1. HIV can not be transmitted by food. 2. The incidence of anHIV food prep person cutting themselves and bleeding on food are a few orders of magnitude less likely than getting into an accident as a passenger. 3. Your scenario would be an accident and may even be covered by insurance. Not holding insurance is a choice and therefore very different.
Real-world data disagrees.
References please. Then why do we have background checks for anyone? The reason is that, though it may not eliminate the threat, it will decrease the threat because it eliminates people who have proven themselves a risk. I am not saying the risk is 0 but it is lower.
most people are unaware that commercial driving involves special insurance, and are thus unaware of the loss of that insurance in certain cases.
That is not what I said. I said most people know taxis have commercial insurance but don't know that many uber drivers don't. They don't even think about slug drivers needing insurance because since no money changes hand it is not commercial. They equate Uber with taxi when it is not.
Slugging looks like a cheap ride; so does Uber.
Slugging is a free ride. Uber is a cheap ride that looks like a taxi. By the way slugging is not widely known and only happens in a few cities. I don't understand how you don't see the difference between slugging and Uber. Slugging has no dispatch service, does not have requested end points and does not charge. It is very different than taxis and Uber who do all that.
You are not talking about trial and error. You are talking about imposing a requirement that is known to have a bad effect on development. You don't need a trial to figure that out. It is simple math.
If they were good ideas, they'll be built.
Many a good idea is not built due to onerous requirements imposed by planning departments. Put enough requirements on a building and they can't even break even.
In this case profit is everything. When a building get built it is usually done on credit. If the profit is not high enough the banks won't lend the money and the building does not get built. The high margins are there because thing go wrong and costs rise. Banks don't like to lose money.
Do you go to work every day and take home nothing? Why should developers do that?
So why is the fact that the planning department allowed previous buildings to be build improperly the responsibility of current developers to solve? Developments run on a very tight budget with very strict profit margins. A lender will only front money if the projected profit is quite high; sometimes 30%. Buy building extra parking the profit margin comes down and some good building will not be built.
I am not in a a no-fault state, yet I have $5000 Guest PIP
That $5000 is not going to help a lot if you are seriously injured and the medical bills are $100,000. What state by the way so I can check to see if what you say is true.
This particular risk is exceptionally low.
So being injured in an accident where the driver of the vehicle you are in is an exceptionally low risk. Even if it is a very low risk the fact that it could leave you penniless and disabled makes even a low risk something to be concerned with. The high consequences negate the low risk.
With a taxi service, your risk of no financial compensation in the event of injury is lower; all other risks are identical.
The risk of no financial compensation should be enough. The other risks are also lower with taxis die to background checks and licensing. Background checks mean fewer felons driving. A taxi drivers and/or company can have their licenses pulled for too many complaints. Not so for Uber drivers and Uber itself as they have no license to pull.
You have failed to differentiate the risk of slugging from the risk of Uber.
One major issue is that Uber looks very much like a taxi service while slugging looks completely different. People who use Uber can be easily duped into thinking it has the same protections as a taxi when it does not.
Uninsured motorist insurance often covers you in all situations.
This is from the link you posted;
if you were hit by an uninsured motorist while driving another person’s vehicle, walking across the street or riding your bike, the bodily injury portion of your insurance may help with your expenses in a covered incident.
All of the examples involve being hit by an uninsured motorist and not riding in an uninsured vehicle. Many insurance companies regard riding in an uninsured vehicle to be a choice and therefor do not cover injury while doing so. If the driver of the uninsured vehicle you are riding in is at fault the insurance will probably not cover it.
It's often covered by Guest PIP.
Guest PIP is only in no fault states and only as part of a valid insurance. If the insurance is voided by using a vehicle for commercial purposes when it is only insured for non-comercial purposes then PIP does not apply.
What sets Uber apart, in terms of risk, from traditional slugging?
1. Slugs don't pay so it is not a commercial venture which would nullify the non-commercial insurance. 2. Slugging is not a pickup and delivery service.
In effect a slug line is a free bus rather than a for pay taxi.
Yes, let developers foot the bill for social issue if they ever want to change a building. All that will do is cause less construction. The value of a parking space is much less than the value of the same area of office space yet cost similar amounts to build. This will cause costs of office space to rise even faster that it already does making new building no longer viable. Simple solutions to complex problems usually don't work.
You could walk outside and get hit by a bad driver under the same circumstances. Your own uninsured motorist insurance covers this,
Uninsured mororist insurance is usually attached to a vehicle and not a person.
Injury falls onto personal medical insurance,
Personal insurance rates are set assuming almost all vehicles are insured and paying their insurance. When you get into a vehicle you personal insurance usually does not cover injuries sustained there as it is normally covered by the requires vehicle insurance.
nobody has claimed it more prevalent on Uber-commissioned service.
Yet. Uber has not been around very long. Predators will eventually see it as a fertile hunting ground since there are no background checks.
The market pressure Uber causes provides positive benefit to society.
The service itself also causes bad things. It is a risk/reward analysis. Without the regulation (insurance, background checks, inspections, licensing, etc) the risks are much higher in an Uber vehicle. What little reward is far outweighed by the risk.
So you want to knowingly put vulnirable people in vehicles with a proven history of violence, sexual assault, robbery, etc.
How are convicted felons ever going to find work if we put background checks on everything?
There are two parts to this; 1. There are not background checks on every job. Just background checks on jobs that come into contact with vulnerable people. A taxi driver is a perfect example of where background checks are necessary. Women, children, elderly, and/or disabled people use taxis every day. They can be vulnerable to what ever the driver wants to do. A construction worker is an example where a background check is not necessary as they do not come into business contact with vulnerable people. 2. Maybe the felon should have though about the possible restrictions in job opportunities before he did the crime.
The major difference is insurance. Most Uber vehicles effectively have no insurance. The insurance on the vehicle is void because the vehicle is being used for commercial purposes. Say you get into an accident. Without insurance your only recourse is to sue the driver who has no assets and lots of debt. How is that going to help you pay the tens if not hundreds of thousandths in medical bills, lost wages, disability, etc? There is a huge difference between an injured/deceased pet and a seriously injured person.
Sometimes the person you end up meeting up with is dangerous. Prepare yourself accordingly and take precautions.
Many people see Uber drivers like taxi drivers but they are not if they have not gone through the proper checks. Uber wants you to think they are the same and that is how they present it. Also when you go to someone's house you know a very important piece of information; where they live. If something goes wrong they are easy to find. It is much harder with a vehicle arriving to pick you up. Sure you could write down the license plate but that may have been stolen.
How many Uber drivers tell their customers that they would be riding in an uninsured vehicle? How many Uber drivers even know their non-commercial insurance is void? Most people don't understand the legalities of commercial insurance.
Sometimes things need to be killed of by politicians before bad things happen.
We are talking about on street parking. There is a limited supply of streets to park on. What is you solution to providing more parking? Tearing down building to build parkades is not a viable option.
You need to learn a little history before you start comparing historic figures.
On 5 March 1940, after the Gestapo–NKVD Third Conference was held in Zakopane, Beria sent a note (no. 794/B) to Stalin in which he stated that the Polish prisoners of war kept at camps and prisons in western Belarus and Ukraine were enemies of the Soviet Union, and recommended their execution. Most of them were military officers, but there were also intelligentsia, doctors, and priests for a total of over 22,000. With Stalin's approval, Beria's NKVD murdered them in the Katyn massacre.
In 1944, as the Germans were driven from Soviet soil, Beria was in charge of dealing with the various ethnic minorities accused of anti-sovietism and/or collaboration with the invaders, including the Chechens, the Ingush, the Crimean Tatars, the Pontic Greeks and the Volga Germans. All these groups were deported to Soviet Central Asia
I do not see any references to McCarthy having thousands of people slaughtered and deporting entire cultures to gulags? While McCarthyism was bad it was nowhere near as bad as what happened in Russia.
writing blogs about the social problems we face, proposing solutions,
The only solutions I have heard from the Occupy movement is "give us your money". I would like to hear others. Do they exist? The Occupy movement is good at pointing out issues but not so good at pointing out solutions.
Last week a Ukrainian court put the blame for the famine on Stalin and several other officials.
That was in 2010. So a Russian propaganda outlet runs a story about a lawsuit brought by the grandson of one of the biggest murderer's in history. Do you thing the grandson of Stalin might be a bit biased?
The point that makes it obvious is the fact that of the millions of people who died most were from the Ukraine. One estimate from the Encyclopedia Britannica is that of the 6-8 million who dies 4-5 million were from the Ukraine. This is odd considering that most of Russia's grain and many other foodstuffs comes from the Ukraine. When there is a famine one would expect the production areas to be least hard hit. That was not the case because Stalin exported most of the food. He also wanted fewer Ukrainians so break any Ukrainian nationalism and allow Russians to occupy the land.
The best course would have been to force him to bring back the old constitution or resign
It is difficult to force someone to do something when they are hiding in a neighboring country under that government's protection. He was declared "incapable of performing his dutie" after he fled by a vote of the Parliament. The constitution states the acting president would be the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada and that is what happened. That Turchynov was voted in at the same time looks a little fishy until one sees that the previous Chairman resigned due to ill health.
Despite its significance, the election was marred by voter fraud, ballot stuffing, boycotts, intimidation, vote-buying, and protests by opposition groups, leading for a low-turnout of under 30%.
I don't think for a moment that Crimeans or East Ukrainians actually want to join Russia,
Crmea might want to join Russia but I doubt most of Eastern Ukrainians want to.
You have a good plan there. It isd sad the Putin will not let it happen.
If the Crimea was removed from the Ukraine the percentage would drop dramatically. As I said there probably should have been a referendum but after the election to replace the president who fled.
I never said the US wasn't an uncivilized bully from time to time. And not much, if any, of that has happened in the last 20 years or so. By the way, I am Canadian so I can call both of them bullies.
Ukrainian new unelected leadership is more like Hitler.
First all the current leaders were elected to Parliament. The only "unelected" part is the post of acting President. That was done when the previous president abandoned his post and fled. Second the main political party is Batkivshchyna which looks like a pretty progressive party. Show me how they compare to Hitler in what they have actually done. If you mean the few radical outliers the same thing could be said for the Republican Party.
Aggressively moved right away to abolish equal rights for Russian and Russian-speaking population who make up almost half the country.
You might want to look at the demographics of the Ukraine. The Russian speaking percentage is 30%. The Ukrainian speaking percentage is 67%. So the less than 1/3 Russian speaking portion is nowhere near half. Take a look at this map. Most of the Ukraine is primarily Ukrainian speakers. Notice how much of the Russian speaking population is concentrated in the Crimea. I agree that should have been a referendum in the Crimea but it was done improperly under vary shady circumstances. Democracy does not work very well during political upheaval. The only thing close to a rights issue was a bill to make Ukrainian the only official language. The bill was passed by the parliament but vetoed by the President. It is not in effect. Do you have any other examples?
Russia has no choice but to get involved.
There are other way to "get involved" than sending in special forces, supplying arms to insurgents, holding large military exercises on the borders and threatening invasion. Those are the tactics of an uncivilized bully. Russia won't even admit that the Holodomor happened.
So you are 1/4 of the capability of the equipment we are talking about. Good for you. The 4-5 km range is much less than 15 and the flight time of an hour is much less that 3.5 hours. You be the one to tell the mother her some was killed because the drone ran out of power.Sure you can do some of the things an expensive drone can to but doing them all is very expensive. Your logic is like comparing a Honda Civic with a quarter mile time of 17 seconds to a Bugatti Veyron with a quarter mile time of 10 second and saying the Bugati should cost less than twice as much as the Bugatti.
Scaling it up is proportional, not exponential or something silly.
Actually it is closer to exponential than linear. Look at the priced of these cameras they go from $1k to $27K. I doubt that the $27K camera is 27times as effective as the $1K. Also notice that $27K time 2 cameras is half the cost of the aircraft. Add a spare and that is over $75K in cameras alone. Your logic is like comparing a Honda Civic with a quarter mile time of 17 seconds to a Bugatti Veyron with a quarter mile time of 10 second and saying the Bugati should cost less than twice as much as the Honda.
How about you show some examples of the products you mention. As far as I can tell you are pulling numbers out of the air.
A gambol is not stabilization. Stabilization is much more difficult. The $100 transceiver could not deal video in high enough rez to be useful. Cost estimate on camera is way low. This camera has to see people at over a mile away and be about the size of your fist. That kind of performance is very expensive. When I mention infantrymen I mean they will be the ones assembling and taking care of the equipment. They are no know for their light touch.
One of the main cost factors is to get this kind of performance into a man portable package. When you go small things get expensive fast.
Many hobbyists meet a lot of that criteria on a sub $1000.
Ever hear of the 80/20 rule? In general one spends 80% of the budget on the last 20% of the features. Not meeting all the requirements would make it useless in combat.
Slashdot Mirror
The prep chef may have cut himself on a knife
1. HIV can not be transmitted by food. 2. The incidence of anHIV food prep person cutting themselves and bleeding on food are a few orders of magnitude less likely than getting into an accident as a passenger. 3. Your scenario would be an accident and may even be covered by insurance. Not holding insurance is a choice and therefore very different.
Real-world data disagrees.
References please. Then why do we have background checks for anyone? The reason is that, though it may not eliminate the threat, it will decrease the threat because it eliminates people who have proven themselves a risk. I am not saying the risk is 0 but it is lower.
most people are unaware that commercial driving involves special insurance, and are thus unaware of the loss of that insurance in certain cases.
That is not what I said. I said most people know taxis have commercial insurance but don't know that many uber drivers don't. They don't even think about slug drivers needing insurance because since no money changes hand it is not commercial. They equate Uber with taxi when it is not.
Slugging looks like a cheap ride; so does Uber.
Slugging is a free ride. Uber is a cheap ride that looks like a taxi. By the way slugging is not widely known and only happens in a few cities. I don't understand how you don't see the difference between slugging and Uber. Slugging has no dispatch service, does not have requested end points and does not charge. It is very different than taxis and Uber who do all that.
We can't when we learn through trial and error.
You are not talking about trial and error. You are talking about imposing a requirement that is known to have a bad effect on development. You don't need a trial to figure that out. It is simple math.
If they were good ideas, they'll be built.
Many a good idea is not built due to onerous requirements imposed by planning departments. Put enough requirements on a building and they can't even break even.
In this case profit is everything. When a building get built it is usually done on credit. If the profit is not high enough the banks won't lend the money and the building does not get built. The high margins are there because thing go wrong and costs rise. Banks don't like to lose money.
Do you go to work every day and take home nothing? Why should developers do that?
Usually, the next rules are too strict.
How about we break the cycle and just do it right.
Sure, that might not be fair for a single building
Those buildings don't get built and you are even worse off. Lost construction jobs, lost office jobs due to lack of affordable space, etc.
So why is the fact that the planning department allowed previous buildings to be build improperly the responsibility of current developers to solve? Developments run on a very tight budget with very strict profit margins. A lender will only front money if the projected profit is quite high; sometimes 30%. Buy building extra parking the profit margin comes down and some good building will not be built.
I am not in a a no-fault state, yet I have $5000 Guest PIP
That $5000 is not going to help a lot if you are seriously injured and the medical bills are $100,000. What state by the way so I can check to see if what you say is true.
This particular risk is exceptionally low.
So being injured in an accident where the driver of the vehicle you are in is an exceptionally low risk. Even if it is a very low risk the fact that it could leave you penniless and disabled makes even a low risk something to be concerned with. The high consequences negate the low risk.
With a taxi service, your risk of no financial compensation in the event of injury is lower; all other risks are identical.
The risk of no financial compensation should be enough. The other risks are also lower with taxis die to background checks and licensing. Background checks mean fewer felons driving. A taxi drivers and/or company can have their licenses pulled for too many complaints. Not so for Uber drivers and Uber itself as they have no license to pull.
You have failed to differentiate the risk of slugging from the risk of Uber.
One major issue is that Uber looks very much like a taxi service while slugging looks completely different. People who use Uber can be easily duped into thinking it has the same protections as a taxi when it does not.
So you think it better that taxpayers foot the bill for the parking infrastructure required by new and larger buildings?
That is not what you said in your other post.
The planners should require parking garages under new buildings that exceeds the needs of the new building.
Should they meet the parking requirements of the new building? Yes. Should they exceed the requirements for the new building? No.
Uninsured motorist insurance often covers you in all situations.
This is from the link you posted;
if you were hit by an uninsured motorist while driving another person’s vehicle, walking across the street or riding your bike, the bodily injury portion of your insurance may help with your expenses in a covered incident.
All of the examples involve being hit by an uninsured motorist and not riding in an uninsured vehicle. Many insurance companies regard riding in an uninsured vehicle to be a choice and therefor do not cover injury while doing so. If the driver of the uninsured vehicle you are riding in is at fault the insurance will probably not cover it.
It's often covered by Guest PIP.
Guest PIP is only in no fault states and only as part of a valid insurance. If the insurance is voided by using a vehicle for commercial purposes when it is only insured for non-comercial purposes then PIP does not apply.
What sets Uber apart, in terms of risk, from traditional slugging?
1. Slugs don't pay so it is not a commercial venture which would nullify the non-commercial insurance.
2. Slugging is not a pickup and delivery service.
In effect a slug line is a free bus rather than a for pay taxi.
Yes, let developers foot the bill for social issue if they ever want to change a building. All that will do is cause less construction. The value of a parking space is much less than the value of the same area of office space yet cost similar amounts to build. This will cause costs of office space to rise even faster that it already does making new building no longer viable. Simple solutions to complex problems usually don't work.
You could walk outside and get hit by a bad driver under the same circumstances. Your own uninsured motorist insurance covers this,
Uninsured mororist insurance is usually attached to a vehicle and not a person.
Injury falls onto personal medical insurance,
Personal insurance rates are set assuming almost all vehicles are insured and paying their insurance. When you get into a vehicle you personal insurance usually does not cover injuries sustained there as it is normally covered by the requires vehicle insurance.
nobody has claimed it more prevalent on Uber-commissioned service.
Yet. Uber has not been around very long. Predators will eventually see it as a fertile hunting ground since there are no background checks.
The market pressure Uber causes provides positive benefit to society.
The service itself also causes bad things. It is a risk/reward analysis. Without the regulation (insurance, background checks, inspections, licensing, etc) the risks are much higher in an Uber vehicle. What little reward is far outweighed by the risk.
So you want to knowingly put vulnirable people in vehicles with a proven history of violence, sexual assault, robbery, etc.
How are convicted felons ever going to find work if we put background checks on everything?
There are two parts to this;
1. There are not background checks on every job. Just background checks on jobs that come into contact with vulnerable people. A taxi driver is a perfect example of where background checks are necessary. Women, children, elderly, and/or disabled people use taxis every day. They can be vulnerable to what ever the driver wants to do. A construction worker is an example where a background check is not necessary as they do not come into business contact with vulnerable people.
2. Maybe the felon should have though about the possible restrictions in job opportunities before he did the crime.
The major difference is insurance. Most Uber vehicles effectively have no insurance. The insurance on the vehicle is void because the vehicle is being used for commercial purposes. Say you get into an accident. Without insurance your only recourse is to sue the driver who has no assets and lots of debt. How is that going to help you pay the tens if not hundreds of thousandths in medical bills, lost wages, disability, etc? There is a huge difference between an injured/deceased pet and a seriously injured person.
Sometimes the person you end up meeting up with is dangerous. Prepare yourself accordingly and take precautions.
Many people see Uber drivers like taxi drivers but they are not if they have not gone through the proper checks. Uber wants you to think they are the same and that is how they present it. Also when you go to someone's house you know a very important piece of information; where they live. If something goes wrong they are easy to find. It is much harder with a vehicle arriving to pick you up. Sure you could write down the license plate but that may have been stolen.
How many Uber drivers tell their customers that they would be riding in an uninsured vehicle? How many Uber drivers even know their non-commercial insurance is void? Most people don't understand the legalities of commercial insurance.
Sometimes things need to be killed of by politicians before bad things happen.
We are talking about on street parking. There is a limited supply of streets to park on. What is you solution to providing more parking? Tearing down building to build parkades is not a viable option.
You need to learn a little history before you start comparing historic figures.
On 5 March 1940, after the Gestapo–NKVD Third Conference was held in Zakopane, Beria sent a note (no. 794/B) to Stalin in which he stated that the Polish prisoners of war kept at camps and prisons in western Belarus and Ukraine were enemies of the Soviet Union, and recommended their execution. Most of them were military officers, but there were also intelligentsia, doctors, and priests for a total of over 22,000. With Stalin's approval, Beria's NKVD murdered them in the Katyn massacre.
In 1944, as the Germans were driven from Soviet soil, Beria was in charge of dealing with the various ethnic minorities accused of anti-sovietism and/or collaboration with the invaders, including the Chechens, the Ingush, the Crimean Tatars, the Pontic Greeks and the Volga Germans. All these groups were deported to Soviet Central Asia
I do not see any references to McCarthy having thousands of people slaughtered and deporting entire cultures to gulags? While McCarthyism was bad it was nowhere near as bad as what happened in Russia.
writing blogs about the social problems we face, proposing solutions,
The only solutions I have heard from the Occupy movement is "give us your money". I would like to hear others. Do they exist? The Occupy movement is good at pointing out issues but not so good at pointing out solutions.
Last week a Ukrainian court put the blame for the famine on Stalin and several other officials.
That was in 2010.
So a Russian propaganda outlet runs a story about a lawsuit brought by the grandson of one of the biggest murderer's in history. Do you thing the grandson of Stalin might be a bit biased?
The point that makes it obvious is the fact that of the millions of people who died most were from the Ukraine. One estimate from the Encyclopedia Britannica is that of the 6-8 million who dies 4-5 million were from the Ukraine. This is odd considering that most of Russia's grain and many other foodstuffs comes from the Ukraine. When there is a famine one would expect the production areas to be least hard hit. That was not the case because Stalin exported most of the food. He also wanted fewer Ukrainians so break any Ukrainian nationalism and allow Russians to occupy the land.
The best course would have been to force him to bring back the old constitution or resign
It is difficult to force someone to do something when they are hiding in a neighboring country under that government's protection. He was declared "incapable of performing his dutie" after he fled by a vote of the Parliament. The constitution states the acting president would be the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada and that is what happened. That Turchynov was voted in at the same time looks a little fishy until one sees that the previous Chairman resigned due to ill health.
Look what has happened in Egypt when they overthrew their terrible, but democratically elected leader.
The elections of Mubarak were about as democratic as the elections in China
Despite its significance, the election was marred by voter fraud, ballot stuffing, boycotts, intimidation, vote-buying, and protests by opposition groups, leading for a low-turnout of under 30%.
I don't think for a moment that Crimeans or East Ukrainians actually want to join Russia,
Crmea might want to join Russia but I doubt most of Eastern Ukrainians want to.
You have a good plan there. It isd sad the Putin will not let it happen.
If the Crimea was removed from the Ukraine the percentage would drop dramatically. As I said there probably should have been a referendum but after the election to replace the president who fled.
I never said the US wasn't an uncivilized bully from time to time. And not much, if any, of that has happened in the last 20 years or so. By the way, I am Canadian so I can call both of them bullies.
Ukrainian new unelected leadership is more like Hitler.
First all the current leaders were elected to Parliament. The only "unelected" part is the post of acting President. That was done when the previous president abandoned his post and fled. Second the main political party is Batkivshchyna which looks like a pretty progressive party. Show me how they compare to Hitler in what they have actually done. If you mean the few radical outliers the same thing could be said for the Republican Party.
Aggressively moved right away to abolish equal rights for Russian and Russian-speaking population who make up almost half the country.
You might want to look at the demographics of the Ukraine. The Russian speaking percentage is 30%. The Ukrainian speaking percentage is 67%. So the less than 1/3 Russian speaking portion is nowhere near half. Take a look at this map. Most of the Ukraine is primarily Ukrainian speakers. Notice how much of the Russian speaking population is concentrated in the Crimea. I agree that should have been a referendum in the Crimea but it was done improperly under vary shady circumstances. Democracy does not work very well during political upheaval. The only thing close to a rights issue was a bill to make Ukrainian the only official language. The bill was passed by the parliament but vetoed by the President. It is not in effect. Do you have any other examples?
Russia has no choice but to get involved.
There are other way to "get involved" than sending in special forces, supplying arms to insurgents, holding large military exercises on the borders and threatening invasion. Those are the tactics of an uncivilized bully. Russia won't even admit that the Holodomor happened.
So you are 1/4 of the capability of the equipment we are talking about. Good for you. The 4-5 km range is much less than 15 and the flight time of an hour is much less that 3.5 hours. You be the one to tell the mother her some was killed because the drone ran out of power.Sure you can do some of the things an expensive drone can to but doing them all is very expensive. Your logic is like comparing a Honda Civic with a quarter mile time of 17 seconds to a Bugatti Veyron with a quarter mile time of 10 second and saying the Bugati should cost less than twice as much as the Bugatti.
Scaling it up is proportional, not exponential or something silly.
Actually it is closer to exponential than linear. Look at the priced of these cameras they go from $1k to $27K. I doubt that the $27K camera is 27times as effective as the $1K. Also notice that $27K time 2 cameras is half the cost of the aircraft. Add a spare and that is over $75K in cameras alone. Your logic is like comparing a Honda Civic with a quarter mile time of 17 seconds to a Bugatti Veyron with a quarter mile time of 10 second and saying the Bugati should cost less than twice as much as the Honda.
How about you show some examples of the products you mention. As far as I can tell you are pulling numbers out of the air.
A gambol is not stabilization. Stabilization is much more difficult.
The $100 transceiver could not deal video in high enough rez to be useful. Cost estimate on camera is way low. This camera has to see people at over a mile away and be about the size of your fist. That kind of performance is very expensive. When I mention infantrymen I mean they will be the ones assembling and taking care of the equipment. They are no know for their light touch.
One of the main cost factors is to get this kind of performance into a man portable package. When you go small things get expensive fast.
Many hobbyists meet a lot of that criteria on a sub $1000.
Ever hear of the 80/20 rule? In general one spends 80% of the budget on the last 20% of the features. Not meeting all the requirements would make it useless in combat.
Vice is stupid for starting it Dice is stupid for following along. Lets point fingers at both of them.