Instead of threatening Google, why isn't the NYPD asking Google to dump the traffic data... Then filter out the folk who are regularly speeding along the same route?
I grew up the son of a farmer. Ever bailed hay? It's a fairly time sensitive process. Bail it too wet, and you run the chance of mold and mildew, if not having it rot, spontaneously combust, and burn your barn down. Too dry, and it degrades the quality of the hay. Point is, when the hay is ready, it's gotta be bailed.
Dad's tractor set up consisted of an International tractor, a JD square baker with a kicker, followed by the hay wagon. We came off a side hill with the wagon 3/4 full. Dad didn't head right down the hill, but kept performing S turns to keep the weight of the load pushing the tractor down the hill. The wagon had enough weight to push the baler sideways, down the hill, and snapped the wheel mount off the baler. Cast iron, popped, dropping the baler onto the ground.
I thought for sure the day was done. Nope. Dad unhitched the wagon from the baler, parked it sideways up the hill about 20'. Ran a rope down to anchor the baler from sliding further when he jacked it up. Grabbed another mount off the spare junker parts baler, replaced it, and went back to baling hay. Took two hours, at most.
Tell my Dad that something broke on the tractor and he'll need to wait hours/days for some third party service to fix it, and I guarantee you he'd have trailored it down to the dealership and done his best to shove it up someone's arse sideways, then gone back to 1950's technology that he could repair himself without trouble.
FAA is bundling fixed wing and helicopter RC models into the drone category as well. Hence the outrage from the folk who have been responsibly flying their fixed wing and helicopter models for years, without any need for gov't oversight.
We also question the usefulness of the registration. Each model is not registered, just the owner. Each aircraft should be labeled with the owner's info, so it would be easy to spoof someone else's info onto a given model. The likelihood of the registration info surviving ingestion into a typical turbine engine is unlikely as well, rendering the issue moot.
Please explain how a local government catering to a single provider by preventing all others from hanging/sharing cables and thus providing service, in exchange for kickbacks from that single provider is anything but fascism.
To quote your linked article: "Fascism's distinguishing characteristic is a "mixed economy." Unlike socialists and communists who seek to abolish private business, fascists are content to let business remain in private hands. Instead, fascists use regulations, mandates, and taxes to control business and run (and ruin) the economy. A fascist system, then, is one where private businesses serve politicians and bureaucrats instead of consumers. Does the modern American economy not fit the definition of fascism?"
Nationalizing the infrastructure doesn't work if it leads to the same situation we're in now, with most of the country being served by one broadband provider. Nationalizing the infrastructure does work if it leads to increased competition amongst multiple broadband providers. However we solve this particular issue, by nationalizing the infrastructure or some other way... it comes down to that. Limiting competition is bad for the consumer, and encouraging competition is good.
Then stop the glut of local and state governments creating a monopoly on service providers by allowing one provider to string cable on poles and no others. Prevent the same governments from preventing municipality-owned service providers as well.
You want to get the government out of infrastructure? Get them out then.
'Til then, you're nothing but a fascist fool destroying what's left of America.
"Where there is no reason for a civilian drone to operate above more than 400 ft above the ground."
Sure there is. My entertainment. You may not see it as a valid reason, but it's a reason nonetheless. It's also fairly hard to accurately gauge height AGL without telemetry... and hard to prove any hobbyist is flying above 400' AGL without telemetry, unless they hit an aircraft. Which is also the issue at hand: the drone operator in this incident clearly failed to remain clear of a manned aircraft.
He's already violating regulations. By proposing additional regulation, you're doing little more than piling charges onto someone who's already violated regulations, and further restricting other hobbyists flying their aircraft legally.
Oh, that's right... we live in a nanny state these days. Carry on./sarcasm.
Odd. Maybe I'm blind, but in that first link you're quoting, there's a link to the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (P.L. 112-95, Section 336) (https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/uas_arctic/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdf)
The only reference I see to 400 feet in that document is 334.c.2.C, which address government public safety agencies operating UACs:
(C) allow a government public safety agency to operate unmanned aircraft weighing 4.4 pounds or less, if operated—
(i) within the line of sight of the operator; (ii) less than 400 feet above the ground; (iii) during daylight conditions; (iv) within Class G airspace; and (v) outside of 5 statute miles from any airport, heliport, seaplane base, spaceport, or other location with aviation activities.
The closest I can see is 336.a.2: (2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;... which then fails to define which "community based set of safety guidelines" should be followed.
Not that it matters all that much in this case, since 336.a.4 clearly states that the UAC operator must not interfere with manned aircraft, which this drone operator clearly did.
All I'm saying is that the "must not operatie above 400' AGL" rule being bandied about frequently doesn't exist in my eyes.
FAA rule 107 (https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=20516) pertains to non-hobbyist drone flight: "The new rules for non-hobbyist small unmanned aircraft (UAS) operations – Part 107 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (PDF) – cover a broad spectrum of commercial uses for drones weighing less than 55 pounds."
We already have laws to punish that drone pilot as well. I don't believe we need more laws and regulation to punish the other R/C hobbyists who haven't interfered with a full size aircraft in their pursuit of happiness.
I've said it above, but I'll say it again: do you have a reference on that 400' ceiling for drones? All I'm seeing is that it's a "safety guideline": https://www.faa.gov/uas/gettin...
All I've seen is a "safety guideline" that suggests model aircraft be flown under 500'. No absolute ceiling was provided: https://www.faa.gov/uas/gettin...
Try doing that 100 miles a day on a bicycle in the middle of January in Upstate NY. If the cold doesn't slow you down enough, the snow and ice likely will.
I find it particularly ironic that a great deal of folk are throwing fits about drones needing to be regulated... and yet ultralights don't seem to be an issue.
Not all milk. Here in NYS, we have a loophole allowing farms to sell raw milk directly from the farm. It's worth the drive out once a week to pick it up. I was raised on fresh raw milk from a Jersey cow milked by the family. Milk just ain't the same if you don't have to shake it a bit before opening...
Slashdot Mirror
Instead of threatening Google, why isn't the NYPD asking Google to dump the traffic data... Then filter out the folk who are regularly speeding along the same route?
https://twitter.com/realDonald...
I grew up the son of a farmer. Ever bailed hay? It's a fairly time sensitive process. Bail it too wet, and you run the chance of mold and mildew, if not having it rot, spontaneously combust, and burn your barn down. Too dry, and it degrades the quality of the hay. Point is, when the hay is ready, it's gotta be bailed.
Dad's tractor set up consisted of an International tractor, a JD square baker with a kicker, followed by the hay wagon. We came off a side hill with the wagon 3/4 full. Dad didn't head right down the hill, but kept performing S turns to keep the weight of the load pushing the tractor down the hill. The wagon had enough weight to push the baler sideways, down the hill, and snapped the wheel mount off the baler. Cast iron, popped, dropping the baler onto the ground.
I thought for sure the day was done. Nope. Dad unhitched the wagon from the baler, parked it sideways up the hill about 20'. Ran a rope down to anchor the baler from sliding further when he jacked it up. Grabbed another mount off the spare junker parts baler, replaced it, and went back to baling hay. Took two hours, at most.
Tell my Dad that something broke on the tractor and he'll need to wait hours/days for some third party service to fix it, and I guarantee you he'd have trailored it down to the dealership and done his best to shove it up someone's arse sideways, then gone back to 1950's technology that he could repair himself without trouble.
Were you sleeping through the last Democratic primary?
There is that. Plenty of blame to go around for both parties.
Taking a page right out of Trump's book... blame the guy who came before you.
Take this "treated, cooked, and compressed" wood, and use it to make plywood.
New York State tried forcing registration of assault weapons. It failed miserably: https://hudsonvalleyone.com/20...
FAA is bundling fixed wing and helicopter RC models into the drone category as well. Hence the outrage from the folk who have been responsibly flying their fixed wing and helicopter models for years, without any need for gov't oversight.
We also question the usefulness of the registration. Each model is not registered, just the owner. Each aircraft should be labeled with the owner's info, so it would be easy to spoof someone else's info onto a given model. The likelihood of the registration info surviving ingestion into a typical turbine engine is unlikely as well, rendering the issue moot.
Please explain how a local government catering to a single provider by preventing all others from hanging/sharing cables and thus providing service, in exchange for kickbacks from that single provider is anything but fascism.
To quote your linked article:
"Fascism's distinguishing characteristic is a "mixed economy." Unlike socialists and communists who seek to abolish private business, fascists are content to let business remain in private hands. Instead, fascists use regulations, mandates, and taxes to control business and run (and ruin) the economy. A fascist system, then, is one where private businesses serve politicians and bureaucrats instead of consumers. Does the modern American economy not fit the definition of fascism?"
Nationalizing the infrastructure doesn't work if it leads to the same situation we're in now, with most of the country being served by one broadband provider. Nationalizing the infrastructure does work if it leads to increased competition amongst multiple broadband providers. However we solve this particular issue, by nationalizing the infrastructure or some other way... it comes down to that. Limiting competition is bad for the consumer, and encouraging competition is good.
Then stop the glut of local and state governments creating a monopoly on service providers by allowing one provider to string cable on poles and no others. Prevent the same governments from preventing municipality-owned service providers as well.
You want to get the government out of infrastructure? Get them out then.
'Til then, you're nothing but a fascist fool destroying what's left of America.
Reminds me of the stores that Jack up prices 100% overnight, then hang a 25% off sale sign the next morning.
"Where there is no reason for a civilian drone to operate above more than 400 ft above the ground."
Sure there is. My entertainment. You may not see it as a valid reason, but it's a reason nonetheless. It's also fairly hard to accurately gauge height AGL without telemetry... and hard to prove any hobbyist is flying above 400' AGL without telemetry, unless they hit an aircraft. Which is also the issue at hand: the drone operator in this incident clearly failed to remain clear of a manned aircraft.
He's already violating regulations. By proposing additional regulation, you're doing little more than piling charges onto someone who's already violated regulations, and further restricting other hobbyists flying their aircraft legally.
Oh, that's right... we live in a nanny state these days. Carry on. /sarcasm.
Odd. Maybe I'm blind, but in that first link you're quoting, there's a link to the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (P.L. 112-95, Section 336) (https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/uas_arctic/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdf)
The only reference I see to 400 feet in that document is 334.c.2.C, which address government public safety agencies operating UACs:
(C) allow a government public safety agency to operate
unmanned aircraft weighing 4.4 pounds or less, if operated—
(i) within the line of sight of the operator;
(ii) less than 400 feet above the ground;
(iii) during daylight conditions;
(iv) within Class G airspace; and
(v) outside of 5 statute miles from any airport,
heliport, seaplane base, spaceport, or other location
with aviation activities.
The closest I can see is 336.a.2: ... which then fails to define which "community based set of safety guidelines" should be followed.
(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community based
set of safety guidelines and within the programming
of a nationwide community-based organization;
Not that it matters all that much in this case, since 336.a.4 clearly states that the UAC operator must not interfere with manned aircraft, which this drone operator clearly did.
All I'm saying is that the "must not operatie above 400' AGL" rule being bandied about frequently doesn't exist in my eyes.
FAA rule 107 (https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=20516) pertains to non-hobbyist drone flight: "The new rules for non-hobbyist small unmanned aircraft (UAS) operations – Part 107 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (PDF) – cover a broad spectrum of commercial uses for drones weighing less than 55 pounds."
We already have laws to punish that drone pilot as well. I don't believe we need more laws and regulation to punish the other R/C hobbyists who haven't interfered with a full size aircraft in their pursuit of happiness.
I've said it above, but I'll say it again: do you have a reference on that 400' ceiling for drones? All I'm seeing is that it's a "safety guideline": https://www.faa.gov/uas/gettin...
Got a reference on that ceiling requirement?
All I've seen is a "safety guideline" that suggests model aircraft be flown under 500'. No absolute ceiling was provided: https://www.faa.gov/uas/gettin...
New York State can't get most folk to register their "assault weapons": https://hudsonvalleyone.com/20...
I wish the U.N. lots of luck. Ain't likely to fly here in Upstate (Look Ma, I made a pun!)
/\ this.
I've got fiber strung on the pole outside outside my house, about thirty feet away. Verizon won't let me touch it. FIOS is not available.
My guess is that one of the nearby corporations (GE, SI, Environmental One) have a dedicated lease.
Irritates me to no end, since Spectrum has no competition and acts accordingly.
Try doing that 100 miles a day on a bicycle in the middle of January in Upstate NY. If the cold doesn't slow you down enough, the snow and ice likely will.
May you never grow complacent in watching your guardians, either, lest you need to guard yourself from them in turn.
I find it particularly ironic that a great deal of folk are throwing fits about drones needing to be regulated... and yet ultralights don't seem to be an issue.
Not all milk. Here in NYS, we have a loophole allowing farms to sell raw milk directly from the farm. It's worth the drive out once a week to pick it up. I was raised on fresh raw milk from a Jersey cow milked by the family. Milk just ain't the same if you don't have to shake it a bit before opening...
Damn right I'm entitled. I pay monthly for a service. I expect that service to be fulfilled, not monkeyed with.