Screw changing anything, just stick with the A-10 Warthog, a proven worthy opponent on the battlefield (and a beautiful, tough aircraft to boot!)
No, update the A-10. Include folding wings, sturdier landing gear and a tail hook so that it can be aircraft carrier capable. Then the Marines will be allowed to fly it. Note that the Marines believe that aircraft exist for one and only one reason, to support the Infantry. Marine pilots had to become qualified infantry officers before they were even allowed to go to flight school. The A-10 is a perfect fit for Marine culture, from privates to generals to the commandant; but the Navy so no because of it not being carrier capable.
It seems that one of the affected parties was Tencent, hardly a small developer and unlikely to be using "dodgy" versions of XCode.
Actually its entirely plausible, even likely, that large developers keep Xcode downloads on their local servers for their internal developers. Or have standard suites of software including Xcode that corporate IT puts on internal developer machines. One would only need to infect the Xcode on the server or in this standard suite.
Apple DOES offer hashes/signatures on their regular Downloads; but not for stuff that is distributed through the App Store (which XCode now is).
Xcode is also available as a download from Apple's developer site. The App Store is not required. This developer site is where access to beta versions and "golden masters" may be found. These allow developers to target an upcoming iOS version many months prior to an iOS update and to build and submit to the app store an app built with the official public version of Xcode immediately prior to the iOS update in order to be available on launch day. Plus legacy versions of Xcode are also available in case someone needs one to debug on an older version of iOS. For example Xcode 7 only includes simulators for 9.0, 8.4,... 8.1.
At least the Apple works and have a longer span of vendor support. Scoff all you want but I can keep my devices longer as they're both longer lived and longer supported.
The person having the malware problem and asking questions is using a Nexus 6. That's a product from Google and it gets all upgrades. IMHO the Nexus devices are the only way to go with Android, you are sure of getting long term support and upgrades. For Android development I have a Nexus 4, a 2012 device, and it upgrades to the most recent version of Android.
I guess they could have put it in Apple`s Walled Prison right
There are two Apple ecosystems, iOS and Mac OS X, both offer app stores where every app is subject to review. The Mac ecosystem also allows a user to download apps directly from a manufacturer. In other words on the Mac if the supplier is trustworthy you can go direct. If the supplier is an unknown you can go app store so you know its been reviewed. Google could have gone this route and reviewed apps on Google play while still allowing side loading for users who wanted to take the risk or who were dealing with reliable direct sources. They still could go that route and begin reviewing apps.
For that to work, you'd have to plan in advance to put your "large enough" selection on the phone.
It takes no more planning than getting an entire collection on the phone. The user gets to pick the entire collection, a playlist or a random selection that gets synced from computer to phone. Or if one is a user of Apple Music and is browsing and/or streaming with just a phone while on wifi there is an option to make a song or album available when offline (i.e. downloads the music for when not on wifi).
Do you really think Apple or Android users looking to switch to iOS care about the reviews or ratings?
Yes. If I thought it would move all my photos, contacts, videos, notes, whatever else... I'd probably consider a 5-star app, on the presumption that it's easy to use, efficient, and does what I'd expect it to do well. I wouldn't bother with a 1-star app, on the presumption that it would be a complete waste of time.
I expect most Android users looking to switch to iOS would not make any such presumption regarding a 1-star review. This is an extremely "politically incorrect" app for an Android app store and obviously sets off the zealotry of platform fanboys. Reviews are surely going to be skewed as a result. Would be switchers would likely take that into consideration. The fact that it is an official Apple app and is important to Apple's Android to iOS switching efforts would probably far outweigh a bunch of likely bogus reviews.
Streaming music changes things with reference to your MP3 player point. I don't need my entire collection downloaded to the phone. I only need a "large enough" selection downloaded for when I am away from wifi. If on wifi I can just stream.
OR, every drone would need to access the database wirelessly in real time to know where it can or can't go. So to be effective, in the case of a man hunt, the police would have to constantly update the database with locations and the drone would have to be continually querying the DB for prohibited locations.
And local government has the ability to push notifications to subscribed cell phones regarding local emergency alerts.
Also aircraft have transponders identifying their position, drones could listen for these transponders.
The potential solutions can be far simpler than you suggest.
3. If you ditch the Fire and Police nonsense...
And this is the attitude that will get drones heavily restricted. Like drivers of autos you *must* yield to and stay out of the way of emergency services.
Every user I knew had a third party fan. It didn't take long for those slots to start filling up. Working up from slot zero, language card, perhaps serial card (or modem), often a parallel card for printing, 80 column card (extended memory on the IIE) perhaps a clock or sound card or 2 empty slots, slot 6 was the 5.25 floppy and slot 7 was the 3.5 in floppy or HD controller. Sound, clock and 3.5 in controller came later.
I was an Apple ][ dev. I had one on my//e, not sure I needed the fan until I added a 68K coprocessor card. The font facing power switch may have been more useful. We also had a couple of ][s in the house (bunch of college kids renting a housing and doing development work), southern California, an air conditional that would frequently fail, the ][s were just fine even without a fan.
The Ag department (bunch of farm management software for the Apple ][ available at the time) at school actually have a computer lab with a bunch of Apple//es, no fans. Seemed to work fine.
No, you could not because modern objective-c for Mac OS and iOS has ARC retain/release just like Swift. ARC is not specific to Swift.
Yes, I could because Objective-C has a lovely switch called -fno-objc-arc that would allow me to decide in a chunk of code by chunk of code basis where ARC was acceptable and where it was not.
Not quite, at least on Mac OS. ARC is required for Mac App Store apps. Not sure when the iOS App Store goes this way too. Apple has been telling developers to convert their code to ARC for years, there are even tools to do much of the work automatically.
In any case the point remains, modern objective-c is ARC based. Code generated by Xcode has been assuming ARC for a while.
Apple also had at least two internal Mac OS replacement projects over the years. Neither getting close to where NeXT was.
What killed Lisa more than anything else was the $10K price tag. I got to use one a bit and it was quite useable, at least to an Apple ][ and very early Mac user.
Now this all comes out after his death..Sounds like an over inflated ego to me
That thought crossed my mind as well. Since Jobs ain't there to contradict him....
Speaking as a former Apple ][ dev, this was all common knowledge. Jobs was the salesman, Woz was the engineer. That said, sales was certainly a very important and critical role. Both Steves were absolutely essential to Apple's success. Jobs got an upgrade in our view post-Mac due to his look-and-feel design work, but still he was never thought of as a hands on tech person.
Woz is the hero of the Apple story to engineers, Jobs is the hero to wall street. The mainstream news and the public at large merely lean towards the wall street perspective.
As someone who programmed and used an Apple II and III and original owner of a Fat Mac...this is all common knowledge. Essentially Steve saw what Woz had and said, "hey, we should sell this."
Apple ][ dev here as well. My recollection from those days was that Woz was the engineer and Jobs was the salesman. From Mac days onward Jobs was the salesman and the designer in the look-and-feel sense, not in any technical sense.
While sales and look-at-feel are certainly important, when at a '83 trade show as a developer and returning to our booth and telling my buddies I just talked to "Steve" for a few minutes over at the Apple booth, they were excited. Then I confessed it was Jobs not Woz and the mood shifted to, eh, ok.
We certainly recognized that Jobs was essential to Apple's success, its just that we were engineers and the business/sales side held little interest for us. Again, post-Mac, our appraisal of Jobs improved due to his look-and-feel design work.
That hasn't been productive advice since about 1998:) Modern languages with runtimes like Java, C# (and presumably Swift when it gets its act together) can actually be *faster* than C/C++ in some cases...
Not in the cases you mentioned earlier, high performance numerics and games. I've worked in both areas. To be fair I am assuming you are not including casual video games.
... because they have more optimization information at runtime than exists statically at compile time. In particular garbage collection in Java is just about optimal and you really can't beat it with hand crafted memory management.
Actually it is beaten quite routinely by game devs, again non-casual.
I assume that the ARC people have some plan for how to eliminate the overhead for special cases like this eventually, but they just aren't there yet. More generally - yes, I could just rewrite my entire app in objc...
No, you could not because modern objective-c for Mac OS and iOS has ARC retain/release just like Swift. ARC is not specific to Swift.
... or C/C++ to work around the current problems with Swift but then I'd have 25k lines of ugly code instead of 10k lines of pretty code that I actually want to maintain and work on:)
Having done quite a bit of C/C++, a fair amount of Objective-C and some Swift I'm not sure how you came up with any such ratios. We must have very different coding styles.:-)
More useful advice might be to rewrite the *parts* of the application that are slow today in objc or C/C++, which would normally be a good option as swift interoperates with them fine... but in my case is awkward.
Personally I have not found separating UI and core code awkward. Matter of fact I find it cleaner, beneficial with respect to design, automated testing. Plus the core code being shared across various platforms as mentioned earlier. The benefits extend beyond performance tuning from what I've seen.
Where I'll use something like Java for core code is when there are standard classes/libraries that greatly simplify the problem at hand and raw performance is a secondary consideration. But now we are leaving the high performance computing and video game domain.
Modern Objective-C for MacOS and iOS automatically generates ARC retain/release just like swift. Swift, Objective-C, Java is for UI code. The core code should be written in C/C++, written once, re-used/shared on iOS, MacOS, Android, Windows and Linux.
I'm talking mostly about high performance numerical computing, games, etc.... Right now the only way to write high performance code in Swift is to essentially abandon classes and work only with structs.
You don't write the high performance part of your code in Swift or Objective-C or Java on Android; you write it in C/C++. You only write the user interface code in Swift, Objective-C or Java. Matter of fact you write your core application functionality in C/C++, high performance or not. You separate your core code from user interface code. Your core code will be portable and can be shared between iOS, Android, Mac OS X, Windows, Linux, etc.
No, "regulated" when discussing a group of people or a business means "subjected to regulations".
In the days of the Bill of Rights "well regulated" meant operating efficiently, operating at a desired level. How, in part, was that efficiency obtained? By allowing the militia members to possess their own weapons and powder, so a trip to the armory was not necessary.
Don't omit that word "well", it changes the context of regulated and leads one to the wrong definition of the word.
Don't like the watch analogy. Go with air flow. Various devices regulate the flow of air, some of these are named "regulators". For example scuba. The first stage regulator (on the tank) regulates (operates at desired level) the flow of air from about 3,000 PSI to 150 PSI, then a second stage regulator (in your mouth) regulates the flow of air from 150 PSI to ambient (whatever the pressure your lungs are at, varies with depth).
Regulate does not necessarily mean bury in government oversight and paperwork, and preceding it with the word "well" indicates that is the wrong definition to adopt and that a performance related definition applies.
And thus, "a well regulated militia. .." yet I don't see the NRA agreeing every person who owns a gun being regulated in any sense of the word nor claiming the same group is part of a militia and should be called up for training by the government. After all, if you're going to call up a group of people you need to have them registered and that is the last thing the NRA wants despite what the 2nd Amendment says and implies.
Actually the NRA is very much in favor of "regulated" in the 18th century sense that the word in the 2nd amendment means: trained and practiced to the point of being effective. The NRA is the premier organization for firearms safety and proficiency training. They train civilians, law enforcement and the military. This is their primary mission. The political lobbying a secondary mission they feel "forced" into.
Part of the "federal militia" is what is considered "unorganized", no obligation to sign up nor show up for training. This "unorganized militia" may be the legal foundation for conscription. You are being transferred from "unorganized militia" to "active duty reserve" when drafted. Note that various states have similar laws on the books so many able bodied men are technically in a "state militia" as well as a "federal militia". Also note that the National Guard is only **part** of the militia, in the organized part, the unorganized part exists separately, so the 2nd amendment is not solely for the benefit of the National Guard as some would argue.
10 U.S. Code 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...
and that purpose would be much better served by the presence of an actual officer, not a quad copter that took 30 minutes to get to the scene counting setup time and evaluation.
First off I am not advocating armed drones, either lethal or less-than-lethal, I personally think a lot more thought and research needs to be done before deciding to go that route. However it is easy to conceive of a situation where a drone can arrive on scene faster than an officer, note we are talking North Dakota here. Linear distances, or in this case as the drone flies, can be extremely misleading with respect to someone traveling by ground. A drone may be able to arrive on scene much before an officer and do something useful.
Take some of the emotion out of this topic, consider a search and rescue situation. A drone may be able to drop water, a space blanket and a first aid kit to someone long before a rescuer can get to them due to distance and terrain.
Slashdot Mirror
Screw changing anything, just stick with the A-10 Warthog, a proven worthy opponent on the battlefield (and a beautiful, tough aircraft to boot!)
No, update the A-10. Include folding wings, sturdier landing gear and a tail hook so that it can be aircraft carrier capable. Then the Marines will be allowed to fly it. Note that the Marines believe that aircraft exist for one and only one reason, to support the Infantry. Marine pilots had to become qualified infantry officers before they were even allowed to go to flight school. The A-10 is a perfect fit for Marine culture, from privates to generals to the commandant; but the Navy so no because of it not being carrier capable.
Apple is known for mysteriously and capriciously denying apps which are similar to other apps which they have accepted.
Other than fart and flashlight type apps?
It seems that one of the affected parties was Tencent, hardly a small developer and unlikely to be using "dodgy" versions of XCode.
Actually its entirely plausible, even likely, that large developers keep Xcode downloads on their local servers for their internal developers. Or have standard suites of software including Xcode that corporate IT puts on internal developer machines. One would only need to infect the Xcode on the server or in this standard suite.
Apple DOES offer hashes/signatures on their regular Downloads; but not for stuff that is distributed through the App Store (which XCode now is).
Xcode is also available as a download from Apple's developer site. The App Store is not required. This developer site is where access to beta versions and "golden masters" may be found. These allow developers to target an upcoming iOS version many months prior to an iOS update and to build and submit to the app store an app built with the official public version of Xcode immediately prior to the iOS update in order to be available on launch day. Plus legacy versions of Xcode are also available in case someone needs one to debug on an older version of iOS. For example Xcode 7 only includes simulators for 9.0, 8.4, ... 8.1.
Other than laziness there is no good reason for people to get their Xcode anywhere else than apple (as Xcode is a free download).
I wonder if this was part of a Hackintosh set of software, a Hackintosh being Max OS X running on non-Apple hardware.
At least the Apple works and have a longer span of vendor support. Scoff all you want but I can keep my devices longer as they're both longer lived and longer supported.
The person having the malware problem and asking questions is using a Nexus 6. That's a product from Google and it gets all upgrades. IMHO the Nexus devices are the only way to go with Android, you are sure of getting long term support and upgrades. For Android development I have a Nexus 4, a 2012 device, and it upgrades to the most recent version of Android.
I guess they could have put it in Apple`s Walled Prison right
There are two Apple ecosystems, iOS and Mac OS X, both offer app stores where every app is subject to review. The Mac ecosystem also allows a user to download apps directly from a manufacturer. In other words on the Mac if the supplier is trustworthy you can go direct. If the supplier is an unknown you can go app store so you know its been reviewed. Google could have gone this route and reviewed apps on Google play while still allowing side loading for users who wanted to take the risk or who were dealing with reliable direct sources. They still could go that route and begin reviewing apps.
I really want to see Google try to publish Move to Android in the Apple store
You assume that Google could write such an app. Sandboxing would probably prevent direct access to the relevant data by a 3rd party app.
My understanding is that the tools for such migrations actually work off of phone backup files on the computer.
For that to work, you'd have to plan in advance to put your "large enough" selection on the phone.
It takes no more planning than getting an entire collection on the phone. The user gets to pick the entire collection, a playlist or a random selection that gets synced from computer to phone. Or if one is a user of Apple Music and is browsing and/or streaming with just a phone while on wifi there is an option to make a song or album available when offline (i.e. downloads the music for when not on wifi).
Do you really think Apple or Android users looking to switch to iOS care about the reviews or ratings?
Yes. If I thought it would move all my photos, contacts, videos, notes, whatever else... I'd probably consider a 5-star app, on the presumption that it's easy to use, efficient, and does what I'd expect it to do well. I wouldn't bother with a 1-star app, on the presumption that it would be a complete waste of time.
I expect most Android users looking to switch to iOS would not make any such presumption regarding a 1-star review. This is an extremely "politically incorrect" app for an Android app store and obviously sets off the zealotry of platform fanboys. Reviews are surely going to be skewed as a result. Would be switchers would likely take that into consideration. The fact that it is an official Apple app and is important to Apple's Android to iOS switching efforts would probably far outweigh a bunch of likely bogus reviews.
Do you really think Apple or Android users looking to switch to iOS care about the reviews or ratings?
Streaming music changes things with reference to your MP3 player point. I don't need my entire collection downloaded to the phone. I only need a "large enough" selection downloaded for when I am away from wifi. If on wifi I can just stream.
OR, every drone would need to access the database wirelessly in real time to know where it can or can't go. So to be effective, in the case of a man hunt, the police would have to constantly update the database with locations and the drone would have to be continually querying the DB for prohibited locations.
And local government has the ability to push notifications to subscribed cell phones regarding local emergency alerts.
Also aircraft have transponders identifying their position, drones could listen for these transponders.
The potential solutions can be far simpler than you suggest.
3. If you ditch the Fire and Police nonsense ...
And this is the attitude that will get drones heavily restricted. Like drivers of autos you *must* yield to and stay out of the way of emergency services.
Every user I knew had a third party fan. It didn't take long for those slots to start filling up. Working up from slot zero, language card, perhaps serial card (or modem), often a parallel card for printing, 80 column card (extended memory on the IIE) perhaps a clock or sound card or 2 empty slots, slot 6 was the 5.25 floppy and slot 7 was the 3.5 in floppy or HD controller. Sound, clock and 3.5 in controller came later.
I was an Apple ][ dev. I had one on my //e, not sure I needed the fan until I added a 68K coprocessor card. The font facing power switch may have been more useful. We also had a couple of ][s in the house (bunch of college kids renting a housing and doing development work), southern California, an air conditional that would frequently fail, the ][s were just fine even without a fan.
//es, no fans. Seemed to work fine.
The Ag department (bunch of farm management software for the Apple ][ available at the time) at school actually have a computer lab with a bunch of Apple
No, you could not because modern objective-c for Mac OS and iOS has ARC retain/release just like Swift. ARC is not specific to Swift.
Yes, I could because Objective-C has a lovely switch called -fno-objc-arc that would allow me to decide in a chunk of code by chunk of code basis where ARC was acceptable and where it was not.
Not quite, at least on Mac OS. ARC is required for Mac App Store apps. Not sure when the iOS App Store goes this way too. Apple has been telling developers to convert their code to ARC for years, there are even tools to do much of the work automatically.
In any case the point remains, modern objective-c is ARC based. Code generated by Xcode has been assuming ARC for a while.
Apple also had at least two internal Mac OS replacement projects over the years. Neither getting close to where NeXT was.
What killed Lisa more than anything else was the $10K price tag. I got to use one a bit and it was quite useable, at least to an Apple ][ and very early Mac user.
Now this all comes out after his death..Sounds like an over inflated ego to me
That thought crossed my mind as well. Since Jobs ain't there to contradict him....
Speaking as a former Apple ][ dev, this was all common knowledge. Jobs was the salesman, Woz was the engineer. That said, sales was certainly a very important and critical role. Both Steves were absolutely essential to Apple's success. Jobs got an upgrade in our view post-Mac due to his look-and-feel design work, but still he was never thought of as a hands on tech person.
Woz is the hero of the Apple story to engineers, Jobs is the hero to wall street. The mainstream news and the public at large merely lean towards the wall street perspective.
That's how I heard it, including the lack of a fan, which was needed as soon as you started filling up the slots.
Which means that most users never needed one. As "Apple" said in those days, that feature/functionality was left as a 3rd party opportunity. :-)
As someone who programmed and used an Apple II and III and original owner of a Fat Mac...this is all common knowledge. Essentially Steve saw what Woz had and said, "hey, we should sell this."
Apple ][ dev here as well. My recollection from those days was that Woz was the engineer and Jobs was the salesman. From Mac days onward Jobs was the salesman and the designer in the look-and-feel sense, not in any technical sense.
While sales and look-at-feel are certainly important, when at a '83 trade show as a developer and returning to our booth and telling my buddies I just talked to "Steve" for a few minutes over at the Apple booth, they were excited. Then I confessed it was Jobs not Woz and the mood shifted to, eh, ok.
We certainly recognized that Jobs was essential to Apple's success, its just that we were engineers and the business/sales side held little interest for us. Again, post-Mac, our appraisal of Jobs improved due to his look-and-feel design work.
That hasn't been productive advice since about 1998 :) Modern languages with runtimes like Java, C# (and presumably Swift when it gets its act together) can actually be *faster* than C/C++ in some cases ...
Not in the cases you mentioned earlier, high performance numerics and games. I've worked in both areas. To be fair I am assuming you are not including casual video games.
Actually it is beaten quite routinely by game devs, again non-casual.
I assume that the ARC people have some plan for how to eliminate the overhead for special cases like this eventually, but they just aren't there yet. More generally - yes, I could just rewrite my entire app in objc ...
No, you could not because modern objective-c for Mac OS and iOS has ARC retain/release just like Swift. ARC is not specific to Swift.
... or C/C++ to work around the current problems with Swift but then I'd have 25k lines of ugly code instead of 10k lines of pretty code that I actually want to maintain and work on :)
Having done quite a bit of C/C++, a fair amount of Objective-C and some Swift I'm not sure how you came up with any such ratios. We must have very different coding styles. :-)
More useful advice might be to rewrite the *parts* of the application that are slow today in objc or C/C++, which would normally be a good option as swift interoperates with them fine... but in my case is awkward.
Personally I have not found separating UI and core code awkward. Matter of fact I find it cleaner, beneficial with respect to design, automated testing. Plus the core code being shared across various platforms as mentioned earlier. The benefits extend beyond performance tuning from what I've seen.
Where I'll use something like Java for core code is when there are standard classes/libraries that greatly simplify the problem at hand and raw performance is a secondary consideration. But now we are leaving the high performance computing and video game domain.
Sounds like Objective-C is the way to go lol.
Modern Objective-C for MacOS and iOS automatically generates ARC retain/release just like swift. Swift, Objective-C, Java is for UI code. The core code should be written in C/C++, written once, re-used/shared on iOS, MacOS, Android, Windows and Linux.
I'm talking mostly about high performance numerical computing, games, etc. ... Right now the only way to write high performance code in Swift is to essentially abandon classes and work only with structs.
You don't write the high performance part of your code in Swift or Objective-C or Java on Android; you write it in C/C++. You only write the user interface code in Swift, Objective-C or Java. Matter of fact you write your core application functionality in C/C++, high performance or not. You separate your core code from user interface code. Your core code will be portable and can be shared between iOS, Android, Mac OS X, Windows, Linux, etc.
No, "regulated" when discussing a group of people or a business means "subjected to regulations".
In the days of the Bill of Rights "well regulated" meant operating efficiently, operating at a desired level. How, in part, was that efficiency obtained? By allowing the militia members to possess their own weapons and powder, so a trip to the armory was not necessary.
Don't omit that word "well", it changes the context of regulated and leads one to the wrong definition of the word.
Don't like the watch analogy. Go with air flow. Various devices regulate the flow of air, some of these are named "regulators". For example scuba. The first stage regulator (on the tank) regulates (operates at desired level) the flow of air from about 3,000 PSI to 150 PSI, then a second stage regulator (in your mouth) regulates the flow of air from 150 PSI to ambient (whatever the pressure your lungs are at, varies with depth).
Regulate does not necessarily mean bury in government oversight and paperwork, and preceding it with the word "well" indicates that is the wrong definition to adopt and that a performance related definition applies.
And thus, "a well regulated militia. . ." yet I don't see the NRA agreeing every person who owns a gun being regulated in any sense of the word nor claiming the same group is part of a militia and should be called up for training by the government. After all, if you're going to call up a group of people you need to have them registered and that is the last thing the NRA wants despite what the 2nd Amendment says and implies.
Actually the NRA is very much in favor of "regulated" in the 18th century sense that the word in the 2nd amendment means: trained and practiced to the point of being effective. The NRA is the premier organization for firearms safety and proficiency training. They train civilians, law enforcement and the military. This is their primary mission. The political lobbying a secondary mission they feel "forced" into.
Part of the "federal militia" is what is considered "unorganized", no obligation to sign up nor show up for training. This "unorganized militia" may be the legal foundation for conscription. You are being transferred from "unorganized militia" to "active duty reserve" when drafted. Note that various states have similar laws on the books so many able bodied men are technically in a "state militia" as well as a "federal militia". Also note that the National Guard is only **part** of the militia, in the organized part, the unorganized part exists separately, so the 2nd amendment is not solely for the benefit of the National Guard as some would argue.
10 U.S. Code 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...
and that purpose would be much better served by the presence of an actual officer, not a quad copter that took 30 minutes to get to the scene counting setup time and evaluation.
First off I am not advocating armed drones, either lethal or less-than-lethal, I personally think a lot more thought and research needs to be done before deciding to go that route. However it is easy to conceive of a situation where a drone can arrive on scene faster than an officer, note we are talking North Dakota here. Linear distances, or in this case as the drone flies, can be extremely misleading with respect to someone traveling by ground. A drone may be able to arrive on scene much before an officer and do something useful.
Take some of the emotion out of this topic, consider a search and rescue situation. A drone may be able to drop water, a space blanket and a first aid kit to someone long before a rescuer can get to them due to distance and terrain.