Right now, it is illegal to use drones for commercial purposes. There have even been stirrings of prosecuting those who post monetized videos on Youtube because they're profiting on the use of the footage only collectable through the use of the drone.
Probably for the same reason that Uber isn't yet regulated as a taxi service requiring all of the conventional trappings of a taxi service, because the regulatory agencies and the courts usually trail behind developments, based on developments.
The two closest local hobby stores receive their product shipped directly from China. If any drones are manufactured for places without these kinds of restrictions, they will end up in the US supply chain even if 'reputable' companies try to add such controls. Also factor-in unlicensed product copying and I don't think that it's possible.
It's too bad, really. Back when the barrier to the RC aircraft hobby was high (expensive devices, very high likelihood of crashing and destroying the craft) the number of incidents were low because irresponsible people simply couldn't afford to participate for the most part. Now that it's cheap and easy, a lot of people that shouldn't get into the hobby are able to get into the hobby, and are going to get the hobby banned.
How will police departments run without red light and ticket revenue? Similarly, they would completely put taxi services out of business. The short answer is politicians and police departments especially are going to put as many roadblocks in the way as possible to make sure this doesn't happen. They stand to make WAY too much from it.
How many people would choose to do without a car, or would own less cars per household, if one could subscribe to a car service like one subscribes to cable television service? If that subscription guaranteed essentially a level above conventional yellow taxi (more like a London Black Cab) but not quite as premium as a pricey sedan service, and could, based on your phone location service as you move around, attempt to prioritize and queue cars up to make it easy for passengers to summon cars, it might be possible to avoid both the headaches of car ownership or leasing and the headaches of conventional taxis.
This is where I think companies like Uber are ultimately headed- a middle-market between a random-hail taxi and a pricey sedan, where the cars are clean (after all, losing one's subscription would be a penalty for abusing the cars) the cars are timely as they're repositioning vehicles based on subscriber patterns, and the cars are priced where it costs the user somewhat less than private ownership without losing too much on the convenience. This model where Uber employs drivers with their own cars is a stop-gap until the technology is ready for them to push this kind of service in-earnest, and they'll drop the human drivers with their own cars in a New York minute if they can.
Just a guess, but there probably was no clean way to word it less-strongly than they did. It will probably be interpreted by the courts, in the case of private property, that the rule means that anyone living there or anyone there with the permission of the owner or tenant (call it the property-equivalent of a guardian) will be able to rule yay/nay on the use of drones in the legal airspace of that property.
As to those who feel this is unnecessarily burdensome, how would you feel if a person put a camera on a 50' pole, pointed it down to look at the ground 30' to 50' away, and stood with that pole in the alley behind your house, filming everything going on in your backyard? How would you feel if your neighbor did this on their own property, right at the property line? I'm not talking about a fixed installation either, just something that someone can set-up and bring with them and personally use, that happens to take high-resolution pictures and can use a variety of lenses to focus in on whatever details they would like to.
It's not necessarily the RC devices that are causing the laws, it's the ability to put cameras on them.
Exactly. If the functions of the vehicle's control systems have changed from a relatively simple engine spark and fuel injection management system to something that controls most aspects of the mechanics of the vehicle-in-motion, then the systems need to be balanced so that these critical systems are not run on poorly-secured or unsecured systems like the infotainment and passenger-comfort parts of the controls. If there is a need for something like the feedback from the body control module to tell the ECM how to set the suspension based on driver input, go back to basics, set a serial-link a simple four-bit byte that just changes values based on the setting chosen, and anything else is simply ignored and last-setting is retained. Doesn't have to be complicated.
...is that people still make threats using a durable medium (ie, not simply mouthing-off without leaving a record) when they actually want to carry-out such threats. It also amazes me when people that have absolutely no idea how communications systems work use them for illegal activities where their lack of knowledge means that they don't have a clue how their communications could be intercepted.
I've made this argument on and off for a decade. Connections between the ECM and the BCM should be one-way, with the ECM notifying the BCM of status only, no response, not even a reply, going back. The ECM doesn't need to know anything from the car's entertainment system. Unfortunately I think that some aspects of the operator's interface funnel through the BCM before ending up at the ECM now, so drive-by-wire might be at least partially to blame for this.
This is only going to get worse with the advent of cars that are capable of driving themselves while still allowing a human to override and take control unless automakers and their suppliers figure out how to sanely allow disparate computer systems to work together without compromising security.
I don't see why most interface information needs to be on a screen anyway. When I use the GPS on my phone while driving I've found that if I put the phone into the disused ashtray a certain way it echoes very well and I can hear the instructions as if a person was sitting in the car with me. I don't need a visual indication when the highways are well marked and the GPS is basically providing me with a rough guide.
I don't need my car stereo to tell me the name of the musician or song on a screen. The name of the station might be useful during commercial breaks but I don't need to know their advertising slogan while driving. I don't even need to know most facts about the car (tire pressure, oil temperature, transmission temperature) unless they get out of the acceptable range. I admit I like having RPM in addition to speed, and I like having coolant temp, but I don't need more than a handful of constant monitoring displayed for me when conditions are normal.
Heh. Makes one wonder if the a default setting to call law-enforcement where the call is automatically recorded had some of this sort of thing in mind...
I'm not sure of that. I've heard claims of 115200 when someone was stuck with a bad IOS file and had to upload it via Xmodem, and changed the terminal settings in their client up.
The panasonic ones are fairly decent. They can be had really cheap too, as long as you don't get in the view of the camera itself when you're obtaining them...
Yes. I've made a similar argument for the education system, there are not enough good metrics that measure both student and teacher performance, and having the teacher provide most 'graded' assessment with little more than a pass/fail for occasional standardized testing for graduation doesn't work. For education, use an independent means to assess for all tests, so that the instructor does not even proctor thes tests let alone grade them, and account for student ratings coming-in to the teacher's class as a means of quantifying how the teacher does based on change in performance by the end of the year.
Do a similar thing for surgeons and other doctors. Grade the case, then grade the doctor's performance on the case. If anything it might reveal that some doctors are taking a disproprtionate number of untreatable cases too far in treatment when hospice really should be the course of action, in addition to revealing when doctors, faced with difficult cases that might be treatable, are doing well considering their cache of patients.
Two sides of the same coin. Call it the idealist (want to be treated) versus the pragmatic (through experience, expect to be treated). There is a solution, but it requires someone to voluntarily take the first step, or it requires an enforced change from above, and just about everyone in the system is upset by it even if it weeds-out the bad apples and makes it better for everyone else.
Close. Some men actually like the BS working conditions (after all they usually are the cause), some go along with it, and some keep their mouths shut even if they don't like it because it's kind of necessary to have a job and even a crappy one is better than none and complaining might not succeed in getting the problems corrected.
I've known some women that will participate and can be as bad at offending as some of the worst men, I've known women that participate some because it can help them get a leg-up in the org chart and in their careers. I've known women that were ambivalent and managed to stay out of the fray. I've known women that were unhappy that their disapproval and lack of participation seemed to hurt their careers. I've known women to complain to no benefit. I've known at least one woman that did complain, but she had enough demerits for other reasons that they chose to let her go and with those demerits she couldn't really mount much of a counter-argument that had gravitas.
That's the thing, each woman, each man, each person has their own reactions and own motivations. Often people will react similarly to each other, but that doesn't mean that they always will, or that even similar circumstances repeating themselves will cause the same reactions in every case. Unfortunately just about everyone forgets to treat others as they themselves want to be treated, or they somehow interpret his to their own desires rather than being civil to those they are around. It also doesn't help that familiarity breeds contempt; when we learn of the flaws of our fellows we are more apt to judge them more on their flaws than on their strengths of character.
People are quick to assign characteristics of an individual to a group to whom the individual belongs. Look at how often an individual with a characteristic that isn't of the majority is aked their opinion as if it represents that of the minority to whom they are a part. Unfortunately it's also inaccurate. If Mike asks Johnny, who's a nerd, if he likes pizza, and Johnny replies no, he doesn't like pizza, Mike might draw the conclusion that nerds don't like pizza, even when it may only be Mike that doesn't like pizza, or even something as simple as Mike can't process dairy, so he can't eat the stuff even if he wants to.
I think you're also misusing Social Justice Warrior, which I think means someone otherwise-unaffected by the injustice that acts as a self-appointed mercenary and doesn't coordinate their efforts with those who actually are affected by the injustice either. They think they're doing good, and for all we know many may actually be doing good, but at the same time if they're not consulting those affected by the injustice and acting in-concert with those people's movements and leadership then they might actually cause more harm than good if they make the movement itself visibly look bad.
As to your other point, about, "neckbeards and mouthbreathers that are programmers you would know that they're hostile to everybody," this is actually more true than a lot of people realize. There are cases where women have perceived behavior in the workplace to be hostile toward them, when in reality they're actually being treated the same as the men are treating each other; in-effect they have been accepted as, "just one of the guys," but they don't realize that the guys treat each other like crap and now they're just getting the same as everyone else gets. Certainly that's not all cases of workplace harassment, but I have seen it first-hand and usually it's the result of the entire workplace degenerating, and companies end up cracking down on it in strange ways, like with uniforms, work-area inspections, and other things that simply keep employees too busy to harang each other. Sometimes it works, and sometimes the employer structurally reorganizes instead.
Then how did it progress from phone interviews to in-person interviews so many times? Besides, she appears to be highly qualified for her field. Ivy league might be a bit of a who-you-know thing for undergrad admissions, but they don't exactly hand out PhDs just because your papa went there, at least if a friend's decade-long saga with Cornell is any indication.
Or maybe even if it was intended as a joke it simply wasn't funny...
Re:Yea- we need the GPL or we won't get sources
on
On Being Pro-GPL
·
· Score: 1
Do you know of ANY hardware manufacturer who SELLS their drivers to people???
IBM.
Cisco.
Nortel/Avaya.
F5.
I could probably keep going but I think I've made my point that not all hardware companies provide drivers for free. Some of these companies, like Cisco in particular, will sell you drivers that effectively activate features of the devices under-license. Paying for the drivers activates features that are otherwise not enabled.
Re:Yea- we need the GPL or we won't get sources
on
On Being Pro-GPL
·
· Score: 1
The non-free proponents had an easy foothold. It's called basic functionality. I waited close to a decade for an 802.11a module and software. I even offered to send equipment to the 802.11b developer whose modules were for devices from the same manufacturer as one that made the "a" device I wanted to use and theoretically would have been most similar, he was literally not interested.
You want it to all be free? How about getting cracking on those modules? I'll use the free ones if the exist and if they work at all. I'll even contribute some material support from time to time.
Slashdot Mirror
Right now, it is illegal to use drones for commercial purposes. There have even been stirrings of prosecuting those who post monetized videos on Youtube because they're profiting on the use of the footage only collectable through the use of the drone.
What about "One China Policy"?
Probably for the same reason that Uber isn't yet regulated as a taxi service requiring all of the conventional trappings of a taxi service, because the regulatory agencies and the courts usually trail behind developments, based on developments.
The two closest local hobby stores receive their product shipped directly from China. If any drones are manufactured for places without these kinds of restrictions, they will end up in the US supply chain even if 'reputable' companies try to add such controls. Also factor-in unlicensed product copying and I don't think that it's possible.
It's too bad, really. Back when the barrier to the RC aircraft hobby was high (expensive devices, very high likelihood of crashing and destroying the craft) the number of incidents were low because irresponsible people simply couldn't afford to participate for the most part. Now that it's cheap and easy, a lot of people that shouldn't get into the hobby are able to get into the hobby, and are going to get the hobby banned.
How will police departments run without red light and ticket revenue? Similarly, they would completely put taxi services out of business. The short answer is politicians and police departments especially are going to put as many roadblocks in the way as possible to make sure this doesn't happen. They stand to make WAY too much from it.
How many people would choose to do without a car, or would own less cars per household, if one could subscribe to a car service like one subscribes to cable television service? If that subscription guaranteed essentially a level above conventional yellow taxi (more like a London Black Cab) but not quite as premium as a pricey sedan service, and could, based on your phone location service as you move around, attempt to prioritize and queue cars up to make it easy for passengers to summon cars, it might be possible to avoid both the headaches of car ownership or leasing and the headaches of conventional taxis.
This is where I think companies like Uber are ultimately headed- a middle-market between a random-hail taxi and a pricey sedan, where the cars are clean (after all, losing one's subscription would be a penalty for abusing the cars) the cars are timely as they're repositioning vehicles based on subscriber patterns, and the cars are priced where it costs the user somewhat less than private ownership without losing too much on the convenience. This model where Uber employs drivers with their own cars is a stop-gap until the technology is ready for them to push this kind of service in-earnest, and they'll drop the human drivers with their own cars in a New York minute if they can.
Just a guess, but there probably was no clean way to word it less-strongly than they did. It will probably be interpreted by the courts, in the case of private property, that the rule means that anyone living there or anyone there with the permission of the owner or tenant (call it the property-equivalent of a guardian) will be able to rule yay/nay on the use of drones in the legal airspace of that property.
As to those who feel this is unnecessarily burdensome, how would you feel if a person put a camera on a 50' pole, pointed it down to look at the ground 30' to 50' away, and stood with that pole in the alley behind your house, filming everything going on in your backyard? How would you feel if your neighbor did this on their own property, right at the property line? I'm not talking about a fixed installation either, just something that someone can set-up and bring with them and personally use, that happens to take high-resolution pictures and can use a variety of lenses to focus in on whatever details they would like to.
It's not necessarily the RC devices that are causing the laws, it's the ability to put cameras on them.
Exactly. If the functions of the vehicle's control systems have changed from a relatively simple engine spark and fuel injection management system to something that controls most aspects of the mechanics of the vehicle-in-motion, then the systems need to be balanced so that these critical systems are not run on poorly-secured or unsecured systems like the infotainment and passenger-comfort parts of the controls. If there is a need for something like the feedback from the body control module to tell the ECM how to set the suspension based on driver input, go back to basics, set a serial-link a simple four-bit byte that just changes values based on the setting chosen, and anything else is simply ignored and last-setting is retained. Doesn't have to be complicated.
...is that people still make threats using a durable medium (ie, not simply mouthing-off without leaving a record) when they actually want to carry-out such threats. It also amazes me when people that have absolutely no idea how communications systems work use them for illegal activities where their lack of knowledge means that they don't have a clue how their communications could be intercepted.
I've made this argument on and off for a decade. Connections between the ECM and the BCM should be one-way, with the ECM notifying the BCM of status only, no response, not even a reply, going back. The ECM doesn't need to know anything from the car's entertainment system. Unfortunately I think that some aspects of the operator's interface funnel through the BCM before ending up at the ECM now, so drive-by-wire might be at least partially to blame for this.
This is only going to get worse with the advent of cars that are capable of driving themselves while still allowing a human to override and take control unless automakers and their suppliers figure out how to sanely allow disparate computer systems to work together without compromising security.
I don't see why most interface information needs to be on a screen anyway. When I use the GPS on my phone while driving I've found that if I put the phone into the disused ashtray a certain way it echoes very well and I can hear the instructions as if a person was sitting in the car with me. I don't need a visual indication when the highways are well marked and the GPS is basically providing me with a rough guide.
I don't need my car stereo to tell me the name of the musician or song on a screen. The name of the station might be useful during commercial breaks but I don't need to know their advertising slogan while driving. I don't even need to know most facts about the car (tire pressure, oil temperature, transmission temperature) unless they get out of the acceptable range. I admit I like having RPM in addition to speed, and I like having coolant temp, but I don't need more than a handful of constant monitoring displayed for me when conditions are normal.
You could write that as 0::1 IIRC, which looks even more shady...
Relevant quote from bash.org...
Musta deleted everything. All I get is an apache error that a webserver has been configured and is ready for a site.
Confusing butt-dialed with booty call would be like confusing ladies' man with ladyboy.
Heh. Makes one wonder if the a default setting to call law-enforcement where the call is automatically recorded had some of this sort of thing in mind...
I'm not sure of that. I've heard claims of 115200 when someone was stuck with a bad IOS file and had to upload it via Xmodem, and changed the terminal settings in their client up.
The panasonic ones are fairly decent. They can be had really cheap too, as long as you don't get in the view of the camera itself when you're obtaining them...
Yes. I've made a similar argument for the education system, there are not enough good metrics that measure both student and teacher performance, and having the teacher provide most 'graded' assessment with little more than a pass/fail for occasional standardized testing for graduation doesn't work. For education, use an independent means to assess for all tests, so that the instructor does not even proctor thes tests let alone grade them, and account for student ratings coming-in to the teacher's class as a means of quantifying how the teacher does based on change in performance by the end of the year.
Do a similar thing for surgeons and other doctors. Grade the case, then grade the doctor's performance on the case. If anything it might reveal that some doctors are taking a disproprtionate number of untreatable cases too far in treatment when hospice really should be the course of action, in addition to revealing when doctors, faced with difficult cases that might be treatable, are doing well considering their cache of patients.
Two sides of the same coin. Call it the idealist (want to be treated) versus the pragmatic (through experience, expect to be treated). There is a solution, but it requires someone to voluntarily take the first step, or it requires an enforced change from above, and just about everyone in the system is upset by it even if it weeds-out the bad apples and makes it better for everyone else.
Close. Some men actually like the BS working conditions (after all they usually are the cause), some go along with it, and some keep their mouths shut even if they don't like it because it's kind of necessary to have a job and even a crappy one is better than none and complaining might not succeed in getting the problems corrected.
I've known some women that will participate and can be as bad at offending as some of the worst men, I've known women that participate some because it can help them get a leg-up in the org chart and in their careers. I've known women that were ambivalent and managed to stay out of the fray. I've known women that were unhappy that their disapproval and lack of participation seemed to hurt their careers. I've known women to complain to no benefit. I've known at least one woman that did complain, but she had enough demerits for other reasons that they chose to let her go and with those demerits she couldn't really mount much of a counter-argument that had gravitas.
That's the thing, each woman, each man, each person has their own reactions and own motivations. Often people will react similarly to each other, but that doesn't mean that they always will, or that even similar circumstances repeating themselves will cause the same reactions in every case. Unfortunately just about everyone forgets to treat others as they themselves want to be treated, or they somehow interpret his to their own desires rather than being civil to those they are around. It also doesn't help that familiarity breeds contempt; when we learn of the flaws of our fellows we are more apt to judge them more on their flaws than on their strengths of character.
This XKCD sums it up rather well actually...
People are quick to assign characteristics of an individual to a group to whom the individual belongs. Look at how often an individual with a characteristic that isn't of the majority is aked their opinion as if it represents that of the minority to whom they are a part. Unfortunately it's also inaccurate. If Mike asks Johnny, who's a nerd, if he likes pizza, and Johnny replies no, he doesn't like pizza, Mike might draw the conclusion that nerds don't like pizza, even when it may only be Mike that doesn't like pizza, or even something as simple as Mike can't process dairy, so he can't eat the stuff even if he wants to.
I think you're also misusing Social Justice Warrior, which I think means someone otherwise-unaffected by the injustice that acts as a self-appointed mercenary and doesn't coordinate their efforts with those who actually are affected by the injustice either. They think they're doing good, and for all we know many may actually be doing good, but at the same time if they're not consulting those affected by the injustice and acting in-concert with those people's movements and leadership then they might actually cause more harm than good if they make the movement itself visibly look bad.
As to your other point, about, "neckbeards and mouthbreathers that are programmers you would know that they're hostile to everybody," this is actually more true than a lot of people realize. There are cases where women have perceived behavior in the workplace to be hostile toward them, when in reality they're actually being treated the same as the men are treating each other; in-effect they have been accepted as, "just one of the guys," but they don't realize that the guys treat each other like crap and now they're just getting the same as everyone else gets. Certainly that's not all cases of workplace harassment, but I have seen it first-hand and usually it's the result of the entire workplace degenerating, and companies end up cracking down on it in strange ways, like with uniforms, work-area inspections, and other things that simply keep employees too busy to harang each other. Sometimes it works, and sometimes the employer structurally reorganizes instead.
Then how did it progress from phone interviews to in-person interviews so many times? Besides, she appears to be highly qualified for her field. Ivy league might be a bit of a who-you-know thing for undergrad admissions, but they don't exactly hand out PhDs just because your papa went there, at least if a friend's decade-long saga with Cornell is any indication.
Or maybe even if it was intended as a joke it simply wasn't funny...
Do you know of ANY hardware manufacturer who SELLS their drivers to people???
IBM.
Cisco.
Nortel/Avaya.
F5.
I could probably keep going but I think I've made my point that not all hardware companies provide drivers for free. Some of these companies, like Cisco in particular, will sell you drivers that effectively activate features of the devices under-license. Paying for the drivers activates features that are otherwise not enabled.
The non-free proponents had an easy foothold. It's called basic functionality. I waited close to a decade for an 802.11a module and software. I even offered to send equipment to the 802.11b developer whose modules were for devices from the same manufacturer as one that made the "a" device I wanted to use and theoretically would have been most similar, he was literally not interested.
You want it to all be free? How about getting cracking on those modules? I'll use the free ones if the exist and if they work at all. I'll even contribute some material support from time to time.