4 ms·
The problem is that virtually all those things could harm, interfere with, or annoy human activity. In the context of how to respond and if possible disabled a
by iamdave 8y ago
The problem is that virtually all those things could harm, interfere with, or annoy human activity.
In the context of how to respond and if possible disabled a weaponized remote controlled aircraft, I think being dead or seriously wounded also interferes with human activity. These proposals aren't-I didn't get the impression at least-meant to be implemented and operated persistently, but applied into purpose-built apparatuses to disrupt a hostile remote controlled aircraft.
That's a context I'm willing to trade having my phone work for a moment if there's a DJI Phantom dropping bombs over Boston (I beg humor for the hip-hop hyperbole) being taken out of commission before someone gets hurt.
- ProblemFactory 8y agoThe problem I see is that jamming GPS / wifi / mobile frequencies once you see a suspicious drone is too late. When the drone is already in view, it can find its target by inertial or camera navigation alone. But jamming 1km around every possible target, every day as a precaution is going to be too disruptive. It may actually increase risk to life - by jamming 911 calls for any ordinary accident.