4 ms·

Thus, no doubt, spoiling it for everybody as it suddenly becomes illegal to fly a remote-controlled plane without a licence.

by hugh3 16y ago

tonycore 16y ago
Yes.. sadly this will end with regulation- more of it.
- hugh3 16y ago
  Well, with this kind of thing becoming more popular as it becomes more possible (thanks to improved batteries and cheap small video cameras) it's only a matter of time before it gets regulated. Even if everybody only used them with the best intentions, someday someone's gonna get seriously hurt by getting clobbered on the head by one of these things. Still, for now: awesome video!
  - DanielStraight 16y ago
    Isn't this "what if" thinking the whole problem with, for example, the TSA? Yes, someone will get hurt. Someone may even die. It will be terrible, but it will be an accident. We can't prevent all accidents, nor should we try.
- cma 16y ago
  Why is that sad? As these get more and more autonomous they will be capable of targeted assassination. The same hardware accelerated face-recognition chip in your $50 point-and-shoot camera will wind up making point-and-shoot a taboo phrase.
iwr 16y ago
If those things have enough range, you can just stay indoors, safe from police interference. It would be very difficult to trace unless the cops ran around in triangulation squads. Other ways to do it could be by wireless internet.
- hugh3 16y ago
  Or they just wait until it lands. Either they catch you picking it up or they confiscate it from you; either way the flight becomes unworthwhile.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - iwr 16y ago
    If the contraptions are cheap enough, or the footage valuable enough, there'd be no need to recover it.
- chopsueyar 16y ago
  Latency.
  - daten 16y ago
    There are already 802.11 drones with video and cell phones that can act as a wireless hot spot. Combine the two and I don't think latency would be bad enough to prevent you from flying it remotely. I would be more concerned with battery life or dangers of mechanical failure on something large enough to use liquid fuel. [1] http://ardrone.parrot.com/parrot-ar-drone/usa/ http://ardrone.parrot.com/parrot-ar-drone/usa/ [2] http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/13/exclusive-google-to-add-tethering-wifi-hotspot-to-android-2-2-froyo/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/13/exclusive-google-to-add-tet...
    - chopsueyar 16y ago
      LoS
MichaelApproved 16y ago
Shouldn't a license or some form of registration be required? What if it hits a building or car by mistake? There needs to be some way to trace it to the owner to pay for the damages.
- DanielStraight 16y ago
  I'm thinking the owner is probably the guy who runs up saying, "I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry." Will that always happen? No, of course not. Some people are jerks. Are most people jerks, though? No. The last thing we need is more laws, especially ones that enforce responsibilities most people will take on for themselves.
  - MichaelApproved 16y ago
    These planes can fly for miles as did this one in the video. The owner isn't going to be running up to anyone after a crash because he'll have to get in a car first and drive over. If your going to be flying something though the air that has a large range and can seriously hurt someone or damage property, it's not to much to ask that it be registered somewhere. Simple registration number so we know who the owner is. Edit: The remote can also lose contact and the owner wouldn't know where the plane crashed to cover property damages.
    - jrockway 16y ago
      By this logic, people should have registration numbers tattooed on their foreheads, so that if one commits a crime (or just looks at you wrong), we can immediately find it. Makes perfect sense, right?
      - mquander 16y ago
        No, that doesn't really make any sense, but having people register long-range aircraft makes sense to me.
- bigiain 16y ago

Thus, no doubt, spoiling it for everybody as it suddenly becomes illegal to fly a remote-controlled plane without a licence.

by hugh3 16y ago

Thus, no doubt, spoiling it for everybody as it suddenly becomes illegal to fly a remote-controlled plane without a licence.

tonycore 16y ago

Yes.. sadly this will end with regulation- more of it.

hugh3 16y ago
Well, with this kind of thing becoming more popular as it becomes more possible (thanks to improved batteries and cheap small video cameras) it's only a matter of time before it gets regulated. Even if everybody only used them with the best intentions, someday someone's gonna get seriously hurt by getting clobbered on the head by one of these things. Still, for now: awesome video!
- DanielStraight 16y ago
  Isn't this "what if" thinking the whole problem with, for example, the TSA? Yes, someone will get hurt. Someone may even die. It will be terrible, but it will be an accident. We can't prevent all accidents, nor should we try.
cma 16y ago
Why is that sad? As these get more and more autonomous they will be capable of targeted assassination. The same hardware accelerated face-recognition chip in your $50 point-and-shoot camera will wind up making point-and-shoot a taboo phrase.

iwr 16y ago

If those things have enough range, you can just stay indoors, safe from police interference. It would be very difficult to trace unless the cops ran around in triangulation squads. Other ways to do it could be by wireless internet.

hugh3 16y ago
Or they just wait until it lands. Either they catch you picking it up or they confiscate it from you; either way the flight becomes unworthwhile.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- iwr 16y ago
  If the contraptions are cheap enough, or the footage valuable enough, there'd be no need to recover it.
chopsueyar 16y ago
Latency.
- daten 16y ago
  There are already 802.11 drones with video and cell phones that can act as a wireless hot spot. Combine the two and I don't think latency would be bad enough to prevent you from flying it remotely. I would be more concerned with battery life or dangers of mechanical failure on something large enough to use liquid fuel. [1] http://ardrone.parrot.com/parrot-ar-drone/usa/ http://ardrone.parrot.com/parrot-ar-drone/usa/ [2] http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/13/exclusive-google-to-add-tethering-wifi-hotspot-to-android-2-2-froyo/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/13/exclusive-google-to-add-tet...
  - chopsueyar 16y ago
    LoS

MichaelApproved 16y ago

Shouldn't a license or some form of registration be required? What if it hits a building or car by mistake? There needs to be some way to trace it to the owner to pay for the damages.

DanielStraight 16y ago
I'm thinking the owner is probably the guy who runs up saying, "I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry." Will that always happen? No, of course not. Some people are jerks. Are most people jerks, though? No. The last thing we need is more laws, especially ones that enforce responsibilities most people will take on for themselves.
- MichaelApproved 16y ago
  These planes can fly for miles as did this one in the video. The owner isn't going to be running up to anyone after a crash because he'll have to get in a car first and drive over. If your going to be flying something though the air that has a large range and can seriously hurt someone or damage property, it's not to much to ask that it be registered somewhere. Simple registration number so we know who the owner is. Edit: The remote can also lose contact and the owner wouldn't know where the plane crashed to cover property damages.
  - jrockway 16y ago
    By this logic, people should have registration numbers tattooed on their foreheads, so that if one commits a crime (or just looks at you wrong), we can immediately find it. Makes perfect sense, right?
    - mquander 16y ago
      No, that doesn't really make any sense, but having people register long-range aircraft makes sense to me.
bigiain 16y ago