility and ease of use, striving to bridge the gap between technology and individuals who might find traditional digital payment methods complex or intimidating.

Your approach is forward-thinking and envisions a system that relies on everyday language for seamless transactions.

Both the blog post and your take explore different aspects of digital payment innovations. The blog post highlights the adoption of new technologies to solve challenges faced by merchants, while your take suggests a user-friendly solution that focuses on inclusivity and ease of use.

Both perspectives contribute to the ongoing conversation about making digital transactions more accessible and effective.

 

==================================================

 BARD  observed :

Sure, here is a table comparing the merits and demerits of digital payments involving the use of soundboxes and spoken commands:

Feature	Soundboxes	Spoken commands
Convenience	Easy to use, even for people who are not familiar with technology	Can be used hands-free, which can be convenient in some situations
Security	The sound of the confirmation message is encrypted, which helps to protect against fraud	The spoken command can be intercepted by someone listening in, which could be a security risk
Cost	Can be expensive to deploy and maintain	Can be free to use, depending on the service provider
Accessibility	Can be used by people with disabilities who cannot use a touchscreen or type	Can be used by people with disabilities who cannot speak clearly
Acceptance	Some merchants may not accept payments made using soundboxes or spoken commands	Most merchants accept payments made using these methods

==================================================

Overall, both soundboxes and spoken commands have their own advantages and disadvantages. The best method for you will depend on your individual needs and preferences.

Here are some additional things to consider when choosing between soundboxes and spoken commands:

·        The type of merchant. 

Some merchants may be more willing to accept payments made using soundboxes or spoken commands than others. For example, small businesses may be more likely to accept these methods than large chains.

 

·        The location of the merchant. 

Some areas may be more accepting of soundboxes or spoken commands than others. For example, urban areas may be more likely to accept these methods than rural areas.

 

·        The technology infrastructure.

 Some areas may have better technology infrastructure than others. For example, areas with good cellular reception may be more likely to accept payments made using spoken commands.

I hope this helps!