Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Alibaba Tests Drone Delivery Service In China

Posted by Soulskill on from the making-population-density-work-for-you dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Following the lead of online retail giant Amazon, Chinese e-commerce group Alibaba has today tested its first drone delivery service. Asia's largest e-retailer promises to deliver ginger tea within an hour to customers across its flagship consumer-to-consumer marketplace Taobao, which holds an estimated 90 per cent market share in the country. The remote-controlled black and silver drones are helicopter-like in design and carry a white box containing the product. For now the service is limited to a three-day test in three of China's largest mega-cities, Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, and confined to just one tea brand from one merchant. The trial will be applied up to a limit of 450 tea deliveries.

66 comments

  1. Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Akratist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...but, also kind of cool in so many ways.

    1. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      ...but, also kind of cool in so many ways.

      I guess I don't understand using this technology for delivering local items. Maybe their just in a shake out phase of testing. I can see that this might be huge for delivering things to areas that don't have good road systems where driving a truck over terrain that may cause it to break down might be considered wasteful.

    2. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by taliesinangelus · · Score: 2

      I guess I don't understand using this technology for delivering local items. Maybe their just in a shake out phase of testing. I can see that this might be huge for delivering things to areas that don't have good road systems where driving a truck over terrain that may cause it to break down might be considered wasteful.

      "Critical medical supplies" comes to mind.

    3. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by houghi · · Score: 1

      Looks like a standard quadcopter to me. That means it will have a pretty limited flight time and even less once you add weight and some wind. Standard is around 10 minutes.
      So that is 5 minutes distance in flight.

      Add to that the time you need to change the batteries and add the load and you are easily at 15 minutes for a 5 minute flight. Add some maintenance/setting up to that and you get to 20.

      In that time you could easily do 99.99% of the deliveries by foot. And the 0.01% where it might be good, you would need a doctor with the patient as well and not just depend on the person being able to take those critical medical supplies.

      Anything else besides medicine? Most likely to heavy, so the flying time is even shorter.

      There are obviously helicopters already available, and there is a reason they are not used for delivery on a large scale.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    4. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why is using a 5 kg drone more wasteful and inefficient than using a two tonne truck?
      The truck will be more cost effective for routine, non-urgent, bulk deliveries.
      But the drone will be better for urgent deliveries of small items.

    5. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Rei · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm just the opposite, I don't understand how this would be good for delivering things to remove, inaccessible areas. They're short-range aircraft, and even if they weren't, you wouldn't want to monopolize an expensive piece of hardware doing one-by-one package deliveries to remote areas, tying it up for an hour or two per package. Here it's short quick hops, then back to charge and be ready to be quickly launched again.

      As for the need, it's the same reason as why people choose short delivery periods today. Maybe it's a broken part on your factory line that's costing you a ten thousand dollars an hour. Maybe you're leaving on a trip in an hour and you forgot to pick up something you're going to need. Maybe you're a hospital and speedy delivery could save a patient's life. Maybe you're about to give a presentation at a conference and you discover you need something. Maybe you ran out of petrol and you could really use a couple liters. Maybe you're holding a party and discover you've run of / forgot to pick up some essential item. There's countless reasons why a person may need objects under a couple kilograms delivered quickly - let alone why they may just simply want something quickly (the whole "dammit, I want to be playing around with that new purchase *now*!" attitude)

      Beyond speed, if drone delivery takes off (pardon the pun), it could potentially (must stress "potentially") reduce costs for delivery services as well. Ultimately you could completely take humans out of the equation. You're running off of electricity. You need a lot more delivery drones than trucks, but they're also going to be a lot cheaper. Quicker deliveries mean reduced inventory management. Etc. So there's a possibility that it might in the long run prove cheaper. Trucks could increasingly be just for heavy stuff, or paired with drones (aka, the concept of having the truck drive through the general area and drones deliver to the final destination within a few kilometers of the truck as it goes, then returning to its new position, so that the truck doesn't have to weave into every little side street).

      --
      I would have you sign my banana, but it's on the roof.
    6. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Critical medical supplies" comes to mind.

      Like DHL does for the Frisian islands?

    7. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasteful? Inefficient? I don't think so. My quad cruises at about 40 MPH. I can do a 10 mile round trip (5 out, 5 back) in about 15 minutes, using around 2000 mAh from the battery, or around $0.25 in electricity. If I were to drive that distance not only would take way longer it would cost me between 10 and 20 times as much (depending on if it's a cold start).

    8. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by taliesinangelus · · Score: 1

      Very valid points. Only advantage may be traversing otherwise crowded places or delivering to otherwise inaccessible locations (streets blocked by rubble, locked doors, other emergency-level conditions).

    9. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Rei · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about - 15 minutes? They actually give an example delivery in TFA that they plan to make and it's nearly an hour. More to the point, there's simply no way that an as-the-crow-flies drone is going to be moving anywhere even comparable to walking speeds. Realistically you're talking an order of magnitude higher.

      And seriously, probably half the things I order are light enough to fit into a midsize delivery drone. Or even a little drone - the last thing I purchased online was a cell phone protector, for example.

      --
      I would have you sign my banana, but it's on the roof.
    10. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Rei · · Score: 1

      Stealing a valuable object with a GPS and camera in it for laughs? I hope you find jail funny.

      --
      I would have you sign my banana, but it's on the roof.
    11. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Inefficient? Drones use about the same, or less power than a human on a bicycle.

    12. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      Doesn't using a truck to deliver a one or two pound package seem like a bit of overkill to you? For lightweight package deliveries, a drone actually makes a lot more sense than a truck if you think about it, which is fuel-inefficient and contributes to ground-traffic issues. It's just that we're still not used to the technology. In another decade, there will probably be drones buzzing around in the air above us all the time, and we won't think twice about it, just like we don't gape in awe at airliners that are constantly flying overhead.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    13. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called "traffic". Also "automation". Also consider bandwidth/latency of a delivery van vs a fleet of drones. The van might deliver more packages, but you have to wait for the whole load before you start.

      Having a fleet of delivery vans and drivers, that have to find parking, deal with traffic, hand deliver to doorsteps, etc. is a PITA, and not necessarily efficient in a city with slow/heavy traffic. Replacing a fleet with 20 times more automated drones might be easier to handle in many ways and be able to deliver packages with less latency.

      You can even do a hybrid approach. Van is loaded in the warehouse in the outskirts of the city with all the packages and, say several drones, plus a conveyor-type mechanism. As it drives, drones are launched to actually drop off the package to people's doorsteps and then come back while the van is waiting at a traffic light, or the van might circle around for pickup. The drones then pick up the next package and so on.

    14. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you can't beat a camera and a GPS receiver you can hand your geek card at the door.

      My fake beard would be bushy, and my sunglasses huge! And my bag would be lined with my tinfoil hats!

    15. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by mrex · · Score: 3, Informative

      Looks like a standard quadcopter to me. That means it will have a pretty limited flight time and even less once you add weight and some wind. Standard is around 10 minutes. So that is 5 minutes distance in flight.

      Off the shelf quadcopters can have multi-kilometer ranges. Not the logistical equivalent of cargo ships, but they're capable in "last mile" scenarios.

      Add to that the time you need to change the batteries and add the load and you are easily at 15 minutes for a 5 minute flight.

      So just mount multiple drones and allow some to work while the others are charging? You're also free to construct drone waypoints for longer range operations, cargo exchanges in the event of malfunctions, etc.

      Add some maintenance/setting up to that and you get to 20.

      You think commercial drones require five minutes of maintenance for every 10 minutes of flight?!

    16. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but, also kind of cool in so many ways.

      I guess I don't understand using this technology for delivering local items.

      You're failing to grasp the level of patience the Vine generation has for waiting around for a delivery that could take hours or even days? I do hope you're kidding.

      We're also talking about very small items, where driving a 3-ton diesel truck around may not be the most efficient means of transporting your 6oz package, or delivering it to you in a timely manner.

      Believe me demand is there for this, no matter how wasteful it may seem.

    17. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by geekmux · · Score: 1

      I'd steal the drone, just for laughs. Maybe return it by mail with photos of the drone doing things, like hanging on a beach, having a drink, partying with girl robots etc.

      In accordance to the EULA you agreed to, we will now be charging your credit card on file a fee of $2500 for the hardware. Have a Nice Day.

      Laugh it up. Chances are you will agree to something like this to use this kind of service.

      Of course, the alternative to fines would be facing legal charges and/or jail time for interfering with corporate delivery services. They'll likely make those charges a felony too, since everyone seems to be focused on the delivery of legal controlled substances with this service.

    18. Re:Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends what is the actual lifetime cost analyses?

      Drones are small but high matinance, high tech, and flight is a lot less energy efficient that ground transport.

  2. Any guess as to why 450 tea deliveries? by Bob_Who · · Score: 1

    I'm always fascinated by the details which seem somewhat abstract (i.e. 450 in 3 days in 3 cities with 90% market share). Is it numerological or statistical in its significance to the Chinese? Oh, I can make up a million wrong reasons why, but I though maybe someone might know...

    1. Re:Any guess as to why 450 tea deliveries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      50 deliveries per day * 3 days * 3 cities = 450

    2. Re:Any guess as to why 450 tea deliveries? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Oh, they're going with a metric number of deliveries. Now that makes sense.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  3. China by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    I wish the United States was as free as China

    1. Re:China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I prefer to breathe clean air.

    2. Re:China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is, but just like everything else, bribing Chinese officials to get that freedom is a lot cheaper.

    3. Re:China by goombah99 · · Score: 2

      Yummy neurotoxins in their shrimp and fish, melamine in their infant formula, firewalled global internet, and censored bloggers. Before the Pure Food and Drug Act in the US it was common for bakeries to add sawdust to bread, and then there's the great killing fogs of industrial england.

      freedom from regulation isn't freedom in all cases.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  4. Missing Something by number17 · · Score: 1

    So I see the copter starting to land infront of the apartment building in the video and then it cuts to her drinking the tea. How long does the copter wait before taking off again? Does it or somebody notify her that its waiting outside? How can they be so trusting to land it in that location without visual? Hitting a tree seems inevitable.

    1. Re:Missing Something by houghi · · Score: 1

      About the visual (I did not see the video) FPV (First Person View) flight is pretty common. Buy some goggles, a cheap camera and a transmitter and you are done. Just search for 'fpv quadcopter'

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:Missing Something by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      How long does the copter wait before taking off again?

      It doesn't land. It hovers and drops the package.

      Does it or somebody notify her that its waiting outside?

      The customer will receive a text message with the time and location of the drop, which they must acknowledge before the drone launches.

      How can they be so trusting to land it in that location without visual?

      The drone has cameras. The takeoff and mid-flight can be automated, but the drop will be monitored by a human.

    3. Re:Missing Something by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

      It doesn't land. It hovers and drops the package.

      It should drop the package from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    4. Re:Missing Something by number17 · · Score: 1

      I've been using a 5.8Ghz black pearl FPV kit with a DJI phantom and its just not something you could trust 100% in a city. Once you start going low and behind concrete objects (buildings), nevermind a city of them between you and your package destination, you loose signal fast.

  5. It is pathetic that this is being done in china... by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    ... first. We came up with the idea and our people tried to do it. But yet again... fucking government.

    I'd almost prefer if our government were more corrupt so we could at least bribe them to be less stupid.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  6. human vs drone by beefoot · · Score: 1

    With that many people in China and relatively inexpensive labour cost, I can almost guarantee that it is far more cheaper and efficient to deliver products using human than the drone.

    1. Re:human vs drone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Intracity deliveries in China usually costs around 8RMB (the exact type of deliveries that the drones are trying to replace in this case), which is around 1.20USD.
      Meanwhile it is estimated that cost of drone deliveries costs around 20~70 cents for a 10km trip.

      Though it should be noted that the 8RMB includes the margins for the delivery company, while the drone delivery cost doesn't include such margin. Thus, I think it is likely to be economical to deliver with drones even in China.

    2. Re:human vs drone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China's streets are really crowded. Although using trucks to deliver products is cheaper, it's more difficult to guarantee the package will reach it's destination on time.

      With drones, customers could potentially even have same day delivery. Using humans, that service that would be very difficult to provide at a reasonable cost.

    3. Re:human vs drone by Dr.Saeuerlich · · Score: 1

      nobody uses trucks. all the delivery guys seem to have scooters. You won't see a UPS truck in China.

      What happens is that the guy drives right up to your office building in downtown Shanghai, emptying a huge bag of parcels on the floor and rummage for the ones to deliver in your building - usually right in the lobby, or outside. He then either drags the sack with the remaining parcels with him or leaves it with the security guards.

      There's gazillions of scooter delivery guys in Shanghai. They deliver it all. KFC, water, fruit, UPS, mail, food, stuff from tmall or JD, anything.

    4. Re:human vs drone by Dr.Saeuerlich · · Score: 1

      I wonder how this will work in practice. Currently packages either get delivered right to my apartment's door step or dropped off at the guard house, which seemingly every slightly better apartment block in China has. The guards will probably get ticked off if they have to leave their cubicle all the time - most of them seem to just sit in there all day and smoke. And for me as spoiled customer I'd also rather have a dude schlepp everything right to my doorstep on floor 23.

  7. Wasteful, Inefficient, Potentially Dangerous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd steal the drone, just for laughs. Maybe return it by mail with photos of the drone doing things, like hanging on a beach, having a drink, partying with girl robots etc.

  8. Re:It is pathetic that this is being done in china by Akratist · · Score: 1

    Eh, they're plenty bribeable. There's probably a lobbyist from UPS sitting in the office of some Congressman, while a lobbyist from Amazon is in another office down the hall, and one from Fedex down the hall from there. It's all about who ponies up the biggest campaign contribution, if something will be done or not.

  9. I love Alibaba/Aliexpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Let me just say that I love Alibaba/Aliexpress. Finally the playing field is leveled and consumers can get products DIRECTLY from the manufacturer without paying a ridiculous markup.

    I can get shirts for $9 that retail in the West for $70. People call them "fakes" but the reality is that THEY ARE MADE IN THE SAME FACTORY that is making the "real" products. They simply run the assembly line after hours.

    I also know people get angry at this, but I don't understand why. YOU the consumer is benefiting from this. The corporations might be angry about it, but that is their problem, not yours. Corporations already make enough money.

    1. Re:I love Alibaba/Aliexpress by Rei · · Score: 1

      I've often found products there that I've had interest in but have never purchased. Because quite simply, I have no way to know how much I can trust them. How am I supposed to make a judgement call about the legitimacy of a random company in China that I know nothing about?

      --
      I would have you sign my banana, but it's on the roof.
    2. Re:I love Alibaba/Aliexpress by CAPSLOCK2000 · · Score: 1

      There is a number of intermediaries that try to solve this problem. If you want to buy a product you ask the intermediary to buy it for you. They will judge the seller and buy the product for you if they feel all is in order. When they receive the product they'll unpack it and send you a few pictures. Now you can decide if you want to buy it. If so they mail it to you, if not they will return it to the manufacturer and deal with the refundprocess. Ofcourse you'll have to a pay a small fee for the service but the examples I've seen were very cheap.

    3. Re:I love Alibaba/Aliexpress by Rei · · Score: 1

      How can one find reputable intermediaries?

      --
      I would have you sign my banana, but it's on the roof.
    4. Re:I love Alibaba/Aliexpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alibaba has an escrow system when you place your order. You can dispute your order for up to 60 days. The sellers are looking for good feedback scores so they are going to want to make you happy. I have bought many things there (including those $9 shirts which look and feel like the $80 ones in the department stores).

  10. Re:It is pathetic that this is being done in china by Karmashock · · Score: 2

    Google has been trying... they went from sending almost nothing to washington to basically sending them all money.

    Regardless, I wasn't talking about congressman. I was talking about lower level bureaucrats. You see it in a lot of countries. You get pulled over for speeding or whatever and you can make it go away by slipping the officer a reasonable bribe. Sometimes all it takes is 10 bucks. Sometimes they want more.

    If the government isn't going to be rational on the subject then they need to be subverted in various ways.

    Musk was saying that he was seriously constrained by US regulations as to how he built the Teslas. He has to have a blank space on his dash board for example so that there is room to put in a tachometer. His car is electric and they don't have tachometers. But government regulations say you have to have at least the spot on the dashboard for it. And he had to put in side view mirrors instead of side view cameras. He wanted to do away with the mirrors and do it instead with CCTV. Forbidden. Lots of little things. He says the regulations amounted to something like a phonebook of regulations that any car has to meet to be road legal. It is over regulation.

    What a car needs to be is safe. It needs to be able to navigate the roads safely. That's it. Then you bring your car in for an inspection and they determine if it is safe. Specifying everything out to the nth degree is idiotic. And that is what they're doing with everything including this bullshit FAA drone license crap.

    You didn't need a license to fly a remote controlled airplane. Who cares so long as whatever it is stays out of controlled airspace and below 500 or so feet. The whole thing is asinine.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  11. more efficient than bicycle messages or cars by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Most customers for a lcoal business are within a mile or two. Food takeout, cigarettes, pharmacy, sundries are potential deliveries. I expect drone reliability of mid-level models to improve with time.

  12. Re: It is pathetic that this is being done in chin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I care, if I suffer the slightest amount of harm because of it.

    I want some semblance of accountability when the risk becomes a bother to me, which commercial use will increase.

  13. If I see 'em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see them drones around my place and I take my shotgun to 'em. Don't hold with trespassing.

  14. ...and, easy to rob from !!! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
    If this comes to the US...I wonder how long before thieves just start shooting them down to steal from them?

    I mean, hell...you can hardly let UPS/FedEx leave a package on your doorsteps these days in many cities without some fucker coming to steal it.

    Just get a nice rifle with a scope along the travel routes of the delivery drones that is a bit remote, *BANG*..down it comes and then loot whatever its carrying.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    1. Re:...and, easy to rob from !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just get a nice rifle with a scope along the travel routes of the delivery drones that is a bit remote, *BANG*..down it comes and then loot whatever its carrying.

      If you think it would be that easy, and would actually have enough of a payoff to be worthwhile to the point where it would become commonplace, then you really haven't thought it through at all.

    2. Re:...and, easy to rob from !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Thinking" is anathema to his kind.

    3. Re:...and, easy to rob from !!! by cusco · · Score: 1

      A quadcopter with a detachable tail won't have the disadvantage of a spent round going through someone's window and will probably bring it down in good enough condition that it could be resold once you disentangled the tail from the rotors. A lot more fun too.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    4. Re:...and, easy to rob from !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just get a nice rifle with a scope along the travel routes of the delivery drones that is a bit remote, *BANG*..down it comes and then loot whatever its carrying.

      I'm betting you haven't done a lot of shooting.

  15. Re: It is pathetic that this is being done in chin by Karmashock · · Score: 0

    Then remove all cars from the streets.

    Nothing is without risk. As to liability, if I crash my drone into your house then I am liable for that with or without regulation. So I really don't see what the fuck you think you're talking about.

    One of the businesses the FAA shut down was a guy that took pictures of houses for real estate companies. You'd pay him a fee and he'd show up with his drone. Fly the drone around the property a few times taking video and pictures. And then give the realtor a copy of the pictures/video to help sell the house.

    Who could possibly be hurt by that, you complete fucking asshat?

    Another example, there was a beer company that had a brewery along a lake. Every year the lake freezes and people go out to the middle of the lake to ice fish. The beer company had a promotion where you could call them and they'd deliver you a six pack of beer by drone. The drone in this case was flying entirely over a frozen lake. Who was being hurt there, you festering boil on the ass of humanity?

    And the examples really could be just about endless. I mean, you're saying I can't use a drone to take pictures of a wedding because a 2 pound drone might accidentally fall on someone? Beyond belief.

    Comments like yours make me want to live on a different planet.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  16. Re:It is pathetic that this is being done in china by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

    Fuck yeah! Ponies!

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  17. Re: It is pathetic that this is being done in chi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why? They are registered, licensed, and yes, even required to be insured. In a wide variety of ways, including even the roads themselves, and the manufacturers and drivers.

    See how this works? A set of hazard exists. A system is implemented to deal with them.

    Why? Because people care, and hopefully you can comprehend why.

    Same applies to drones. Hell, if I want to look for one dropping out of the sky.

  18. Re: It is pathetic that this is being done in chin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Under age drinking and over severing as the big issues there.

  19. ...and, easy to rob from !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't think Chinese people will steal them?

  20. Re: It is pathetic that this is being done in ch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Missed a sentence.

    But if I am, it isn't too much to ask that the responsible party be held accountable.

  21. Bonus item! by xantonin · · Score: 1

    This is awesome! Order some tea and get one (1) FREE DRONE!!!

  22. Re:It is pathetic that this is being done in china by CAPSLOCK2000 · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't call your examples cases of overregulation. More a case of the law being behind the technology curve, as it usually is. Not that there is no overregulation, but I don't think your examples qualify. Regarding safety. There is no such thing as absolute safety. The law specifies a number of features a car should have to make it safe. How else would 'they' determine if the car is safe? You'll need some kind of guideline.

  23. Remote control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remote control = doa.
    Must be automated.

  24. Re: It is pathetic that this is being done in chi by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    I don't want to live on this planet anymore. Idiots are going to start regulating when I am allowed to take piss in my own home soon...

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  25. Re: It is pathetic that this is being done in ch by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    Everyone was already held accountable.

    If I take a ball and throw it through your window.

    I am held accountable.

    Did you issue me a license to own a ball or throw it? No.

    So why do you need to regulate it for people to be held accountable?

    If I have a drone and that drone falls out of the sky and breaks a skylight or something... then obviously I am liable for damages. Nothing needs to be passed in law to make me liable for damage I cause with a drone I own.

    The licensing system is expressly there to prevent people from operating drones. It makes it more expensive and annoying to do it.

    Tell you what, you charge me NOTHING for the license. Not one fucking cent. And you make the process easy and painless... and I'm all for it.

    You bill me so much as a fucking penny or waste my time with a bunch of bullshit and then we have problems.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  26. Re:It is pathetic that this is being done in china by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    No, it isn't behind the technology curve. They weren't regulating remote controlled airplanes. I could fly a little remote controlled airplane and do all this stuff and the FAA wouldn't have said anything.

    What is the difference? What they're doing is trying to regulate something that previously no one cared about. And really they have no reason to regulate it beyond what is already on the books.

    Here is what needs to be established:

    1. Stay away from controlled airspace such as airports.
    2. Stay below 500 or so feet so there is no chance that your drone will hit an aircraft.

    And pretty much that is it. Everything else is already covered by existing law.

    It is already illegal to crash things you own into other people's property. No need for a new law.

    It is already illegal to put a camera right outside someone's bathroom window and take naughty pictures of them. No need for a new law.

    What exactly do you want to regulate that isn't already covered by existing regulations?

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  27. Re: It is pathetic that this is being done in chin by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    No, that wasn't the issue. The issue was the drone. ATF didn't complain. It was the FAA.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.