Slashdot Mirror
Commercial Drones Taking To the Skies
An anonymous reader sends this excerpt from the NY Times:
"A new federal law, signed by the president on Tuesday, compels the Federal Aviation Administration to allow drones to be used for all sorts of commercial endeavors — from selling real estate and dusting crops, to monitoring oil spills and wildlife, even shooting Hollywood films. Local police and emergency services will also be freer to send up their own drones. But while businesses, and drone manufacturers especially, are celebrating the opening of the skies to these unmanned aerial vehicles, the law raises new worries about how much detail the drones will capture about lives down below — and what will be done with that information. Safety concerns like midair collisions and property damage on the ground are also an issue."
The government can spy on you without all those drones. They have planes
Can anyone point me to a good EMP-type device that might work agains these things? I know the cops were experimenting with such a device to stop automobiles in their tracks.
I really don't want to go trough that old SD cliche...I for once, welcome...blahblah ;)
Anyway, I'm actually for these drones, especially since I'm an avid hobbyist builder of all things robotic, so it's natural that it'd be okay to manufacture these as well and allow them to be used for useful purposes.
Maybe this will be spearheading our future with flying vehicles, Müeller and his infamous sky-car didn't get off the ground due to technical issues, maybe due to MAKERS everywhere, we'll now get rid of the final safety bugs in the designs, and make headway for the very real thing.
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
Does the regulation allow for personal private use? Or are the rules tied under recreational RC planes?
While the commercial uses of these UAVs are cool (hunting feral pigs tearing up your crops using an IR camera on a drone and then radioing the location to your brother with a shotgun! That would be something that only a few militaries in the world could do a decade ago...) the real impact is going to be on the complete loss of privacy for just being anywhere outside in public.
I've long thought that the ease by which something can be obtained really does matter. I mean, things like divorce records have always been "public", but for most of history, that meant going to the city offices and having some surly clerk find the records for you in a basement filing cabinet. Which meant that strictly speaking, they were public, but in practice most people would never go to that trouble. With online records, finding out juicy details about your neighbour's divorce can be as easy as clicking a link. So the change in ease of obtaining records really does change the meaning of "public", even if it doesn't change the definition in a strictly legal sense.
It's the same thing with being outside. The advent of huge networks of computerized cameras on the street, on business fronts, and now perhaps on ubiquitous flying unmanned vehicles... it means that while you had no expectation of privacy in public before, in practice it meant that you could generally go places without anybody knowing about it, as long as you didn't just happen to run into somebody that knows you. Before long, an unblinking computer eye will see you everywhere. The idea of going somewhere without anybody knowing about it will be a thing of the past.
Now, is this, overall, a good thing? That I'm not sure about. Good and bad sides to it, I guess. (I'll be very interested to see its impact on strip clubs and massage parlours, though! Especially if divorce lawyers can subpoena the records.)
Karma: pi (Mostly due to circular reasoning in posts).
Really... it's already been done.
ROFLMAO!
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Get shot out of the sky.
http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=104668&article=9779655
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Memorable quotes for
Looker (1981)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082677/quotes [imdb.com]
âoeJohn Reston: Television can control public opinion more effectively than armies of secret police, because television is entirely voluntary. The American government forces our children to attend school, but nobody forces them to watch T.V. Americans of all ages *submit* to television. Television is the American ideal. Persuasion without coercion. Nobody makes us watch. Who could have predicted that a *free* people would voluntarily spend one fifth of their lives sitting in front of a *box* with pictures? Fifteen years sitting in prison is punishment. But 15 years sitting in front of a television set is entertainment. And the average American now spends more than one and a half years of his life just watching television commercials. Fifty minutes, every day of his life, watching commercials. Now, thatâ(TM)s power. â
âoeThe United States has itâ(TM)s own propaganda, but itâ(TM)s very effective because people donâ(TM)t realize that itâ(TM)s propaganda. And itâ(TM)s subtle, but itâ(TM)s actually a much stronger propaganda machine than the Nazis had but itâ(TM)s funded in a different way. With the Nazis it was funded by the government, but in the United States, itâ(TM)s funded by corporations and corporations they only want things to happen that will make people want to buy stuff. So whatever that is, then that is considered okay and good, but that doesnâ(TM)t necessarily mean it really serves peopleâ(TM)s thinking â" it can stupify and make not very good things happen.â
â" Crispin Glover: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000417/bio [imdb.com]
âoeWeâ(TM)ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.â â" William Casey, CIA Director
âoeItâ(TM)s only logical to assume that conspiracies are everywhere, because thatâ(TM)s what people do. They conspire. If you canâ(TM)t get the message, get the man.â â" Mel Gibson
[1967] Jim Garrison Interview âoeIn a very real and terrifying sense, our Government is the CIA and the Pentagon, with Congress reduced to a debating society. Of course, you canâ(TM)t spot this trend to fascism by casually looking around. You canâ(TM)t look for such familiar signs as the swastika, because they wonâ(TM)t be there. We wonâ(TM)t build Dachaus and Auschwitzes; the clever manipulation of the mass media is creating a concentration camp of the mind that promises to be far more effective in keeping the populace in line. Weâ(TM)re not going to wake up one morning and suddenly find ourselves in gray uniforms goose-stepping off to work. But this isnâ(TM)t the test. The test is: What happens to the individual who dissents? In Nazi Germany, he was physically destroyed; here, the process is more subtle, but the end results can be the same. Iâ(TM)ve learned enough about the machinations of the CIA in the past year to know that this is no longer the dreamworld America I once believed in. The imperatives of the population explosion, which almost inevitably will lessen our belief in the sanctity of the individual human life, combined with the awesome power of the CIA and the defense establishment, seem destined to seal the fate of the America I knew as a child and bring us into a new Orwellian world where the citizen exists for the state and where raw power justifies any and every immoral act. Iâ(TM)ve always had a kind of knee-jerk trust in my Governmentâ(TM)s basic integrity, whatever political blunders it may make. But Iâ(TM)ve come to realize that in Washington, deceiving and manipulating the public are viewed by some as the natural prerogatives of office. Huey Long once said, âoeFascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.â Iâ(TM)m afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security.â
If one lands in my backyard, can I keep it? Can I play the grumpy old man, with the fenced-in yard, who tells the neighborhood children: "No, no ball went over the fence into my yard!" . . . "and their ain't no drone here, neither. Now, scram!"
Are the Iranians selling the plans for their catcher? Or do I have to trade them weapons-grade plutonium for them?
How can you know if drones are circling overhead? Do they have a special air traffic control frequency? Do the drone pilots back at the base communicate with controllers or other pilots? Can I listen in?
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
AAAhhhhahahahahahah!
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
you are asking questions and taking the time to wonder, a bit, before taking steps.
BRAVO.
I wish those in control would do the same.
but we don't. we see that something is *possible* and without any serious thought about implications short and long term, we plow ahead.
I wish more people were a bit more like you and they'd test these new privacy invading technologies before just assuming that the gains outweighs the downsides.
when it comes to privacy, I'm usually in favor of NOT proceeding ahead with some new tech. quite often, these are one-way trips and you can't ever go back if you made a really bad choice or direction.
I fear this is one of those times.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
A mark for everyone, coming soon...
A camera in every home, Kinect(ted) and always watching...
Waiting for you to make one mistake....
And the pounding of the buttocks will begin...
In your own special cell...
With your own special friend...
"Go back to bed, America. Your government has figured out how it all transpired. Go back to bed, America. Your government is in control again. Here. Here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up. Go back to bed, America. Here is American Gladiators. Here is 56 channels of it! Watch these pituitary retards bang their fucking skulls together and congratulate you on living in the land of freedom. Here you go, America! You are free to do as we tell you! You are free to do what we tell you!" -- you know who
That the Muzzies don't get one and crop-spray New York with anthrax or radioactive waste?
You can buy a $80 radio controlled helicopter that has a video camera and broadcasts over wifi. Check it out http://www.spycameracctv.com/productimages/SPY/2650_xl.jpg http://lenny.com/ Were free speach is FREE!!!!!
http://Lenny.com
Several states have sealed driving records to the point it's near impossible to get a name and address from a license plate. Other records will eventually be sealed in such a way as to protect the name and address of people for such life changes as birth, divorce, accident etal.
Eventually those drones will come under such restrictions. I will support prohibitions against non government use of those and strong prohibitions against use of those without a warrant.
I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
the real impact is going to be on the complete loss of privacy for just being anywhere outside in public.
You expect privacy when in public?
I'm imagining the sonorous whine of a quadrotor buzzing in with a delicious deep dish supreme in 12 minutes or less (bakes on the way).
It doesn't raise new worries, both because aerial surveilance doesn't require drones (we have these manned vehicles called "airplanes" and/or "aeroplanes", perhaps you've heard of them?), and because people have already been worrying about government drones, which are allowed already. Enough with the senationalism, already.
no But I can point to the prisons you can end up in just for thinning that way.
and fighting this fact is really stupid. Eventually everyone will know everything they want to know, no one can stop this.
Never say never. Ah!! I did it again!
I wager 5 quatloos the first drone related death or injury happens within 6 months from the date of this post.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Every article here tends to havew a shoehorned "controversy" attached to it; something that no normal person cares about. It's not just Slashdot (although Slashdot's always tend to be more awkwardly phrased) as the newspapers to it too. I know it's made to provoke comment - but it's unnecessary - as someone would bring up the concern if it was legitimate.
The example here is: "the law raises new worries about how much detail the drones will capture about lives down below"
Bullshit. No it doesn't. It means we have drones in the sky.
To try daily one into White House or Congress House invading its aerial space and then to be triggered the alarm!.
It's the question, to be fined or not? The cause of all is its broooken federal law!.
JCPM: i told them many times that the lawmakers (politicians) that did break themselves their laws (written by themshelves) must be punished or condemned or fined! It's the thing of a wise mankind.
This could revive a long dormant industry.
this can only get worse for them
Welcome.
I'll be very interested to see its impact on strip clubs and massage parlours, though! Especially if divorce lawyers can subpoena the records.
Impact? None. Without drones, there's nothing to stop ANYONE, and I do mean ANYONE from parking a car out front of either of these places with cameras in them pointed at the front doors of these businesses, filming everyone going in and out, which includes knowing the duration each person spent inside. The technology to do this has existed since the early 1900's. The reason it hasn't been much of a problem since then, before drones, is the same reason it won't be in the age of drones. Nobody frickin' cares that much if you're going to go look at some titties, or get your crank turned. If they did, they'd simply see to it the business in question are shut down.
Truth is, these businesses are "tolerated" because those people who abhor them publicly, decrying their immoral existence, USE them themselves when they hope no one is looking.
Kids taking them down with pellet guns, drones falling out of the sky onto the freeway... Fun, fun, fun!
These are the drones looking for you
Watch those corners
I think a moments thought will make someone realize that the possibilities for using these for terrorist (or assassination also known as "targeted killing") is real.
How hard would it be to attach a simple grenade to one of these things? Or a lightweight gun? Combined this a cell phone or GPS trigger (gives a new application for Geo-fencing) and you've got a device that can be triggered at distance.
I know that the "rules" will prohibit them fom being used out of sight of the controller but I imagine many slashdotters here could easily come up with a hack around that. Even if the "target" (presumably some important political event) uses counter-measures such as, perhaps, a local GPS jammer during an event (sure to upset the neighbors), you'd imagine that it would be (relatively) easy to put a video camera on the thing and fly it to the target by communicating with it via 3G or 4G. I doubt the authorities will shut THAT down every time there's a political rally! Who knows, with the power of the latest smartphones, maybe you could have the drone run "face recognition" software and track down your target without any ground control at all! (Maybe though politicians would put their faces on balloons at every event to deceive these systems; at least they've got plenty of hot air).
So will we be seeing political rallies/major gatherings guarded by tiny anti-aircraft batteries? (It would be kinda neat to see laser batteries being used). What other solutions are there which would still permit the widespread use of these toys I mean tools?
I see worries in the comments about "the police using them to spy on civilians". They already can.
The only thing a new law like this does is to fix a loophole. UAS and UAV systems can already be used by cops and state govs, by universities (limited), by companies developing experimental aircraft (limited), and for hobby purposes (unregulated, but there are some clear limitations such as flying within range of an airport or above buildings). But you cannot be legally paid to do aerial photography from a UAV/UAS! In other words, you have to pay a pilot to fly a photographer around to legally get aerial pictures. The only other option was using blimps (tethered) and cranes. An entire industry has evolved for erecting collapsible poles to attach cameras because of this rule.
Here are the rules. In it you'll find a letter with the common sense approach for hobbyists, and statements that the FAA will not grant companies any licenses to fly UAS except for experimental aircraft.
Lastly, SHAME ON THE NYT for that last sentence. They just had to jump on the idiot bandwagon and imply a connection between terrorists and photography.
There will be social movements claiming "Cartels of prohibitions of helicopters in this zone" (similar to forbid parking vehicles here but in the sense of to forbid flying here).
When evil governments, local or federal, don't agree them then it could ocurr a scene of helicopters's riots, as using helipcopters as evil weapons or evil tools.
By example, the helicopters could be used for Big Brother, or for being used by traficcers for trafficing drugs, money, tobaccoes, bioweapons, etc without being arrested, or for being used by thieves for assaulting banks, jewelries, or big commercial sites, etc.
Meanwhile, the police officials will be working seat on their office's seats while piloting their GPS-controlled helicopters that could be controlled automatically by central computers of the undergrounds of the federal headquarters (illuminati?, masonry?, zionism?).
The air traffic of helicopters could be collapsed, crashed, etc. and some peoples could claiming money to the securities companies dedicated to this category of aviation. Air control towers will be collapsed due to this excess of air traffic, or jobless.
Worst is the situation when the helicopters (machines) kill peoples (persons). Did you ear Terminator? It's ROBOTs against PEOPLEs.
By example, a police mini-helicopter did shoot a canyon of neutrons to your home's window for scanning your body, and then to kill you! (as in the movie of Eraser of actor Arnold Schwarzenegger patched with an helicopter for its evil police strategy).
It will be a big joke when a police helicopter is prosecuting another criminal-suspected helicopter. This form of prosecution is totally different!. Because 3D gives to the criminal-suspected helicopter one more freedom degree than 2D (the car prosecution is too limited to roads, streets and street-ends). Then for easing the police's prosecution, the US will need another federal law for arming the federal helicopters, it's weaponed helicopters for shooting the criminal-suspected helicopters, and to terminate easily the time of prosecution.
And when the air-helicopters society is spread over all the world similar to as internet, then the U.S. government can intrude easily the incorporation of their UFOcopters (from Area 51 of state Nevada) weared as normal helicopters, as viriicopters or virucopters, and to gain to huge scale advantages at remote distances (trans-trans-trans-oceanic), but by now, then NOT!!!.
Now, told similar to drones as to helicopters.
They wanted it for WARGAMES, i don't like them.
Terrible is the thing when 4 helicopters did come to my home as 4 horsemen of the Apocalypse!!!.
JCPM: i did think twice this concern, and i shouldn't permit to approve a federal law that brings chaos. It seems to be supported acts of jewish zionism for U.S. and subsumited allies.
Regardless what you think about the group who were launching the drone, I think we can all agree that our first reaction to seeing the ugly thing would be to shoot first and ask questions later. Years of first person shooter games with enemies that fly around have permanently implanted the reaction into my brain.
And then the drone shooters "fled scene on small motorized vehicles". Weird, but awesome.
This sig is false.
How long before we have these things peeking in our windows and scooting for "legal" airspace if noticed. Might even start a new forms of abusive kiddie pictures.
When I walk out in my back yard and find a little helicopter hovering around taking photos of my house and yard, I am going to shoot it down unless it's clearly marked as a law enforcement drone.
If it's a commercial drone, it's going down. I'm going to get myself a .22 caliber pellet rifle. It's not a firearm but it will jack up a camera lens and or put a nice hole in a plastic fuel tank. Google has already crossed the line on every other avenue. I can see them trotting these out soon. If I'm not mistaken, they've been working with developing drones for quite some time already..
And they drive around our neighborhoods, and they look at license plates. My grandfather warned us about this, but did anyone listen? Now they can see things from the sky, too.
Gently reply
I have been wondering for a while now whether it might be practical to equip trains with little automated drones, which fly ahead of the train. The idea is to spot dangerous obstructions before the train gets too close to stop.
My original idea was some sort of little train car that ran on ahead of the train. You would have to make it able to carry enough fuel to run for a long-enough length of time, yet not be so massive that it has too much momentum to stop itself in time before its cameras see an obstruction.
But some sort of lightweight flying drone might be even better, flying ahead of the train looking down with a camera. The train could even carry several drones and they could change shifts automatically as they need refueling.
This only makes sense if the operational costs of the drones are cheaper than the expected cost of a train crash (expected cost: odds of a crash multiplied by cost of a crash). If it ever happens, it will be done first on trains with exceptionally dangerous cargo (refined petroleum, nuclear waste, whatever).
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
there's nothing to stop ANYONE, and I do mean ANYONE from parking a car out front of either of these places with cameras in them pointed at the front doors of these businesses
The property owner can ask them to leave and if they refuse to, stick them with a trespassing charge. If it is sort of robotic camera, they have the right to confiscate it. With the drone, they cannot do anything.
Having the bill signed is just telling the FAA to move . As to whether the FAA will meet this deadline is another issue. Besides, the FAA has a long history of moving slow. The last time they had a mandate to come up with new rules for UAVs was 2007. So I wouldn't hold my breath.
Our nation is in sad shape when we have to receive permission from our government in order push technology into new areas. Engineers will not drive our future...lobbyists will, because that's what truly limits our potential.
Flying cars are technologically possible, just not politically possible. There's no license plate category for them, and until there is, they won't exist. Innovation stifled by bureaucracy.
Small aircraft to this day use ancient Rotax engines with magnetos--decades-old design--just because that's what approved, not because that's the cutting edge.
When I go to classic car rallys, I'm impressed not by the technology on display, but by the fact that it's all illegal. None of the classic cars there would be legal to produce and sell today. Nobody would probably produce a '85 firebird today, but who knows? Nobody will try, because it would be illegal anyway. Even my old Corolla, which got 35 mpg in the 90's, would probably not pass mandatory crash tests today.
Engineers and technology do not dictate what is possible in America; Washington does. It reminds me of all the stories of the failed Communist and Socialist economies where they drove shitty two-cycle cars and technology decades behind, and were lucky at that, because that's what they were reduced to by their overlords.
I'm struck by the fact that if America had always suffered under the current regulatory burdens, we probably would still be working or railroads or cars or airplanes. We would probably still be trying to get the FDA to approve the microwave oven or some other agency to approve cell phones.
NRA files suit to allow an armed drone body-guard for self-defense. I can imagine a flock (is that the correct term?) of drones following me everywhere I go, circling overhead, ready to respond to any threat against me with deadly force. ... One day it will be orbital charged particle beam weapons or rail guns, all clearly within the intent of the 2nd amendment.
Crop dusting is inherently dangerous to the pilot. It is by definition done only in low population areas. There are no privacy concerns. That is one application where drones are pure win.
I do all of my crop dusting at the office.
lovely link to a PICTURE of a helicopter,
here is the product listing
"http://www.spycameracctv.com/spycamera/the-first-spy-camera-helicopter-built-in-gyro-high-definition-mini-sd-card-usb-connection-"
wifi? broadcast? NEITHER!
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Pilot license required for operation.
Got Code?
... Sure a lot of commercial groups want this. A lot of police may like this.
>> But the first time some Billionaire, Politician, or well-connected crook gets spied on by a drone and some Jumbotron somewhere displays the FBI agent handing the latest suspected terrorist a home bombing kit -- WELL, won't that be another kettle of fish!
I can think of a thousand useful things to do with drones -- but we all know that eventually, we will all be hunted down like wild dogs trying to reduce our infrared footprint by bathing in cold water and covering ourselves in mud. I've got a recording of "Predator" just in case I need a refresher course.
If it lands on my property, it's mine.
Depending on what the floor for flying will be (1000 ft) I could see Google drones flying 20 ft off the ground everywhere.
They both told me
http://Lenny.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_cannon
Use ham radio to take them down. Not by using RF, but by hanging a lot of wire!
http://www.hamuniverse.com/multidipole.html
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
> Years of first person shooter games with enemies that fly around have permanently implanted the reaction into my brain.
The fact the current resolution is a lot higher than what you're used to, should clue your inhibition engine to kick in ;-)
If you want privacy, get rid of technology. No one can spy on you from an unmanned drone if they can't build unmanned drones.
Clearly no one's going to turn the technological clock back, but it should be a warning to all those people who embrace technology unconditionally.
Computers and the internet have opened up a vast world of information and communication. They have also made it a lot easier for people to spy on you.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it