Slashdot Mirror
The Problem With Mandatory Drone Registration (roboticstrends.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Drone lawyer and commercial pilot Jonathan Rupprecht believes any drone registration plan is a necessary first step, but he's also doubtful that registering drones will be a valuable solution. "Who is going to regulate this? Point-of-sale? Wal-Mart? Best Buy?" he asked. "What if I'm ordering parts off the Internet and put them together? That's what the gun industry does." A registration number, he said, could quickly be lost if a drone is bought and sold multiple times. Rupprecht believes geofencing will produce far better results by preventing problems as opposed to trying to figure out who is responsible after something has happened.
... seem to work for cars and air planes quite well.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Hello neighbor! I'm sure we're going to be best friends!
What is the difference between "bad guy does illegal stuff" and "bad guy does illegal stuff with drone"?
Nothing. Doing illegal stuff is already against the law. This is right up there with ... "on the internet" style patents IMHO.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Drones are interesting but beyond their scary name they are just the classic tool. Like knives, gasoline, matches, and leaf blowers there are the vast majority of people who will do good with them and a tiny few who will do bad things.
Fertilizer monitoring probably is a good thing as a single bad person can do a tremendous amount of damage. But right now a drone is going to give someone a bad cut or maybe take out an eye.
What I do smell is the government getting really pissed off that drones are being used to inform. That is their worst nightmare. Drones monitoring police, or fire is not what they want. They love when they have an excuse to push the public back and exert their authority. They love when they can put armed patrols around a pollution site where some big donor has been given cart blanche to pollute their way to another billion dollars. They hate when a drone flies overhead and exposes the truth.
As for drones interfering with flight operations, have you ever met a goose? If you are a pilot and your choices are to hit a goose or to hit a drone pretty much every pilot will chose the drone.
But sadly various criminals are going to buy better and better drones and come up with better and better ways to use them. So drug deliveries, even armed robberies are coming.
So this is going to be the classic war on drugs stupidity where they don't have any impact on the criminals while having a massive impact on the benefits that drones could provide the public.
I also wonder if some of these regulations are coming from the really big aviation companies who have pretty much entirely missed out on the commercial drone market and they know that if they craft the regulations carefully enough they will shut out the innovations pouring out of small companies all over. This way it will end up only being large corporations selling to the police, the military, and other large corporations? This completely screws the little guy. But at what point has government taken the needs of the little guy into serious consideration in the last 50 years when it came up against huge corporations?
This is giving me a headache. I had better take one of my cheap aspirin before the TPP allows Bayer to somehow renew their patent.
If it doesn't provide a "valuable solution" to a known problem, then why do it? It would just be an additional governmental expense that in the end is only useful to the government workers it employs and the identity thieves that will eventually gain access to the registration database.
I see this as being just as effective as the FCC requiring a license to use the GMRS walkie-talkies you can buy at Walmart - which is to say, not all.
No, the "gun industry" does not do this. Sure, you can order parts online, but the most critical part always has a registration process when produced new by a company. Of course, you could make your own, which is perfectly legal, but then that isn't the "gun industry."
What if I'm ordering parts off the Internet and put them together? That's what the gun industry does.
No, That's not what the gun industry does. The real gun industry can only sell to recognized resellers of firearms (FFLs) and are highly regulated. Colt, H&K or Ruger are not buying off the shelf parts, slapping them together and selling them openly to anyone with the cash to do it out of the back of a van.
The gun industry has taken a lot of crap from people (a few of whom are running for president) that clearly have no idea how the industry works. Can a private individual by some part and make others and get a fully functional firearm from it? Yes. No law can stop that so the ATF was smart enough to set up some regulations to even make that a dicey prospect to the unknowning homebuilder but there is still some level of parts manufacturing that must go on from the owners side and these firearms cannot be traded, given or sold without going back to the same regulations as the firearms industry.
So if he really wants it, I'm sure the FAA will get involved and make the buying of a drone just like "what the gun industry does" and he'll certainly change his tone.
The fact that the FAA and DOT is trying to mandate and or implement this by mid-December, which would be about the fastest they've ever moved on any regulation ever, by far. Also the fact that there are previous laws against regulation of 'drones' flown for hobby or recreation.
Looking forward to seeing where the line is drawn in a schadenfreude sort of way. I've built and flown "RC Airplanes" that weigh less than 18 grams, and are mostly balsa and tissue, with repurposed pager motors for propulsion and servo-drives. So will I have to apply for registration for each one of these I want to fly outside?
What about a Guillows balsa-wood and rubber-band powered uncontrolled flying object? What about estes model rockets? Air-water Rockets?
Kites? Could someone dodge this just by making a tethered drone dragging fibre optic line?
The majority of people I know, the old-core RC pilots build up their contraptions from components and paper or PDF plans.
Don't let that helium balloon go!
"Who is going to regulate this? Point-of-sale? Wal-Mart? Best Buy?" he asked. "What if I'm ordering parts off the Internet and put them together? That's what the gun industry does."
What's what the gun industry does?
I don't see that quote on the linked article.
A drone sucked in a jet engine is going to be all over the place. (A) Are you going to require metal placards attached to the drone? Furthermore, it is easy to scratch off a serial number. (B) Is possession of a drone with a scratched off serial number going to become illegal?
(A) No. (B) Yes. That was easy!
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
There are plenty of "toy" grade quads out there with no GPS functionality whatsoever that you can get up to mischief with. The Syma X8, for example: It can carry a Go-Pro, and a range booster can push it out a distance. But no GPS at all.
Those machines with GPS functionality have the means to necessarily disable it. If I'm flying and lose GPS for whatever reason (solar flare, heavy clouds etc), I need to be able to regain control of the bird and bring it back, otherwise there is now an uncontrollable thing in the sky just waiting to crash. Yes, if i disable GPS then I lose RTH functionality - but if I'm flying under FAA guidelines then I'm flying Line-Of-Sight anyway and can bring the bird back.
Let's not talk about the reports of DJI Phantom 1 & 2 fly-aways. Those problem appears to be GPS related.
Mandating an unreliable means of control into these things is only going to make matters worse, not better.
I'm certainly not in favor of more regulations. The FAA has good guidelines already; what it lacks is enforceability. If the proposed regulations come to pass, it means that more idiots who lose control of their machines over airports, stadiums etc. can be found and be accountable for their actions. I'm good with that. It's the same as driving a car: if I'm an idiot, sooner or later I'll be held accountable for my idiocy.
In fact, I'd be happy with the whole registration if the FAA allowed a little more leeway on things: tell us where not to fly (done), tell us where limited flying is allowed (done), and tell us where we can punch our machines 2000' + high where it's safe to do so. I don't know about the USA, but in Australia we can take our cars onto a racetrack every month or so and go as fast as we like (after insurance waviers etc. are dealt with) with the support of the local police. Or could - I've been out of Aus for over two years now so things might have changed a bit.
I could find only one accident on youtube involving a drone and a manned aircraft. But it turned out to be a montage, a fake video.
I read that shark attacks on humans are extremly rare, just about a dozen or less per year in the entire world. Could it be that a fear of drones is also a similar phatasm, but even less realistic?
I agree with the folks that say licenses are not the answer. My dog is licensed, and he STILL can't drive well at all. I told him "The speed limit in school zones is 15 mph", but it's like he doesn't even listen. I'll tell you the truth, I really don't like riding with him much at all. I don't think he could control a drone any better than he can drive a car. What did getting him the license solve? Nothing!
Everything you know is wrong, Just forget the words and sing along.
How do you geo-fence something without any geo-position capability?
"drones" includes the balsa wood RC planes people were flying 30 years ago.
It also includes the $20 toys you buy from China.
And we know we can't regulate those on the roads, so this will do no better.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
And that we splash anything that lacks those.
Oh.
Wait.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Amazon already decamped it's UAV/drone research to Canada.
Who's next? Bureaucratic red tape and regulation can only hurt.
If you're having a problem with this kind of activity (ATVs) in your area, don't call the cops. Call the game commission.
At least here in good old Pennsylvania it works. Those assholes on their fart cans fucking shit their pants when the game commission showed up after the residents were blow off by the cops. And the game commission made out well in confiscated vehicles and fines that day.
Or should I say "Ruprecht the Monkey Boy?" ;)
Civil war next? Choose your side.
Force them to carry transponders periodically transmitting their registration number. Make it part of the firmware operating the drone, and make it signed firmware, so if someone tries to alter it, the drone won't fly at all.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
You're so right. For the same reason, we need a federal licensing regime for owning binoculars. And cameras. And eyes.
Come to think of it, we've already HAVE privacy laws. Because we already have eyes.
Registration provides accountability.
But to have accountability, you need regs to follow.
Perhaps the first step is to actually finish the rulemaking process and have actual, functional rules that make sense.
Then if there is a problem with holding folks accountable it might be necessary to have a registration system.
Seems it is a bit early to know if that is necessary or not.
I thinks if there were a simple, clear set of rules, and some effort to get the message out, it would fix most of the problems.
The registration stuff seems like more theater do delay having to do the work of making actual, clear, simple regs.
Ahh, that's the point, makes perfect sense now.
Just put a gun on every drone. Then nobody in Congress will give a shit no matter how many people your drone inconveniences, maims or kills, because NRA lobby.
The problem with mandatory drone registration is that queen bees will now have to spend their entire careers doing paperwork.
If any drone gets to close to air space they should jam the radio signal. Same issue with choppers in L.A. Drones getting to close could cause a major problem. All the radio signals for RC toys, planes, drones are public property. That will prevent anyone from flying drones near airports ect..
Let's not try because it might not be perfect. Get stuffed, Twit!
I think in general the registration is the least of our worries with drones. We have yet to have any kind of cost effective way to monitor traffic of drones and this may not be a problem now. But in larger cities and more dense population areas your going to see more drone traffic and more issues. Especially if you get companies like Amazon using drones in large numbers for delivery as well as others who will follow. We have begun to realize the problems with drones.
1. Every drone must have a transponder. Immediate on the spot fine of $5000 and one day in prison for offenders.
2. Transponders can only be purchased from the local civil authority which issues licence plates. A transponder can only be used by the person who purchased it.
3. Same rules as car registration. Leeway for lending to others, same as cars.
4. Problem solved.
5. Government profits.
There are many useful applications of RPV's and the general public should be allowed to enjoy those. However that same general public also has the right to be protected from unreasonable danger. Drones *do* fall out of the sky and therefore can harm people and property.
So instead of trying to register everything I'd say there should be ate least two categories of drones. One 'free for all' that is sufficiently lightweight and slow so as not to cause any serious harm and another which is everything else. You should not be able to buy the 'everything else' category without at least some training.
This legislative suggestion carried out, is the cream needed for the public to swallow even more automated surveillance possible from other drones. This won't stop escalating before we have Minority report style identification and tracking every time your show your face in public.
1. As soon as the radio-link with a drone is lost (a fly-away) the drones lands automatically with a warning sound. It is already done on a newer drones.
2. A drone should be solid only up to manned-aviation speeds. It is about 200 km/h. Above that speed a drone (and all airborne equipment: a camera, a battery, etc.) becomes frangible, i.e. it falls apart in case of an collision like a Lego constructor, so that it is possible to assemble it again later.
Birds, as opposite to drones so far, do cause manned aircraft accidents, but it is impossible to change birds, as millions years of evolution are required. Birds are not falling apart in a collision and do cause a structural damage.
Someone needs to figure it out because there are a lot of people out there that feel entitled to do any damn thing they want and care not even a little bit about anyone else. Problem is they teach that in schools today. Just let the state take care of you.
So someone will do something really stupid with one and then none of us will be able to have them again. That's how they think, just take the toys away. Don't even think about the person behind it. Nope, not their fault. Just look at Guns. Nope, it's the gun's fault, not that guy behind it.
Enjoy it while you have them.
These two legends are fairly infamous for their grandstanding and "progressive activism" with taxpayer funds. California and New Jersey politicians -- what could possibly go wrong. It sounds more like a timed attempt to hand-wave from some other issue.
How many of these fly pre-programmed routes? How many are human operated? Isn't pointing a camera over a fence and videotaping sunbathers already illegal? Reasonable expectation of privacy, etc.
If there are aircraft infringement issues, compare and contrast to the rules on model rocketry or RC aircraft.
The larger professional units are one issue, but this looks more like the usual "ask for everything, meet in the middle" government regulatory nightmare. The Founders wanted us to make wise decisions based on reality, e.g; Hoover, the Quakers, etc. and the original social programs, not just posti worst case scenarios and walk back from there.
Outside of the DoD and NASA, very little seems to be science or reason based in the President's 18 cabinets, or in the larger political domain. Ayn Rand's Objectivism has a long, long path to travel.
Registering drones is about as useful as licensing cats. The collar falls off. The cat can't be caught and won't allow anyone to read the tag if it is wearing one. It looks like all the other cats. When the cat gets lost no one bothers to cancel the license. When the cat dies no one reports its death. If the cat decides to live somewhere else, it does. If the cat bites someone they don't bother with the license, they just capture it or kill it to test it. No different with a drone.