13 ms·

A Criminal Gang Used a Drone Swarm to Obstruct an FBI Hostage Raid

141 points by lnguyen 8y ago

atlasunshrugged 8y ago
I think this is going to get far worse before it gets better. These drones remind me of the use of burner phones - like most tech end up doing eventually it's hit a price point where we can easily pick up and discard new ones with little concern which means that it's going to be a necessity to have one of these for any criminal operation as others start to include them in theirs (arms races aren't just for countries, certainly happens in smaller more local settings). The article mentions a few options for how the authorities will limit the criminal applications but I wonder if it'll get more extreme than that (especially after we end up with a terrorist attack perpetrated by someone using a drone). It won't solve all negative use cases but I wonder if there's some way for drone manufacturers to create no fly zones automatically that will cause a drone to redirect if it enters one and allows law enforcement to create new temporary zones for situations like the one described in the article. edit for clarity
- edem 8y ago
  Even if you create no go zones, those drones will just get hacked or custom ones will be built.
  - ozim 8y ago
    With drones it is quite easy to spot one if it is in no fly zone so authorities can react or place some system that takes down rouge drones. With no gun zones it is different because you still can carry concealed gun.
    - jobigoud 8y ago
      You can build one for less than 200$ that is 10 to 15 cm in size, less than 250g, fly for 5 to 8 min, and has several kilometers of radio and video range. It's not easy to spot if it's in a no fly zone.
      - mcbits 8y ago
        It's pretty easy to detect and locate the radio emissions from the motors, transceiver, and video transmitter if it has one - as in, screaming in your ear through a bullhorn easy. It's probably also possible (not sure how easy) to identify the the specific RC controller that's paired with the offending drone, even if there are other people flying their drones safely in the same general area.
- jstanley 8y ago
  No fly zones will only keep good guys out. The same is true of any regulation-based solution. Anybody can build a drone at home that ignores no-fly zones and doesn't broadcast any serial numbers, and then operate it remotely, with very little chance of getting caught. I don't know what the answer is, other than to hope that most people continue to be mostly good. In case you haven't seen it, the short film "Slaughterbots" is worth a watch: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA
  - erric 8y ago
    I wonder if using a lower tech solution, birds of prey, would be a better option then regulation?
    - cm2187 8y ago
      Drones are cheaper to buy in volume than it is to train birds.
      - erric 8y ago
        Indeed! Here’s one example[0] So LE should get counter-drones. But then the “bad guys” will get anti-counter-drones. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/12/16767000/police-netherlands-eagles-rogue-drones https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/12/16767000/police-netherla...
        croon 8y ago
        > So LE should get counter-drones. But then the “bad guys” will get anti-counter-drones. This reminds me of the not well aged The Big Hit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw3G80bplTg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw3G80bplTg
        mmirate 8y ago
        Right, in military aviation that's just the dichotomy between bombers and fighters. Of course your enemy won't send unescorted bombers if they know you have fighters. That's why victory requires that your own fighters maintain air superiority.
Overtonwindow 8y ago
Related, some of you might enjoy the book “Kill Decision“ by Daniel Suarez, about this very topic.
- atlasunshrugged 8y ago
  Yes, read it just a while ago and it's a fantastic book (as are Daemon and Freedom, his first two novels)
aussieguy123 8y ago
If you think this is bad, just wait until criminals and terrorists get their hands on these: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HipTO_7mUOw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HipTO_7mUOw
- sdoering 8y ago
  Thanks a lot. Didn't know that one. Really interesting and executed in a great way.
- cjsawyer 8y ago
  Well, now I’m afraid. Club, bow, cannon, rifle, nuke, and now c4 face targeting done.
- megous 8y ago
  I'm waiting for a time when being a criminal or a terrorist is decided based purely on what you do, and not on whether some unidentifiable people pushed a button on some machine or made a circle on unsigned paper and thrown it into a box. Until then, this distinction ("until criminals and terrorists") doesn't really mean anything, when state actors regularly act indistinguishably from criminals and terrorists.
  - 0x445442 8y ago
    Bingo! In the US at least, it's the "bad actors" responsibility to keep up with the State in a technological arms race when the State continually pushes closer to "Precogs" as a means of law enforcement.
- zawerf 8y ago
  I wouldn't worry about the "AI" aspect and cheaply mass-produced aspect of that fictional short film. At least not for a couple more years given how terrible and expensive the existing consumer "follow me" drones are (most of which are not computer vision based). Especially at the size depicted, it can't possibly fly for more than a couple minutes if it also needs to process a video feed. In that case, a dumb human remote-controlled flying machine gun achievable by hobbyists is about just scary (2012): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU But mostly because of the machine gun. Similarly in the kamikaze drones case, just make sure no one can amass a large amount of explosives they can strap onto quadcopters.
netsharc 8y ago
Why do I smell propaganda (for more drone laws) when I read this? Imagine if it thr subject were encryption instead of drones. Police are able to shoo people away from crime/accident scenes, that should apply to devices too, and can't they solve it by having a device that shoots out a net? (Or does that only exist in movies?) US police can apply for federal military gear for cheap anyway (not that that's a good thing, police should deescalate, not escalate situations).
- mirimir 8y ago
  I'm suspicious about the phrase "FBI hostage rescue team" aka FBI HRT. Those are tactical units. So yes, this was a raid. But it didn't necessarily involve hostages.
- iopuy 8y ago
  The situation is bullshit the way it is presented in the article. A HRT would have been large news on the outskirts of Denver with plenty of local news coverage. The "gang" would have had plenty of air time. I'm not saying a situation did not occur, I'm saying not as how it was presented.
  - Bizarro 8y ago
    The whole story sounded fishy. That would have definitely made national news with a hostage situation and drones used by the hostage takers...yeah something is fishy.
  - mieseratte 8y ago
    From TFA: > hostage rescue team set up an elevated observation post > the head of the agency’s operational technology law unit told attendees of the AUVSI Xponential conference here. We don't know when this incident occurred nor do we know if this was a surveillance op or part of an actual raid. The article is possibly FUD, but this isn't outside of the realm of possibility. In my neck of the woods, drones have been known to drop contraband in prime locations at our state maximum-security prison[0]. Surveillance, and counter-surveillance is not a huge leap to make from there. Being able to disrupt a top-tier police unit for a few grand is money well spent. [0] - https://www.postandcourier.com/news/in-south-carolina-the-fight-against-prison-contraband-continues-on/article_7e42cb84-2ddc-11e8-8c38-17f5e6d53c00.html https://www.postandcourier.com/news/in-south-carolina-the-fi...
jMyles 8y ago
Is anyone asking the question: is drone obstruction of police raids a net good or net bad for society? Isn't that the real question here?
- loeg 8y ago
  In what way(s) do you see drone obstruction of police raids as a good for society? The bad seems pretty obvious, but I'm struggling to see how this is an open question ("net good or bad?").
  - mr_spothawk 8y ago
    see other comments re: Dakota Pipeline Protests
  - TangoTrotFox 8y ago
    While dodging this specific issue, there is a key philsophical issue in play. Should we desire a society where the police are 100% efficient at preventing unlawful activity? The knee jerk answer is obviously yes, yet it's certainly a knee jerk reaction. The most fundamental issue is that history has shown time and again that the corruption of the powers that be is not a question of if but a question of when. What happens when the powers that be become corrupted, but also perfectly efficient at carrying out their will? That is quite disconcerting and, for instance, is why the fact that society is increasingly turning into a surveillance state should be extremely unsettling. I'm far less concerned about a madman with a gun than I am about a madman with a national military and police force. Another issue is that much progress in the past has been the product of unlawful activity. How long would slavery have lasted if abolitionists were able to have been effectively snuffed out? How would it be if the "founding fathers" instead were rotely hung, drawn, and quartered -- a practice that persisted in the English empire all the way up until 1870? Would America have been a better or worse place if every person who ever once indulged in a controlled substance or drunk before age was prosecuted? Imagine if prohibition or other morality based laws, including for instance laws against homosexuality, could have been effectively enacted. What sort of path of puritanism would that have set us on? Of course I don't think anybody knows the answers to these questions, but I do think there is a strong argument that law enforcement does not have an inherent right to any means that would make their work more efficient. So do police have a right to obstruct all of society's freedom to operate drones for the sake of increased efficiency? I am not sure, but I do think any issue that proposes sacrificing freedom for security should be questioned.
polskibus 8y ago
What now? EMP grenades like in Cyberpunk RPG?
notemaker 8y ago
I wholeheartedly recommend this somewhat OT video about the future of drones and their potential harm: Slaughterbots https://youtu.be/9CO6M2HsoIA https://youtu.be/9CO6M2HsoIA
- fouc 8y ago
  It seems scary at first glance but it doesn't take into account the countermeasures that people would come up with.
  - musage 8y ago
    You know what happened when radio was invented? Fascism happened and played train. But computing and robotics? Even "just" the things that are already done, plus the things that are already on the horizon? Meh, someone will "make something" and everybody will sign up for it, and it'll be fine. And hey if nobody makes anything, or nobody signs up for it, that'll just mean there is no real need. To stop and reconsider anything would be silly. For wiser and smarter people, we are the material of horror stories. Look no further.
  - notemaker 8y ago
    True. But I'd still deem that to be a very scary world.
codezero 8y ago
Can anyone make the connection to the hostage situation in question? Did this really happen?
- mirimir 8y ago
  I doubt that there were hostages involved. An FBI "Hostage Rescue Team" aka HRT likely just raided some "gang". This was last winter. It could have been the Dakota Pipeline protests.
iopuy 8y ago
Now based on this article lawmakers can cite the dangers of drones. This is ammunition to fund and agenda. Don't bother with trying to piece together this dribble, it is propaganda at its finest. Look at the outlet. They have a vested interests in restricting drones access to encumbent powers.
Lunatic666 8y ago
I think a drone id is a good thing, but not to identify criminals. They’d reset the id or falsify it. It would be helpful to monitor drone airspace though, e.g. to see who’s using drones too close to restricted zones etc.
- Tepix 8y ago
  Yep. I don't see how legislation will stop smuggling of drugs with drones. It's illegal to start with.
thaumaturgy 8y ago
Here is a neat thing to do for the comments section here: open up your browser's console, and enter something like: for (let i of $$('.comment span.c00')) i.innerHTML = i.innerHTML.replace(/drone/ig, 'gun'); It's really a stunning effect, much more so than just staring at the comments and imagining swapping the words around. For the record, I don't think drones are exactly equivalent to firearms. But the parallels between the comments here and those of gun advocates is something that should make people stop and go, "hmm." > Why do I smell propaganda (for more gun laws) when I read this?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- mcbits 8y ago
  That was great. Some other funny words to try: toy, chatbot, drug, nuke, 3D printer, kite
- mmirate 8y ago
  Propaganda for gun laws that are even more restrictive than the U.S.'s current situation, is indeed bad. (And arguably worse than propaganda for drone laws, on account of the 2nd Amendment and the reasons we have it.) What's your point?
- ryandrake 8y ago
  Also, replace "criminal" with "protester" and read the article, to understand what this is really about.
codedokode 8y ago
Drones must be regulated because people are irresponsible. Sometimes I see photos taken from a drone hanging above the people. What if it falls down? Therefore, drones need identification. There must be a number on it and there must be a law forbidding to operate a drone without number.
- jrumbut 8y ago
  I like trying to preserve anonymity and a lack of bureaucracy where possible but really registering a flying machine is not unduly onerous, assuming the cost (if any) and process is kept proportional to the size/value/potential for havoc of the device.
- _0ffh 8y ago
  "What if it falls down?" In Germany drones from 250g up must have a fireproof plaque with name and address of the owner. If it falls down, you'll be able to read it. No need for ID broadcasting. Or even IDs.
  - djrogers 8y ago
    This doesn’t at all address criminal behavior or use of drones though - if one is willing to commit a crime with a drone, surely one would be willing to extend that crime by removing the nameplate?
    - _0ffh 8y ago
      If one is willing to commit a crime with a drone, surely one would be willing to extend that crime by disabling or falsifying the ID broadcast?
    - codedokode 8y ago
      But this could help against reckless and irresponsible people.
- syshum 8y ago
  >Drones must be regulated because people are irresponsible So does this apply to everything a person can be "irresponsible" with? I can be "irresponsible" with my hammer do I need hammer regulation? How far do you want to go into Authoritarianism?
AliAdams 8y ago
We are trending towards a world where individuals are becoming more omniscient and more omnipotent. Where any motivated US citizen can purchase a drone, look up how to build a bomb or plant a GPS tracker. Regulation to prevent access to these capabilities feels like throwing rocks into a river; it may slow some things down, but it seems an inevitability that the capabilities of technologically augmented citizens will continue to grow - we as a society need to work out how to adapt to deal with this future in a meaningful way, avoiding knee-jerk policies like drone registration that inconvenience the masses and serve as no real barrier to the malicious.
- gonzo41 8y ago
  Make a better society. There are a lot of crime of opportunity but just as much criminality from circumstance. These are smart people doing very bad things, they need to be identified and put to constructive and rewarding work.
  - intended 8y ago
    Societal change is at a different scale and pace as other changes. Not saying the idea isn't correct - just that theres a lot left to figure out in the details. People cant get to gym or eat healthy even if it has massive differences to their life style.
  - JulianMorrison 8y ago
    Universal Basic Income and decriminalization of drugs and single payer universal healthcare would go a long way towards making the whole criminality arms race dry up and disappear. Desperation, as a constant social background hum, would largely stop.
    - stef25 8y ago
      Poverty, social misery and drug addiction no doubt leads to lots of petty crime but hostage takings and illegal immigration is not going to get solved with UBI. Decriminalisation of drugs (Portugal) would not negate the need of going after importers and large scale dealers.
squarefoot 8y ago
Even 20 years ago almost anyone could load model RC airplanes with a grenade then direct them beyond an embassy fence or to a human target during a speech. Don't assume only modern stuff can be used as a weapon and don't blame technology or attempt to overregulate it when it happens. (Just to be clear: I'm strongly in favor of gun regulation; there's a huge difference between something whose primary use it to harm people from tools and toys).
basicplus2 8y ago
"The gangs will monitor port authority workers. If the workers get close to a shipping container that houses illegal substances or contraband, the gang will call in a fire, theft, or some other false alarm to draw off security forces." This presents the Perfect opportunity to zero in on dodgy containers of contraband.. walk around coming from various directions till the drones come and they will show the area to search
stef25 8y ago
Birds of prey have been trained to hunt and take down drones and they do it very well. Seems like an elegant solution to this problem.
- misnome 8y ago
  Without injury? What about when it becomes common and they put sharper blades on?
  - stef25 8y ago
    Plenty of Youtube videos suggest no injury. Other drones could be employed to drop mesh nets on the offending drones to entangle the rotors.
downer68 8y ago
This is a joke. Consumer electronics radio communication systems may be trivially jammed, with little to no effort. It's simply a matter of political protocol (aka: warrants) for when and where such things must happen. The article states that the services used to relay data links were common wi-fi and ordinary cellular telephone service. The first thing that usually happens in a war zone is HAM radio service experiences disruption. [0] Cell phone back doors via CALEA [1] are already used to disrupt would-be suicide bombers around the world, and yes even in the United States. [2] If push comes to shove, we'll all lose wi-fi and cell phones in an area of effect, around any hostile activity, whenever shit gets real. [0] http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-radio14jan14-story.html http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-radio14jan14-story.html [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_Law_Enforcement_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_... [2] http://codegreenprep.com/2013/04/boston-bombing-shows-you-cant-rely-on-cell-phones-in-an-emergency/ http://codegreenprep.com/2013/04/boston-bombing-shows-you-ca...
- bufferoverflow 8y ago
  How would you "trivially" block LED/light sensor communication? It's not insanely hard to create a drone swarm with zero radio.
  - jasonjayr 8y ago
    A brighter light to overwhelm the carrier signal
    - downer68 8y ago
      "Lasers." (although, line of sight, point-to-point communication is admittedly less trivial to interfere with) The point being that, if "criminal gangs" are up to no good, but they're parting their equipment with off-the-shelf Best Buy and Radio Shack products, they probably aren't programming DSP interfaces, aren't encoding and decoding raw bit streams, aren't masking binary objects with base64 blobs, aren't rolling their own encryption. Or, if they are rolling their own encryption, they're using Excel spreadsheets to do it. [0] [0] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/22/ba_jihadist_trial_sentencing/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/22/ba_jihadist_trial_s...
danesparza 8y ago
Why couldn't they have just waited the 20-30 minutes it would have taken for the drones to lose power (instead of panicking)?
- ceejayoz 8y ago
  Drone racers already carry a bunch of spare batteries to keep flying. I suspect a gang taking on the FBI would be capable of the same. With multiple drones, spare batteries, and some quick chargers, waiting it out might take a while.
contourtrails 8y ago
It's funny, some people are so opposed to increasing capabilities of law enforcement but they conveniently ignore that the capabilities of criminals are increasing too. Law enforcement should be as many steps ahead of criminals as possible, provided their capabilities do not infringe on our rights as citizens.
- jmulho 8y ago
  > "provided their capabilities do not infringe on our rights as citizens" For example blowing people up with a robot bomb without giving them a trial. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police_officers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police...
  - contourtrails 8y ago
    No, that particular case was a completely justified use of lethal force. Police we're being directly fired upon. Should officers not fire back when they are fired upon?
sandworm101 8y ago
The logistics of keeping a drone airborne for an extended period make skeptical of many of the claims in this article. A drone monitoring people who come in and out of a police station would be a monumental task. Take the flight time of a drone, one that is both small enough to not be noticed and yet powerful enough to spot people's faces. These things have flight time measured in minutes. It would take a team of people and a fleet of a dozen drones. This is batman-v-joker stuff. Same too with the drones used at the boarder. A drone has a limited useful range, perhaps a kilometer at most. So people will still need to hike into the area. And the drones need recharge/refuel. A man standing on a mountain with a telescope can continuously observe a greater area than a hundred drones. I don't see the efficiency. Perhaps the bad guys have experimented and these experiments have been spotted, but I cannot believe that these are common practices.
nkrisc 8y ago
Isn't this a problem shotguns with bird shot could solve?
- mmirate 8y ago
  Unfortunately, it is quite likely that stochastic motion would be an effective defense against any simple ballistic weaponry. Airburst munitions (i.e. flak) would be a more robust solution.
Esperaux 8y ago
I feel like using drones in crimes would be more impractical and costly than the impression this article tries to present.

141 points by lnguyen 8y ago

I think this is going to get far worse before it gets better. These drones remind me of the use of burner phones - like most tech end up doing eventually it's hit a price point where we can easily pick up and discard new ones with little concern which means that it's going to be a necessity to have one of these for any criminal operation as others start to include them in theirs (arms races aren't just for countries, certainly happens in smaller more local settings). The article mentions a few options for how the authorities will limit the criminal applications but I wonder if it'll get more extreme than that (especially after we end up with a terrorist attack perpetrated by someone using a drone). It won't solve all negative use cases but I wonder if there's some way for drone manufacturers to create no fly zones automatically that will cause a drone to redirect if it enters one and allows law enforcement to create new temporary zones for situations like the one described in the article. edit for clarity

edem 8y ago
Even if you create no go zones, those drones will just get hacked or custom ones will be built.
- ozim 8y ago
  With drones it is quite easy to spot one if it is in no fly zone so authorities can react or place some system that takes down rouge drones. With no gun zones it is different because you still can carry concealed gun.
  - jobigoud 8y ago
    You can build one for less than 200$ that is 10 to 15 cm in size, less than 250g, fly for 5 to 8 min, and has several kilometers of radio and video range. It's not easy to spot if it's in a no fly zone.
    - mcbits 8y ago
      It's pretty easy to detect and locate the radio emissions from the motors, transceiver, and video transmitter if it has one - as in, screaming in your ear through a bullhorn easy. It's probably also possible (not sure how easy) to identify the the specific RC controller that's paired with the offending drone, even if there are other people flying their drones safely in the same general area.
jstanley 8y ago
No fly zones will only keep good guys out. The same is true of any regulation-based solution. Anybody can build a drone at home that ignores no-fly zones and doesn't broadcast any serial numbers, and then operate it remotely, with very little chance of getting caught. I don't know what the answer is, other than to hope that most people continue to be mostly good. In case you haven't seen it, the short film "Slaughterbots" is worth a watch: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA
- erric 8y ago
  I wonder if using a lower tech solution, birds of prey, would be a better option then regulation?
  - cm2187 8y ago
    Drones are cheaper to buy in volume than it is to train birds.
    - erric 8y ago
      Indeed! Here’s one example[0] So LE should get counter-drones. But then the “bad guys” will get anti-counter-drones. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/12/16767000/police-netherlands-eagles-rogue-drones https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/12/16767000/police-netherla...
      - croon 8y ago
        > So LE should get counter-drones. But then the “bad guys” will get anti-counter-drones. This reminds me of the not well aged The Big Hit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw3G80bplTg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw3G80bplTg
      - mmirate 8y ago
        Right, in military aviation that's just the dichotomy between bombers and fighters. Of course your enemy won't send unescorted bombers if they know you have fighters. That's why victory requires that your own fighters maintain air superiority.

Overtonwindow 8y ago

Related, some of you might enjoy the book “Kill Decision“ by Daniel Suarez, about this very topic.

atlasunshrugged 8y ago
Yes, read it just a while ago and it's a fantastic book (as are Daemon and Freedom, his first two novels)

aussieguy123 8y ago

If you think this is bad, just wait until criminals and terrorists get their hands on these: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HipTO_7mUOw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HipTO_7mUOw

sdoering 8y ago
Thanks a lot. Didn't know that one. Really interesting and executed in a great way.
cjsawyer 8y ago
Well, now I’m afraid. Club, bow, cannon, rifle, nuke, and now c4 face targeting done.
megous 8y ago
I'm waiting for a time when being a criminal or a terrorist is decided based purely on what you do, and not on whether some unidentifiable people pushed a button on some machine or made a circle on unsigned paper and thrown it into a box. Until then, this distinction ("until criminals and terrorists") doesn't really mean anything, when state actors regularly act indistinguishably from criminals and terrorists.
- 0x445442 8y ago
  Bingo! In the US at least, it's the "bad actors" responsibility to keep up with the State in a technological arms race when the State continually pushes closer to "Precogs" as a means of law enforcement.
zawerf 8y ago
I wouldn't worry about the "AI" aspect and cheaply mass-produced aspect of that fictional short film. At least not for a couple more years given how terrible and expensive the existing consumer "follow me" drones are (most of which are not computer vision based). Especially at the size depicted, it can't possibly fly for more than a couple minutes if it also needs to process a video feed. In that case, a dumb human remote-controlled flying machine gun achievable by hobbyists is about just scary (2012): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU But mostly because of the machine gun. Similarly in the kamikaze drones case, just make sure no one can amass a large amount of explosives they can strap onto quadcopters.

netsharc 8y ago

Why do I smell propaganda (for more drone laws) when I read this? Imagine if it thr subject were encryption instead of drones. Police are able to shoo people away from crime/accident scenes, that should apply to devices too, and can't they solve it by having a device that shoots out a net? (Or does that only exist in movies?) US police can apply for federal military gear for cheap anyway (not that that's a good thing, police should deescalate, not escalate situations).

mirimir 8y ago
I'm suspicious about the phrase "FBI hostage rescue team" aka FBI HRT. Those are tactical units. So yes, this was a raid. But it didn't necessarily involve hostages.
iopuy 8y ago
The situation is bullshit the way it is presented in the article. A HRT would have been large news on the outskirts of Denver with plenty of local news coverage. The "gang" would have had plenty of air time. I'm not saying a situation did not occur, I'm saying not as how it was presented.
- Bizarro 8y ago
  The whole story sounded fishy. That would have definitely made national news with a hostage situation and drones used by the hostage takers...yeah something is fishy.
- mieseratte 8y ago
  From TFA: > hostage rescue team set up an elevated observation post > the head of the agency’s operational technology law unit told attendees of the AUVSI Xponential conference here. We don't know when this incident occurred nor do we know if this was a surveillance op or part of an actual raid. The article is possibly FUD, but this isn't outside of the realm of possibility. In my neck of the woods, drones have been known to drop contraband in prime locations at our state maximum-security prison[0]. Surveillance, and counter-surveillance is not a huge leap to make from there. Being able to disrupt a top-tier police unit for a few grand is money well spent. [0] - https://www.postandcourier.com/news/in-south-carolina-the-fight-against-prison-contraband-continues-on/article_7e42cb84-2ddc-11e8-8c38-17f5e6d53c00.html https://www.postandcourier.com/news/in-south-carolina-the-fi...

jMyles 8y ago

Is anyone asking the question: is drone obstruction of police raids a net good or net bad for society? Isn't that the real question here?

loeg 8y ago
In what way(s) do you see drone obstruction of police raids as a good for society? The bad seems pretty obvious, but I'm struggling to see how this is an open question ("net good or bad?").
- mr_spothawk 8y ago
  see other comments re: Dakota Pipeline Protests
- TangoTrotFox 8y ago
  While dodging this specific issue, there is a key philsophical issue in play. Should we desire a society where the police are 100% efficient at preventing unlawful activity? The knee jerk answer is obviously yes, yet it's certainly a knee jerk reaction. The most fundamental issue is that history has shown time and again that the corruption of the powers that be is not a question of if but a question of when. What happens when the powers that be become corrupted, but also perfectly efficient at carrying out their will? That is quite disconcerting and, for instance, is why the fact that society is increasingly turning into a surveillance state should be extremely unsettling. I'm far less concerned about a madman with a gun than I am about a madman with a national military and police force. Another issue is that much progress in the past has been the product of unlawful activity. How long would slavery have lasted if abolitionists were able to have been effectively snuffed out? How would it be if the "founding fathers" instead were rotely hung, drawn, and quartered -- a practice that persisted in the English empire all the way up until 1870? Would America have been a better or worse place if every person who ever once indulged in a controlled substance or drunk before age was prosecuted? Imagine if prohibition or other morality based laws, including for instance laws against homosexuality, could have been effectively enacted. What sort of path of puritanism would that have set us on? Of course I don't think anybody knows the answers to these questions, but I do think there is a strong argument that law enforcement does not have an inherent right to any means that would make their work more efficient. So do police have a right to obstruct all of society's freedom to operate drones for the sake of increased efficiency? I am not sure, but I do think any issue that proposes sacrificing freedom for security should be questioned.

polskibus 8y ago

What now? EMP grenades like in Cyberpunk RPG?

notemaker 8y ago

I wholeheartedly recommend this somewhat OT video about the future of drones and their potential harm: Slaughterbots https://youtu.be/9CO6M2HsoIA https://youtu.be/9CO6M2HsoIA

fouc 8y ago
It seems scary at first glance but it doesn't take into account the countermeasures that people would come up with.
- musage 8y ago
  You know what happened when radio was invented? Fascism happened and played train. But computing and robotics? Even "just" the things that are already done, plus the things that are already on the horizon? Meh, someone will "make something" and everybody will sign up for it, and it'll be fine. And hey if nobody makes anything, or nobody signs up for it, that'll just mean there is no real need. To stop and reconsider anything would be silly. For wiser and smarter people, we are the material of horror stories. Look no further.
- notemaker 8y ago
  True. But I'd still deem that to be a very scary world.

codezero 8y ago

Can anyone make the connection to the hostage situation in question? Did this really happen?

mirimir 8y ago
I doubt that there were hostages involved. An FBI "Hostage Rescue Team" aka HRT likely just raided some "gang". This was last winter. It could have been the Dakota Pipeline protests.

iopuy 8y ago

Now based on this article lawmakers can cite the dangers of drones. This is ammunition to fund and agenda. Don't bother with trying to piece together this dribble, it is propaganda at its finest. Look at the outlet. They have a vested interests in restricting drones access to encumbent powers.

Lunatic666 8y ago

I think a drone id is a good thing, but not to identify criminals. They’d reset the id or falsify it. It would be helpful to monitor drone airspace though, e.g. to see who’s using drones too close to restricted zones etc.

Tepix 8y ago
Yep. I don't see how legislation will stop smuggling of drugs with drones. It's illegal to start with.

thaumaturgy 8y ago

Here is a neat thing to do for the comments section here: open up your browser's console, and enter something like: for (let i of $$('.comment span.c00')) i.innerHTML = i.innerHTML.replace(/drone/ig, 'gun'); It's really a stunning effect, much more so than just staring at the comments and imagining swapping the words around. For the record, I don't think drones are exactly equivalent to firearms. But the parallels between the comments here and those of gun advocates is something that should make people stop and go, "hmm." > Why do I smell propaganda (for more gun laws) when I read this?

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
mcbits 8y ago
That was great. Some other funny words to try: toy, chatbot, drug, nuke, 3D printer, kite
mmirate 8y ago
Propaganda for gun laws that are even more restrictive than the U.S.'s current situation, is indeed bad. (And arguably worse than propaganda for drone laws, on account of the 2nd Amendment and the reasons we have it.) What's your point?
ryandrake 8y ago
Also, replace "criminal" with "protester" and read the article, to understand what this is really about.

codedokode 8y ago

Drones must be regulated because people are irresponsible. Sometimes I see photos taken from a drone hanging above the people. What if it falls down? Therefore, drones need identification. There must be a number on it and there must be a law forbidding to operate a drone without number.

jrumbut 8y ago
I like trying to preserve anonymity and a lack of bureaucracy where possible but really registering a flying machine is not unduly onerous, assuming the cost (if any) and process is kept proportional to the size/value/potential for havoc of the device.
_0ffh 8y ago
"What if it falls down?" In Germany drones from 250g up must have a fireproof plaque with name and address of the owner. If it falls down, you'll be able to read it. No need for ID broadcasting. Or even IDs.
- djrogers 8y ago
  This doesn’t at all address criminal behavior or use of drones though - if one is willing to commit a crime with a drone, surely one would be willing to extend that crime by removing the nameplate?
  - _0ffh 8y ago
    If one is willing to commit a crime with a drone, surely one would be willing to extend that crime by disabling or falsifying the ID broadcast?
  - codedokode 8y ago
    But this could help against reckless and irresponsible people.
syshum 8y ago
>Drones must be regulated because people are irresponsible So does this apply to everything a person can be "irresponsible" with? I can be "irresponsible" with my hammer do I need hammer regulation? How far do you want to go into Authoritarianism?

AliAdams 8y ago

We are trending towards a world where individuals are becoming more omniscient and more omnipotent. Where any motivated US citizen can purchase a drone, look up how to build a bomb or plant a GPS tracker. Regulation to prevent access to these capabilities feels like throwing rocks into a river; it may slow some things down, but it seems an inevitability that the capabilities of technologically augmented citizens will continue to grow - we as a society need to work out how to adapt to deal with this future in a meaningful way, avoiding knee-jerk policies like drone registration that inconvenience the masses and serve as no real barrier to the malicious.

gonzo41 8y ago
Make a better society. There are a lot of crime of opportunity but just as much criminality from circumstance. These are smart people doing very bad things, they need to be identified and put to constructive and rewarding work.
- intended 8y ago
  Societal change is at a different scale and pace as other changes. Not saying the idea isn't correct - just that theres a lot left to figure out in the details. People cant get to gym or eat healthy even if it has massive differences to their life style.
- JulianMorrison 8y ago
  Universal Basic Income and decriminalization of drugs and single payer universal healthcare would go a long way towards making the whole criminality arms race dry up and disappear. Desperation, as a constant social background hum, would largely stop.
  - stef25 8y ago
    Poverty, social misery and drug addiction no doubt leads to lots of petty crime but hostage takings and illegal immigration is not going to get solved with UBI. Decriminalisation of drugs (Portugal) would not negate the need of going after importers and large scale dealers.

squarefoot 8y ago

Even 20 years ago almost anyone could load model RC airplanes with a grenade then direct them beyond an embassy fence or to a human target during a speech. Don't assume only modern stuff can be used as a weapon and don't blame technology or attempt to overregulate it when it happens. (Just to be clear: I'm strongly in favor of gun regulation; there's a huge difference between something whose primary use it to harm people from tools and toys).

basicplus2 8y ago

"The gangs will monitor port authority workers. If the workers get close to a shipping container that houses illegal substances or contraband, the gang will call in a fire, theft, or some other false alarm to draw off security forces." This presents the Perfect opportunity to zero in on dodgy containers of contraband.. walk around coming from various directions till the drones come and they will show the area to search

stef25 8y ago

Birds of prey have been trained to hunt and take down drones and they do it very well. Seems like an elegant solution to this problem.

misnome 8y ago
Without injury? What about when it becomes common and they put sharper blades on?
- stef25 8y ago
  Plenty of Youtube videos suggest no injury. Other drones could be employed to drop mesh nets on the offending drones to entangle the rotors.

downer68 8y ago

This is a joke. Consumer electronics radio communication systems may be trivially jammed, with little to no effort. It's simply a matter of political protocol (aka: warrants) for when and where such things must happen. The article states that the services used to relay data links were common wi-fi and ordinary cellular telephone service. The first thing that usually happens in a war zone is HAM radio service experiences disruption. [0] Cell phone back doors via CALEA [1] are already used to disrupt would-be suicide bombers around the world, and yes even in the United States. [2] If push comes to shove, we'll all lose wi-fi and cell phones in an area of effect, around any hostile activity, whenever shit gets real. [0] http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-radio14jan14-story.html http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-radio14jan14-story.html [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_Law_Enforcement_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_... [2] http://codegreenprep.com/2013/04/boston-bombing-shows-you-cant-rely-on-cell-phones-in-an-emergency/ http://codegreenprep.com/2013/04/boston-bombing-shows-you-ca...

bufferoverflow 8y ago
How would you "trivially" block LED/light sensor communication? It's not insanely hard to create a drone swarm with zero radio.
- jasonjayr 8y ago
  A brighter light to overwhelm the carrier signal
  - downer68 8y ago
    "Lasers." (although, line of sight, point-to-point communication is admittedly less trivial to interfere with) The point being that, if "criminal gangs" are up to no good, but they're parting their equipment with off-the-shelf Best Buy and Radio Shack products, they probably aren't programming DSP interfaces, aren't encoding and decoding raw bit streams, aren't masking binary objects with base64 blobs, aren't rolling their own encryption. Or, if they are rolling their own encryption, they're using Excel spreadsheets to do it. [0] [0] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/22/ba_jihadist_trial_sentencing/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/22/ba_jihadist_trial_s...

danesparza 8y ago

Why couldn't they have just waited the 20-30 minutes it would have taken for the drones to lose power (instead of panicking)?

ceejayoz 8y ago
Drone racers already carry a bunch of spare batteries to keep flying. I suspect a gang taking on the FBI would be capable of the same. With multiple drones, spare batteries, and some quick chargers, waiting it out might take a while.

contourtrails 8y ago

It's funny, some people are so opposed to increasing capabilities of law enforcement but they conveniently ignore that the capabilities of criminals are increasing too. Law enforcement should be as many steps ahead of criminals as possible, provided their capabilities do not infringe on our rights as citizens.

jmulho 8y ago
> "provided their capabilities do not infringe on our rights as citizens" For example blowing people up with a robot bomb without giving them a trial. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police_officers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police...
- contourtrails 8y ago
  No, that particular case was a completely justified use of lethal force. Police we're being directly fired upon. Should officers not fire back when they are fired upon?

sandworm101 8y ago

The logistics of keeping a drone airborne for an extended period make skeptical of many of the claims in this article. A drone monitoring people who come in and out of a police station would be a monumental task. Take the flight time of a drone, one that is both small enough to not be noticed and yet powerful enough to spot people's faces. These things have flight time measured in minutes. It would take a team of people and a fleet of a dozen drones. This is batman-v-joker stuff. Same too with the drones used at the boarder. A drone has a limited useful range, perhaps a kilometer at most. So people will still need to hike into the area. And the drones need recharge/refuel. A man standing on a mountain with a telescope can continuously observe a greater area than a hundred drones. I don't see the efficiency. Perhaps the bad guys have experimented and these experiments have been spotted, but I cannot believe that these are common practices.

nkrisc 8y ago

Isn't this a problem shotguns with bird shot could solve?

mmirate 8y ago
Unfortunately, it is quite likely that stochastic motion would be an effective defense against any simple ballistic weaponry. Airburst munitions (i.e. flak) would be a more robust solution.

Esperaux 8y ago

I feel like using drones in crimes would be more impractical and costly than the impression this article tries to present.