Slashdot Mirror


Aussie Company Planning To Use Drones For Textbook Delivery

First time accepted submitter Michael Harris writes "According to The Age, an Australian company plans to use autonomous quadropters to deliver text books to University students in Sydney. Apparently the drone will locate you via your smartphone's GPS, fly autonomously to your location, and drop the book into your hands."

178 comments

  1. Butterfingers by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2

    Unless you're poor at catching in which case, lawsuit.. and profit.

    1. Re:Butterfingers by Cryacin · · Score: 1

      So computer science textbooks delivered: 0

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    2. Re:Butterfingers by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Or you can rent some quite heavy books and be exactly on the spot the books will fall.

    3. Re:Butterfingers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will never get to you anyways. College campuses have a built in frisbee screen that prevents any drone from landing. And even if it does land, how is it going to take off again with hacky sacks caught in its rotors?

    4. Re:Butterfingers by RJFerret · · Score: 2

      Coed, "There I was giving this bloke a blowie out back when WHAM, I get knocked out by an economics text...what are they suggesting?"

    5. Re: Butterfingers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She should keep up the good work

    6. Re:Butterfingers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a valid example. The RC helicopter was manually controlled and thus prone to erroneous maneuvering. Autonomous choppers are much safer. /s

    7. Re:Butterfingers by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "It will never get to you anyways. College campuses have a built in frisbee screen that prevents any drone from landing. "

      Not to mention the more ancient anti-drone technology called 'doors'.

  2. TCP/IP over avian carrier? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Delivering paper textbooks is probably cheaper than a month subscription to Telstra.

  3. Thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll take the drone, too.

  4. Postie! by Stolzy · · Score: 1

    Drone Posties, nice idea (since letterboxes rarely move).

    1. Re:Postie! by mjwx · · Score: 2

      Drone Posties, nice idea (since letterboxes rarely move).

      Look, they could launch my deliveries at my home with a medieval trebuchet and still manage to deliver them with less damage than the current postie.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    2. Re: Postie! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      you must have a shit letterbox. I've worked as a postie and know 99% of damage happens trying to fit mail in shitty letterboxes

    3. Re:Postie! by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      No help if you live in an apartment :D

    4. Re: Postie! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you by any chance own a black-and-whit cat?

    5. Re: Postie! by mjr167 · · Score: 2

      Because clearly it is the letterboxes fault that the postman tried to fit a 20 inch package into a 10 inch box...

    6. Re: Postie! by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      you must have a shit letterbox. I've worked as a postie and know 99% of damage happens trying to fit mail in shitty letterboxes

      So ... it *is* the postman's fault?

      --
      No sig today...
    7. Re: Postie! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what she said.

    8. Re: Postie! by mjwx · · Score: 1

      you must have a shit letterbox. I've worked as a postie and know 99% of damage happens trying to fit mail in shitty letterboxes

      My postie doesn't even know what a letter box is, he just hurls it at the door from the window of his van.

      Also, if the postie cant figure out that package A is too big for slot B, it really is their fault.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  5. I'm planning to deliver groceries by missile... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a really good idea!

  6. Better to use owls by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

    It worked well for Harry Potter.

  7. Wait until someone by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Orders a book for delivery to the US embassy ... just imagine panic!

    1. Re:Wait until someone by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      easy enough to put "sensitive" destination on a blacklist (or greylist: requires human to call destination to confirm order).

    2. Re:Wait until someone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The embassy is in Canberra...

      This is about Sydney.

    3. Re:Wait until someone by SteveFoerster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pretend he said "consulate", and then laugh. It was a joke, not a geography lesson.

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    4. Re:Wait until someone by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Canberra isn't all that far from Sydney...

  8. Brilliant proof of concept for other industries. by ron_ivi · · Score: 2
    As they perfect this technology, I imagine many other industries will be interested.

    drug smuggling

    deliveries of court orders

    weapons etc

  9. Free Drone !!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on now - who can't see the value in being able to 'catch' one of these drones ? The delivery system is attractive, valuable, and can be parted out easily enough. And you get to call the vendor back and say that you never received the books :-)

    1. Re:Free Drone !!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The delivery system is attractive, valuable, and can be parted out easily enough. And you get to call the vendor back and say that you never received the books :-)

      Video feed back to home base, where it's recorded?

  10. Fantasy: CASA won't approve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I work in commercial Australian aerospace, I do a lot of legal regulatory compliance and I'm a UAV freak. CASA won't give an AOC for this activity as it's inherently non-compliant. The regulations state the UAV should never be in a position that a failure (eg: engine/motor/lift) would cause injury or damage to property and this activity would need to fly over things. In addition to that, I know many of the CASA staff who are involved in AOCs, and they're quite conservative (no offence guys). They're all too worried about the part 61 changes in December which will shake up the whole industry (biggest change in decades) to take a risk on this. I actually spoke with some representatives a month or more ago when they briefed our company on the new regulatory changes and I specifically asked about the future of UAV regulations, they're aware of it's increasing prevalence but nothing will be changing under the new regime.

    1. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      I can't say that I'd blame them in this case: At least in US universities, there are major textbook 'peaks' (and, at least for the fall term, they usually occur while the weather is still good enough for people to be outside, other terms possible, depending on climate and seasonal variation). A plan that involves zipping a bunch of well laden quadcopters across the quad during high use periods just seems to be asking for trouble without commensurate advantage.

      (Extra credit for having a unit enter that neat failure mode where stability is lost, due to hardware fault or firmware fuckup; but at least some rotors remain powered as it whips off in some poorly chosen direction...)

    2. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Funny

      well laden quadcopters

      African or European quadcopters . . . ?

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by craznar · · Score: 1

      Does CASA actually look after low altitude private airspace ?

      --
      EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
    4. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      well laden quadcopters

      African or European quadcopters . . . ?

      Huh? I... I don't know that.

    5. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by crutchy · · Score: 0

      i think as long as you're under 400 ft you're good

    6. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you ordering textbooks or coconuts?

    7. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by cavok · · Score: 1

      Actually I think that would be possible to create dedicated airways for such flows. Highly stacked, computer controlled, separated and managed by local automated computer based traffic "lights".

    8. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      clearly a textbook about coconuts

    9. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, CASA is involved in all areas of air safety as governed by delegated legislation. It's in their charter.

    10. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 1

      It shouldn't be too much of a problem to program these things to deliberately not fly directly over anyone.

    11. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by burisch_research · · Score: 1

      Monty Python: Search for the Holy Grail

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2R3FvS4xr4

      What is the airspeed velocity of a swallow?

      --
      char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
    12. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by barlevg · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's you who missed the reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wpx6XnankZ8&t=2m58s

    13. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and what does the bridge scene entail with Arthur?

    14. Re:Fantasy: CASA won't approve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "property", that includes any vehicle, structure, construct etc. That means over fields only. Good luck with that.

  11. Payload? by not_surt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The text books I remember were all freaking heavy and don't "quadracopters" (six-bladed quadracopters in this case by the looks of it) generally have a very limited payload?

    1. Re:Payload? by nospam007 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "The text books I remember were all freaking heavy and don't "quadracopters" (six-bladed quadracopters in this case by the looks of it) generally have a very limited payload?"

      They're electronic books on a small USB stick I guess.
      But more seriously, this story misses a 'stupid' tag.

    2. Re:Payload? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're printed textbooks up to two kilograms in total weight if you'd take the effort to click on the link and not just assume everyone else is a moron.

    3. Re:Payload? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Hexacopter.

      They go up to octacopter for heavy lifting, like professional TV cameras that have been used to film some sporting events from above.

    4. Re:Payload? by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      maybe they should build a drone clone of a scaled down Chinook CH47 maybe about the size of a breadbox

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    5. Re:Payload? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      If you dislike tedious hand-assembly of models, you could always build a scaled-down Mi-26 clone just by starting with an ordinary small helicopter...

    6. Re:Payload? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they're electronic, just download them.

    7. Re:Payload? by jkflying · · Score: 2

      Having more blades isn't to help with heavier lifting (more smaller blades is actually less efficient than more bigger blades), it's to give some redundancy so that if one fails the whole machine is still capable of flying in a degraded fashion. Think RAID, but with an extra 2 dimensions.

      You need a minimum of 4 blades for stability, having 6 means that any 1 can fail and having 8 means any 2 can fail.

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    8. Re:Payload? by jkflying · · Score: 1

      more smaller blades is actually less efficient than more bigger blades

      Gah. That doesn't make sense. Additional smaller blades is less efficient than fewer big blades. Big props are more efficient.

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    9. Re:Payload? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      It does give finer control though. Which is just what you want when you need to hold a heavy camera steady.

    10. Re:Payload? by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      And yet, people who don't understand basic physics seem to think all these quad-/hex-/octo-copters should be scaled up.

    11. Re:Payload? by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      Actually, what gives finer control is a proper swashplate. All these multi-rotor aircraft pale in comparison to the performance and maneuverability of a traditional helicopter.

    12. Re:Payload? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      A swashplate is a precision-engineered device. Expensive, and in need of regular inspection and lubrication if you don't want something to jam. A quadcopter's rotots are just a high-torque stepper motor with a prop bolted on. They don't even have gears. Not much to go wrong with them.

    13. Re:Payload? by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      What exactly does 'failure' entail? Detaching and flying off at velocity while the copter is in flight? O__o

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    14. Re:Payload? by jkflying · · Score: 1

      It could be a prop breaking from striking something, or a motor burning out, or a motor controller failing, or any of the wiring for any of the above being broken in some way. Once you are running 8 props you can even treat it as two joined quads, each with a completely redundant radio, GPS, battery, flight controller etc, so you don't ever have a single point of failure.

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    15. Re:Payload? by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      Not much to go wrong, and not very efficient if you actually want to scale up and carry a decent payload, like a big professional video camera.

    16. Re:Payload? by jkflying · · Score: 1

      Your traditional heli can only change attitude when the blades are facing along the correct axis. High performance quad/hex/octo motor controllers can accelerate/decelerate the prop noticeably at ~200hz and change the attitude smoothly, not in sinusoidal acceleration bursts based on the angle of a large slow-rotating prop. This is important for filming, to provide smooth stabilisation against gusts. If you really need the negative thrust, try using plain variable-pitch props (think heli tail-rotors) in a multi-rotor config. The performance and agility is much higher than that of a traditional heli.

      Add some real-world dust and grit and a few hundred hours of operation and I'd rather have a $100k camera hanging on something with in-built redundancy, manoeuvrability be damned. Consider that each servo driving your swashplate probably has as many moving parts as an entire hexacopter, and you'll get why.

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    17. Re:Payload? by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      That sounds like a horrible idea to even attempt fine image stabilization using the rotors themselves.

    18. Re:Payload? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Yes, I do imagine the camera would be about the limit of what is practical using... what are we going to call these things? Polycopters? Polycopter technology. Any heavier, and conventional big-rotor-and-tail-rotor helicopter would be the way to go.

      But then you've got to consider noise as well - at a big sports event, would an octocopter be quieter than a helicopter? The faster spinning, smaller rotors would generate a very different noise.

    19. Re:Payload? by Attila+the+Bun · · Score: 1

      The point still stands: that drone looks really small to be carrying a 2kg payload, especially over any distance (when it would also have to carry large heavy batteries). Not to mention all the safety technology casually referred to in the article: backup batteries, delivery crane, laser range-finders, sonar, and yet more batteries to power the collision avoidance systems.

      TFA does not demonstrate anything other than a hex-copter carrying a probably-empty box.

    20. Re:Payload? by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      Anything inside a stadium, they're unnecessary, since you can just do cable-suspended cameras. Anything suspended is going to be much quieter than anything flying.

    21. Re:Payload? by jkflying · · Score: 1

      Rough image stabilisation is done on the frame, with fine stabilisation done with gimbal motors. However, the less the gimbal motors have to do the better, and large slow blades are... well... large and slow.

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    22. Re:Payload? by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't call any of those but the first a 'blade failing' as you did above, though.

      Makes me glad I'm not one of the engineers tasked with making these things stable.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    23. Re:Payload? by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      Large? Yes. Slow? Not hardly. Think about how the two systems operate for a moment. On a direct-drive multi-rotor, rotor RPM directly controls thrust. If you want to increase thrust, you subtract the power needed to counter drag from whatever the motor is outputting, and whatever is left is available to accelerate the rotor. That means you have rapidly diminishing available power as your thrust increases. I question your claim of being able to meaningfully modulate thrust on a multi-rotor at 200Hz. The only way I could see that possible is if your motors were vastly over-speced for your requirements; a trait increasingly difficult to achieve as you scale up.

      On a traditional helicopter, the rotor only operates at a single RPM, and you adjust your engine power to maintain that RPM. Your thrust comes from actuation of the swashplate, so your ability to modulate thrust is dependent on the speed of those servos. That's going to be a damn sight better than anything the motors on multi-rotor are capable of. Worst case on being able to modulate proportional thrust in a particular direction is going to be one full blade passing. An RC helicopter of useful size is going to operate at speed of 2000-3000RPM. 3000RPM with a four-blade prop will get you your 200Hz modulation.

    24. Re:Payload? by jkflying · · Score: 1

      Large? Yes. Slow? Not hardly. Think about how the two systems operate for a moment. On a direct-drive multi-rotor, rotor RPM directly controls thrust. If you want to increase thrust, you subtract the power needed to counter drag from whatever the motor is outputting, and whatever is left is available to accelerate the rotor. That means you have rapidly diminishing available power as your thrust increases. I question your claim of being able to meaningfully modulate thrust on a multi-rotor at 200Hz. The only way I could see that possible is if your motors were vastly over-speced for your requirements; a trait increasingly difficult to achieve as you scale up.

      On your regular heli, if you have to run at max power and max pitch to hover, you will run into issues. Yes, motors on a quad are over-speced for hover. Just like a regular heli. They don't draw their full rated power the full time, but they are capable of producing bursts much higher. Typically a multi-rotor hovers around half-throttle. Newer firmwares also provide regeneration, so you don't lose energy by slowing the prop, chances are the energy goes into speeding up a different prop, and any excess to the battery.

      On a traditional helicopter, the rotor only operates at a single RPM, and you adjust your engine power to maintain that RPM. Your thrust comes from actuation of the swashplate, so your ability to modulate thrust is dependent on the speed of those servos. That's going to be a damn sight better than anything the motors on multi-rotor are capable of. Worst case on being able to modulate proportional thrust in a particular direction is going to be one full blade passing. An RC helicopter of useful size is going to operate at speed of 2000-3000RPM. 3000RPM with a four-blade prop will get you your 200Hz modulation.

      1) Nobody uses a 4-bladed prop on model helis for weight lifting. The only reason more-than-2 bladed props are used is for a) scale effect or b) on a real life plane/heli to prevent the blade tips from exceeding mach 1. More blades = less efficient.
      2) Worst case is actually worse than that, because of flybars. They put much less strain on the servos, but require an extra half-revolution of the blades for any effect to take place.
      3) Because nobody uses more than 2 blades for anything except scale, you have the sinusoidal acceleration for stabilisation.
      4) Traditional helis have more blade area, which means more wind disturbance.
      5) If you really need the manoeuvrability, and you can handle the increased complexity and chance of failure, variable pitch props can be used for multi-rotor. If anything, they give more manoeuvrability than a standard heli. And you still have the option of high motor counts to get redundancy.

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    25. Re:Payload? by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      4) Traditional helis have more blade area, which means more wind disturbance.

      5) If you really need the manoeuvrability, and you can handle the increased complexity and chance of failure, variable pitch props can be used for multi-rotor. If anything, they give more manoeuvrability than a standard heli. And you still have the option of high motor counts to get redundancy.

      That's the whole point. Longer blades means higher aspect ratio. Larger blade area means lower disc loading. Those in turn mean more thrust, less power consumption, and a reduced tendency for ring stalls under heavy maneuvering. Swashplate or not, you're not going to get that with a multi-rotor.

  12. If only... by bikin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    there were a method to codify books as electromagnetic signals, and a transport network to deliver such signals to devices capable of displaying the decodified content. Imagine the added benefit of not having to fly around 1 or 2 kilos of material, with all the energy savings that would imply. nahh, that's impossible

    1. Re:If only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You clearly never done any business with Telstra.

    2. Re:If only... by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Assuming these are rural areas with little-to-no internet, they could even use standard radio signals to transmit textbooks. There was a time when some people experimented with transmiitting programs over FM. Record the signal to a tape, put it in your commodore, and you had a working program. I'm sure the same could be done with books. They aren't that big. You could probably even have people dial into a dedicated computer for downloading books via a modem. The added benefit that you don't even need internet service, so there's no ongoing monthly fees.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:If only... by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Hah I remember those days. Record your ZX Spectrum demo from a late night radio broadcast. I was never allowed to stay up late enough to do that :-(

    4. Re:If only... by jittles · · Score: 1

      there were a method to codify books as electromagnetic signals, and a transport network to deliver such signals to devices capable of displaying the decodified content. Imagine the added benefit of not having to fly around 1 or 2 kilos of material, with all the energy savings that would imply. nahh, that's impossible

      You're definitely underestimating the weight of all those 1's and 0's. Especially the 1's. Most people think the 0 would weight more because it is wider, but the 1 contains much more data and therefore has more mass. There will be millions of 1's and 0's for a single book, versus perhaps 300 pages for a printed copy. Obviously the printed copy weighs less and uses less resources.

    5. Re:If only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming these are rural areas with little-to-no internet, they could even use standard radio signals to transmit textbooks. There was a time when some people experimented with transmiitting programs over FM. Record the signal to a tape, put it in your commodore, and you had a working program. I'm sure the same could be done with books. They aren't that big. You could probably even have people dial into a dedicated computer for downloading books via a modem. The added benefit that you don't even need internet service, so there's no ongoing monthly fees.

      Seeing as recently digitally distributed college textbooks are starting to push past the 1 GB mark (yes I am in college, yes I have seen a digitally distributed college textbook that was published last year; it was an Auditing textbook about ~400 pages long), I'd have to say that your idea is completely unrealistic.

      Dial-up would be bad enough, but radio transmission? Where the hell have you been?

    6. Re:If only... by operagost · · Score: 1

      This. Frankly, delivering physical media by air is such a dumb idea, I feel stupider for having heard it. Even in the bush, a poor satellite link could handle the job better and without the risk of ironically killing someone with a falling physics textbook. This sounds like a moronic idea some bean-counter thought of to protect a textbook publisher's IP-- because those dastardly ebooks can be too easily copied.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    7. Re:If only... by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Odds are that book wasn't very well optimized for digital distribution. Probably just a PDF of the scanned pages. Ideally you won't have many images at all. Most of my textbooks contain very few images, and even the images that are there could be stored quite easily in vector formats, as they are basically line drawings (charts, graphs, and other such things). Sure certain textbooks that required a lot of pictures wouldn't work very well, but it might even be easier in this case to have a paper book with just the pictures, and a digital book that contains all the text, and references the images.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  13. Dangerous/ Forsee problems by sonamchauhan · · Score: 2

    When a car engine fails, the default behavior is to coast to a halt -- unless driving downhill! Even so, a car has emergency brakes, gear/engine braking, a human driver, etc.

    This scheme has no human in control (its "autonomous"), an externally provided destination ("connected to GPS on the users' mobile phone."), and no protection from a flying plastic bag or sheet fouling multiple propellors, turning it into a heavy unguided missile dropping onto the street below.

    To the founders -- densely populated cities are the wrong place for a drone. How about delivering books or medical supplies in the Australian outback? (with a petrol engined drone)

    1. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      A human to deal with emergencies is possibly less reliable than a computer to deal with emergencies.

      Of course the computer should be pretty reliable - yet humans also occasionally suffer from catastrophic failure, such as a heart attack or stroke.

      A computer can reliably perform emergency routines, and won't panic like a human might do. Particularly when dealing with an inherently hard to control vehicle like an aircraft.

      A computer needs to be properly programmed (that is at the moment still an issue: particularly sensing the environment is not exactly solved yet), a human needs to be properly trained.

      A computer may not be able to deal with some very extreme and unexpected situations (a software issue that is certainly being worked on), a human may make basic mistakes when such a situation occurs.

      Safety is an issue for these things - no idea how this can be solved reliably. Probably one will have to set up air-roads for a start, to prevent collisions. These routes can also run along areas where if the drone would fall out of the sky, not much can happen.

    2. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      A properly trained, licensed, operator is better than software. For instance, he can determine if the situation is unrecoverable, and decide its better to crash into a mustard field instead of a children's playground (both of which look identical to this drone's sensors sensors). Of course, any computer support that augments the pilot is something good, not bad.

      Yes, air roads - in unpopulated areas - are probably a good idea for commercial drones.

    3. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing these things are robust enough to carry a real reference book or 3 (350+ page hard bound heavy book.)

      If high velocity heavy falling things are the only issue slowing it down from a safety perspective, an accelerometer/altimeter driven (hardwired circuit that detects low altitude + high speed and fails in the deploy state in the power failure situation) parachute trigger and drive cut out for "oops" situations should be able to reduce the risk of falling payload/delivery system causing impact damage.

    4. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      I doubt a remote operator of a drone is better than software - if so, it's not for long, as development of these things is going faster and faster with the availability of more and more cheap, ready to go starter packages. Software can make faster decisions, and has basically the same info a human operator has on where to go: a map and a video feed, plus the various sensors that tell whether something is wrong. As such drones are mostly flying out of sight of the operator, this human operator can not look out of the window to verify whether a sensor is broken, or whether the rotor has really fallen off.

    5. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by jkflying · · Score: 1

      Some thoughts:
      1) Electric motors are more reliable than petrol engines - less moving parts etc
      2) There are spare props - these use 6, which means that 1 can completely fail and the UAV can still fly.
      3) A plastic bag will pose no issues for these props - they will cut right through.
      4) These will have auto-descent for when signal is lost, battery is low or whatever so that they don't just 'fall out of the sky'.

      That said, GPS is horribly inaccurate with height, and I'd also be worried with things like clipping buildings and trees. What to speak of chopping somebody up with the before-mentioned powerful props.

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    6. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I kind of agree.Everybody always points out this example of crash into field/off a bridge, or run over a bunch of kids. Firstly, that's probably about .00001% of crashes, and secondly, an autonomous car could have all kinds of sensors. It would be pretty simple to figure out where the human bodies are using an infrared camera, and pick the route with the least number of bodies in the way.

      You could probably argue that the autonomous car would be much less likely to even have to make such a decision, since it would always be following at a safe distance, and wouldn't try to be passing a car around a blind corner, or over a hill like human drivers tend to do.

      I only have two eyes, and they always face in the same direction. They also only see a very small part of the electromagnetic spectrum. I think it's inevitable that cars will eventually be better drivers than humans, and that one day we will look back and wonder why we ever wanted to drive cars in the first place (ignoring racing, but that has it's own place, and should not be on public roads). I don't think we're at the point where cars are better than a really good driver, but we're pretty much guaranteed to be there in the long term. It may take 50 more years, and I can't see why it would even take that long.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    7. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by leonardluen · · Score: 1

      ...wonder why we ever wanted to drive cars in the first place (ignoring racing...

      the funny thing is Racing is a more controlled environment than the public roads. it would actually be easier to automate a race car than a normal car that drives on the public road, because there is a more limited set of obstacles

    8. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      This is why they should use hexacopters where computer control can handle loss of one rotor (e.g. because of a plastic bag) or even two as long as they are not adjacent (and mayne even then).

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    9. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the onboard camera -- 99.9% of "problems" will be people fucking around rather than failures.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    10. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder why people ever wanted to cross the ocean in slow moving, dangerous ships when you can just fly.

    11. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I kind of agree.Everybody always points out this example of crash into field/off a bridge, or run over a bunch of kids.

      Not only that, the common thing with all those examples is that we have historic proof that humans certainly can't handle the mentioned situations.
      If people weren't that retarded they would try to find examples that humans can easily handle that computers have problems with. Too bad those are almost impossible to find.

    12. Re: Dangerous/ Forsee problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or just swim, like that one dude, Davy Jones.

    13. Re:Dangerous/ Forsee problems by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but with computers racing, it's not as exciting, or at least it's a different kind of exciting. My point being, that driving on public roads is kind of a time waste as far as I'm concerned, and I'll be happy when I can just read a book or play angry birds while my car drives me.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  14. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This seems like a highly inefficient way. Why not just ... email a pdf of the text book?

    1. Re:What? by ketomax · · Score: 1

      The reason for using drones is to smite those who were not studious enough with the previous batch of books.

    2. Re:What? by ls671 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, maybe even: "delivering books" is just a cover job for these drones and in truth, they are up to something evil!

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    3. Re:What? by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      DRM concerns?

      Maybe deliver the copy-protection USB dongle via helium balloon mini-airship? :D

  15. Trees, Buildings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm standing under a tree. Please deliver

    1. Re:Trees, Buildings by leonardluen · · Score: 1

      that is why they will be equiped with a nerf dart gun to flush them out from under the tree.

  16. how sharp are the blades on that chopper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will your books arrive with blood stains after the drone cuts through the crowds on its mission to find you?

    1. Re: how sharp are the blades on that chopper? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/nyregion/remote-controlled-copter-fatally-strikes-pilot-at-park.html?_r=0

      Enough to do that?

  17. Because the cost of getting a text book... by complete+loony · · Score: 1

    ... is so cheap already?

    --
    09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
  18. Great Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huge potential for other stuff
    A bit ahead of their time tho IMHO.

  19. Re:Brilliant proof of concept for other industries by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    No mobile phone or plate number to track deep into known high crime areas, just the hoodie copter flying out to your car with gang roundel.
    The FSB one for the starving US ex-gov workers who got out with a database retirement package.
    In Capitalist West Russian embassy drone is lucrative for you.
    Better than been a tourist mistaken for Snowden by the US embassy drone.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  20. Competition! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are apparently competing with the U.S.A.'s NSA for the "what could possibly go wrong?" award.

  21. Done before, sorry by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

    I hate to say it to Zookal, but we've done this in the small Italian town of Verbania since 2010. There was even an article in the local newspaper, Eco Risveglio. Email me at spiritplumber +gmail if you want a copy of the article. They can also talk to Kite Winters in Melbourne if they want confirmation from a more local source.

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    1. Re:Done before, sorry by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      Is this discontinued? What were the problems faced?

    2. Re:Done before, sorry by Antonovich · · Score: 1

      You delivered books to Sydney university students from Italy? That's incredible!

  22. Maths will kill you by james.greenhalgh2649 · · Score: 1

    When I first saw my calculus textbook, I thought to myself, "This is going to kill me". Someone will experience death or injury by textbook with this idea.

    1. Re:Maths will kill you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i believe that has already happened without the drones.

      i stole that link from a comment somewhere above.

  23. This makes perfect sense by Arancaytar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because if there is one thing the age of digital communication has brought us, it is the ability to carry paper through the air.

    Admittedly this is pretty cool, but so are zeppelins. Doesn't make it useful.

    1. Re:This makes perfect sense by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      It'd be great to be able to sit in the park and order a drink or a slice of pizza from a nearby shop, to have it deliverd to where-ever you happen to sit in a matter of minutes.

      Books are just one of the many things that can be delivered by these things, and are basically just being used as a proof of concept.

    2. Re:This makes perfect sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What wouldn't be neat is hundreds of these things flying around everywhere delivering goods. That would get annoying real quick.

    3. Re:This makes perfect sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be pissed when it's delivered to the balcony above mine since consumer GPS isn't particularly accurate (especially for elevation data).

    4. Re:This makes perfect sense by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      That's what America needs. More reasons to sit still.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    5. Re:This makes perfect sense by leonardluen · · Score: 1

      having some of those delivered to me to the park might be nice...however the last thing i would want there is a textbook. especially because i would then have to lug it back home and may not have brought a bag to carry it in.

      unless you can have the drone come back later to pick it back up...

    6. Re:This makes perfect sense by leonardluen · · Score: 1

      well, good thing this is in australia!

    7. Re:This makes perfect sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is what Australia needs. More reasons to sit still.

      In 2011-12, 62.8% of Australians aged 18 years and over were overweight or obese, comprised of 35.3% overweight and 27.5% obese. A further 35.5% were of normal weight and 1.7% were underweight.

      The prevalence of overweight and obesity has increased in Australia over time, from 56.3% in 1995 and 61.2% in 2007–08.

      - http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4338.0~2011-13~Main%20Features~Overweight%20and%20obesity~10007

    8. Re:This makes perfect sense by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      It'd definitely have an application in food delivery or other tangible mail order stuff, yeah; Pizza is notoriously hard to transmit over TCP/IP. =D

      (Though the drones may eventually get hacked to either hijack the merchandise or deliver spam. Could even conceivably be used for terrorism.)

  24. if i was going to that college by FudRucker · · Score: 1

    i would get a paintball gun and use those drones for target practice

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
  25. Early 1900s vision of the future by Reliable+Windmill · · Score: 1

    It looks like something you would see in one of those ridiculous pictorials from the early 1900s, envisioning the future.

    --
    Signature intentionally left blank.
  26. Lets Go Fly A Kite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are the optics on the drones good enough to evade a kite string (I'll assume they've been tested against electrical wires)? What's going to stop the from flying through localized bad weather?

  27. books not bombs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make literature not war.

    1. Re:books not bombs by crutchy · · Score: 0

      the pen is mightier than the sword

  28. How long will I need to wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How long will I need to wait until these things start delivering pizza?

  29. Oh no they won't! by sd4f · · Score: 1

    Our nanny state won't let this at all. I really doubt it's even legal at the moment, since there have been many laws governing UAV's already.

  30. Surprise " BOOM " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's surprising we haven't heard of an asassination done by a small rc plane/copter in the papers yet.

  31. Next wave of modern technology. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Funny
    Let us use the 3D printing technology to create papyrus rolls. And use an email to a post-office which will print it and deliver it to the customer's home.

    Or we can speak into a smart phone, use an app to convert it to text, send it via SMS, the receiving app will use a synthesizer to read it out aloud. If the receiving phone has stored the profile of your voice, the receiver can actually hear the sender's voice, on a phone, no less! Oh, wait, some already did this. It is called What's App.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  32. On the contrary by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    Well, I wanted to post a snarky reply like "It's not at all surprising that you haven't heard of one yet." but the US has been using RC planes to "assassinate" targets in the middle east for quite some time. They just do it with small bombs instead of a bullet.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:On the contrary by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      Shh. The US isn't allowed to perform assassinations. International law forbids it. They're surgical strikes against groups of combatants that just happen to include a specific figure of military or political significance.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  33. Fishing net with extension, capture, eBay, profit by ad454 · · Score: 2

    What is to prevent some enterprising individuals from capturing a number of these, and selling them on eBay? Reminds me of Pokemon, "gotta catch them all".

    Each drone would be likely worth hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars, and would be a tempting target for thieves. Even the stripped down electronics are worth it, and one can easily remove any batteries/fuel, or toss them into a metallic mesh box, to shut down or block any tracking signals, before the tracking units are removed in a distant location.

    Military and spy drones always operate at great heights, except for takeoffs and landings at secure locations. In comparison, these delivery drones are required to fly quite low, or even land, in insecure areas, when dropping off packages, in order to avoid injuring the recipients and by-standards. At this point could be easily captured by people on the ground the long nets.

    The only way to avoid this would be to have people following these delivery drones, at which point it becomes easier and cheaper just to let these people simply hand-deliver these packages without any drones.

  34. Re:Brilliant proof of concept for other industries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm surprised RC's arent used more when distributing dope. Perfect for the job.

  35. That has to be the dumbest idea I've heard in by mark_reh · · Score: 2

    months, and I live in the US, the world wide capitol of dumb ideas.

    1) it requires everyone who orders a book to submit to gps tracking
    2) it is for delivering paper books- do people still use those?
    3) the inefficiency is mind-boggling.
    4) it is rife with safety issues

    I could go on but you get the idea...

    1. Re: That has to be the dumbest idea I've heard in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does seem like a gimmick, though on your point 1. , normal delivery to an address is equivalent with respect to privacy.

    2. Re:That has to be the dumbest idea I've heard in by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      Yeah...there's no way in heck they'd get me to turn on my GPS. Considering that I have a relatively dumb phone, I literally have no reason whatsoever to use GPS other than if I get the sudden urge to be tracked.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    3. Re:That has to be the dumbest idea I've heard in by mark_reh · · Score: 1

      You can be tracked with a dumb phone, too, by triangulation of your signal at multiple cell sites. It may not be quite as accurate as gps, but it's good enough for most uses.

    4. Re:That has to be the dumbest idea I've heard in by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      1. You don't necessarily need to allow tracking other than for the few minutes it takes for the drone to reach you. As the AC also pointed out, you need to submit at least one location for regular delivery.
      2. Yes, I'm not sure why there's any doubt in your mind that people still use paper books. There are stores, like Barnes & Noble who make money primarily by selling paper books to people who want to use them.
      3. How is it inefficient? The alternative is for the person who wants the book to travel to the store. Transporting a book is going to use far less resources than transporting a person, simply due to the difference in weight. Even allowing for the inefficiency of air travel the quad-copter is going to come out way ahead.
      4. Safety is a concern, but it is a set of solved problems. There is no need to expose anyone to a spinning blade, or any of the other safety issues you are imagining.

      Shitting on every new idea you see doesn't make you sound smart. Please stop doing it.

  36. Let's legitimize the scam industry even more! by P-niiice · · Score: 1

    All books should be pdf's now anyway. This just perpetuates the enormous scam that is the textbook industry. For the prices we are asked to pay, you'd think the books are made of powdered unicorn horn and printed with the blood of wood nymphs. I torrent textbooks for my son and his girlfriend whenever possible. You can call it a 'protest' but it's really my refusal to take part in the scam.

  37. Hedwig delivers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am waiting for the white ornithopter version. Then I get my notes delivered by an Owl.

  38. Re:Brilliant proof of concept for other industries by Ogi_UnixNut · · Score: 1

    What makes you think drug smugglers have not been doing this? Since the paparazzi autopilot came out in 03 (and got refined by 06), it has been perfectly possible to build a DIY drone good enough to move a few tens of kilo's across borders.

    Considering the profit motive, and lucrative money for any nerds involved, it would not surprise me if they were one of the first non-military users of the tech.

  39. It's stupid by koan · · Score: 2

    It's dangerous, it's expensive, it's impractical, it's technically flawed, it isn't "a better way" it just has a smidge of entertainment value which fades immediately.

    It's stupid.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:It's stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's dangerous, it's expensive, it's impractical, it's technically flawed, it isn't "a better way" it just has a smidge of entertainment value which fades immediately.

      It's stupid.

      Yeah, yeah, yeah. Let's do it!!

  40. Owls by SigmaTao · · Score: 1

    Sure they can come up with a way for them to be called Owls :-)

  41. Oh The Humanity!!!!!! by tgeek · · Score: 2

    " . . . as God is my witness, i thought textbooks could fly . . . "

  42. Re:Brilliant proof of concept for other industries by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    Perfect for the job.

    LOL!

    The drug cartels aren't worried about you moving in on their turf anytime soon.

    --
    No sig today...
  43. Sheila ... I just by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Sheila ... I just shot myself an Enterprise Architecture manual",
    "What 'ya want that for Bob?"
    "Dunno Sheila but the fun's in the huntin'!"

  44. They Have Done A Fantastic Job! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have done a fantastic job of advertising and setting themselves up for investors with venture capital.

    Of course, it will NEVER deliver text books, the CASA will never clear it for flight, there's no need, the cost is ludicrous, the liability is astronomical... But, the technology is there for some other application that we may not yet see and they have set themselves up to profit from this.

    In any case, they can go into low risk weed delivery as a fall back plan. 'Yea, officer, I'm delivering text books. That's the ticket.'

  45. Target practice by rossdee · · Score: 1

    for Abo's with boomerangs

  46. Old fashion idea by wcrowe · · Score: 1

    This sounds like some 1950s, Popular Mechanics approach to the situation. Wouldn't it make more sense for the books to be digital?

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:Old fashion idea by rwise2112 · · Score: 1

      This sounds like some 1950s, Popular Mechanics approach to the situation. Wouldn't it make more sense for the books to be digital?

      Yeah you're right. Digital books would be much lighter, and easier for the drones to carry. Perhaps money can be saved by using smaller drones!

      --

      "For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert"
    2. Re:Old fashion idea by madhi19 · · Score: 1

      You could use small drones to provide movable access point and then send digital books and the rest of the internet while you're at it.

  47. Re:Brilliant proof of concept for other industries by plopez · · Score: 1

    Pizza delivery

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  48. Re:Fishing net with extension, capture, eBay, prof by leonardluen · · Score: 1

    cameras on the drone?

    the drones telemetry data, so they would know the exact time and location it went down. at the very least would make it easier to search for witnesses.

    i expect it would also attempt to phone home when it detects something wrong, in order to make it easier to recover, so you would have to be very careful to block all signals it emits until you pull all the batteries. one mistake and they would know where you are.

  49. Re:Fishing net with extension, capture, eBay, prof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for that matter what is to stop people from kidnapping mail carriers and selling their kidneys?

  50. Re:Brilliant proof of concept for other industries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What makes you think drug smugglers have not been doing this?

    Weight and size limitations mainly. The payload we are talking about here sounds like something that is suitable for the dealer on the local campus and that is already low risk and more or less needs direct contact since the risk of not getting paid will be significant otherwise.
    For transporting across borders we are talking about a business were it is profitable to dig a tunnel with electrical lighting and ventilation and a well maintained road for the trucks.
    Unless the drone can carry tons of concealed payload it is simply not competitive with current solutions. (150 tunnels between Mexico and the US has been found so far, there are probably more.)

  51. Re:Fishing net with extension, capture, eBay, prof by qubezz · · Score: 1

    Yup, that's what I was thinking too, every book purchase includes a free drone.

    Australia, droppin' knowledge since 2014

  52. So, in other words.. by T-Bucket · · Score: 1

    This company is going to be distributing free drones to anyone who cares to grab/knock one out of the air... Sounds like a good business model.

  53. Great news! by philmarcracken · · Score: 1

    1. Order $80 textbook
    2. Buy $20 longrod fishing net
    3. Capture $1000+(??) textbook-carrying drone
    4. Anime style flashbacks to buying the net
    5. More flashbacks
    6. Even more flashbacks
    7. Filler
    8. Lengthy battle with subordinates
    9. No clear victor.

  54. I don't get it. by madhi19 · · Score: 1

    And that simpler and cheaper than going with ebook how?

  55. Re: Fishing net with extension, capture, eBay, pro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, that is a great idea, thank you.

  56. Hair Cut... by itwasgreektome · · Score: 1

    ...and get a free hair cut in the process.

  57. The perfect name... by BitwizeGHC · · Score: 1

    ...Dropbear.

    --
    N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
  58. Re:Fishing net with extension, capture, eBay, prof by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

    Mt first thought is that you don't have to actually land the drone: you could lower the book on a rope and have it set up that the rope can only support very slightly more than the weight of the book. The person gets the book, pulls down to detach the rope and the drone flies off, having never come within 100 m of you. You'd have some clever hitch on the book so that you wouldn't have 100 m of rope falling on you, unless you tried to grab the rope and pull down the drone, then the rope breaks (at a designed weak point) and the copter flies off to safety. You then get put on a black-list (maybe after a few attempts to rule out accidental snags.) Sure you can probably poke holes in that plan, but like so many things: it's an arms race between people who steal things and people who don't want their things stolen.

  59. Re:Brilliant proof of concept for other industries by ottothecow · · Score: 1
    I don't buy this. Maybe for low price to volume/weight goods, but there are plenty of things where a pure kilogram or two is worth quite a lot of money.

    How much weight in cocaine or heroin filled balloons can a drug mule swallow? There you are talking about an expensive airplane ticket and some amount of monetary compensation for a person who can only carry a limited amount of drugs and could roll over on you if they get caught. Not hard to imagine that an inexpensive drone would worthwhile.

    Even if the investment is more than paying for a mule, how many times can your drone make the trip before it gets caught? It probably doesn't even have to land at the drop off. A well wrapped brick of drugs can survive a pretty decent fall (and you could always have a small parachute). You could just rig up a targeting system and drop it somewhere deserted and make the pickup when the coast is clear.

    --
    Bottles.
  60. Good for the last 100 meters by Animats · · Score: 1

    This has possibilities for the last 100 meters of delivery - from the (soon self-driving) delivery truck to the customer. The truck stops near the destination, and a quadrotor takes the package to the door. The quadrotor only has to have a few minutes of battery life, since it gets recharged each time it returns to the truck. So it can trade power for endurance and carry more.

    Apartment dwellers could have an air-conditioner sized landing pad outside their window for direct delivery.

  61. until it malfunctions and chops by ralphaostrander · · Score: 1

    someones head off.

  62. Reminds me of this guy I once met at a conference by hey! · · Score: 1

    He was a retired navy officer and his kid had invented this ultrasonic gizmo that killed mosquito larvae. The idea was you'd lower it into a mosquito breeding source, push a button, and a massive ping of ultrasound would burst the buoyancy bladder of the larva and it'd sink to the bottom of the water and drown.

    It was very cool tech. He had it set up in a fish tank. He'd put some larvae in the tank, push the button and squeak! They all burst like popcorn. And the device had its applications, particularly in fixed installations like sewage treatment plants. But the big money spinner was going to be catch basins -- the storm drains you have on every street. After a big rain you'd have your inspectors drive around neighborhood, lowering the sci-fi gizmo into the drains and zap all the larvae.

    The guy figured that there must be a gazillion storm drains in the country that need treatment. What he didn't figure on was how hard it was to compete with the existing, low tech approach. You put a college kid on a scooter with a messenger bag full of 120 briquettes. Have him ride up and down the street, chucking a briquette into every basin he sees -- he doesn't even have to stop. In the time it takes to zap two or three catch basins with the gizmo, you've got the whole street done and you don't have to come back after the next rain. It's good for the rest of the mosquito season in most places.

    The lesson is that cool technology does not a business plan make. They company's still in business, you can google them if you like. Their product does have some useful applications, but it's not the Mosquito Magnet[tm] sized runaway hit they thought it was going to be.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  63. As God is my witness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought textbooks could fly

  64. Re:Brilliant proof of concept for other industries by number17 · · Score: 1

    drug smuggling

    It can also be used as surveillance by those groups of the police. That neighborhood gang can now see the police coming from miles away.

  65. Internet by drone by capt_mulch · · Score: 1

    In further news, innovative company plans to deliver the Internet via drone... Books by drone, c'mon - back, to the future!!!!

  66. Re:Fishing net with extension, capture, eBay, prof by number17 · · Score: 1
    I'm guessing you don't live in a large city where muggings happen all the time.

    cameras on the drone?

    Baseball cap and hoodie.

    the drones telemetry data, so they would know the exact time and location it went down. at the very least would make it easier to search for witnesses.

    This would be at the companies expense because the police aren't interested. Good luck getting witnesses to talk to a company man let alone the police.

    i expect it would also attempt to phone home when it detects something wrong

    Please see "metallic mesh box".

  67. Drone fishing by JamieIanMacgregor · · Score: 1

    This'll be fantastic, order a book and catch yourself a free drone as a bonus, net gun would probably be most effective

  68. Ditto!! as the Owl at Hogwarts delivering mails :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ditto!! as the Owl at Hogwarts delivering mails :)

  69. Re:Fishing net with extension, capture, eBay, prof by leonardluen · · Score: 1

    Baseball cap and hoodie.

    1) you see someone with a baseball cap and hoodie you abort before you get within baseball bat range. if the drone can't recognize this then you just feed the video to a human prior to delivery, and they tell it to go or abort. you are going to need at least some humans to monitor the drones for problems anyway.

    2) you avoid those neighborhoods in the future.

    Please see "metallic mesh box".

    kind of hard to pull the battery when you have to keep it in the box. hope you have a metallic mesh room for that. or a hammer...which mostly defeats the purpose of capturing it.