7 ms·

> Would there be an audible hum in the video it records from the 4x propellers? And for those who are at the beach just trying to enjoy a little time away from

> Would there be an audible hum in the video it records from the 4x propellers? And for those who are at the beach just trying to enjoy a little time away from the city. The folks at the beach near me are already fed up with ubiquitous Bluetooth speakers.

wyager 4y ago
Destruction of light/sound pollution sources in places otherwise free of such pollution is totally morally justified IMO. I was in Vegas a few weeks ago at a pool club. The bouncer was checking everyone's bags; not for guns, drugs, or alcohol, but for bluetooth speakers.
- BrandonWatson 4y ago
  This will be a very underappreciated observation.
- ryan_j_naughton 4y ago
  > Destruction of light/sound pollution sources in places otherwise free of such pollution is totally morally justified IMO. What do you mean by "destruction"? If you mean actually breaking someone's speaker, then you're wrong and fundamentally don't understand externalities. If you read the original Pigouvian and Coasian theory behind externalities, you'll realize that inherent to the nature of an externality is each side, by getting their way, is externalizing on the other. If you mandate silence, you're forcing that silence on others just as much as them playing music is forcing that sound on you. It's morally equivalent. You just have a belief that the absence of sound is the preferred state but that's not inherent. If birds are making tons of concurrent bird songs, that might sound like a cacophony to you, but you have no right to just go and destroy the birds. You are right and where I sympathize with you is that those with speakers basically thrust their noise on others with no system to push back and find a socially optimal equilibrium. And that is unfair. But what we could/should do is either: (A) create beach decibel maximums such that a person's music cannot be heard beyond X feet from them. That way they would have to find a place where they aren't externalizing on others. I always try to do this when I go to the beach anyway. (B) create beach areas where noise is allowed and areas where it isn't. But this shouldn't be limited to just music. Boisterous people can disrupt a serene beach environment too. Both of these solutions attempt to create win-win solutions with some compromise, which is the whole point of how an externality is internalized. Just blanket letting one side win or the other side win is not solving the problem.
  - genidoi 4y ago
    I don't see how there are 'sides' to this. Blasting a BT speaker with your music, which the majority of people aren't likely to enjoy because of the huge variety of peoples taste in music, is a uniquely selfish thing to do. I don't know about you, but blasting my Spotify likes on a BT speaker in a crowded, and particularly an enclosed environment, would not be an enjoyable experience. I can imagine it's only enjoyable if one is sufficiently self absorbed enough to think that their music is universally enjoyed by everyone.
    - throitallaway 4y ago
      Go to any nature area with hiking trails near decent population centers and you're likely to encounter this. If you want to "enjoy" music while in nature, wear headphones... I'd rather hear birds, the wind hitting leaves, approaching wildlife, etc. I don't want to hear your shitty music from 40 feet away.
    - jyrkesh 4y ago
      Yeah, because you defined a line where the vast majority of people would agree. But you can slide the line over to a point where people would be more split on the issue. E.g. say you're alone on a public beach playing your music, and one other person walks up to also enjoy the beach and who doesn't want to hear your music. Should you turn off the music? Is there a db level that's acceptable? Should the other person be required to find a quieter spot further down the coast? Or should you have to relocate to an empty spot?
      - ericd 4y ago
        Use headphones.
        ryan_j_naughton 4y ago
        What about when it is a small group playing very low music such that it is quickly drowned out by the sound of the waves and the birds after 10 feet of distance. Headphones are actually impede their enjoyment of the situation there because (a) they cannot easily talk to one another with headphones in (b) they cannot enjoy the mixing sounds of nature and music. In many cases, folk music or classical music at low volume mixed with nature can be very enjoyable for people. The problem here is you see no value to their enjoyment of these things and thus weight their enjoyment of such experience at zero while their interruption of your situation as an invasion. But if you force them to stop listening to music, you too are disrupting or invading their lives. That's the two-sided nature of any negative externality and attempts to internalize it. We all need to view this from the perspective of social costs and social benefits (i.e. a utilitarian perspective across all people's happiness). The result is almost always a compromise between the two extremes.
recuter 4y ago
I am so tempted to start a hardware company that makes auto aiming bbguns, slingshots and one more thing... predator drones (in-app purchase doom metal and eagle noises).
- 1024core 4y ago
  It's against the law.
  - leaflets2 4y ago
    In the US?
    - 1024core 4y ago
      Yes.
  - recuter 4y ago
    I think if people are allowed their buzzing flying camera doodads everywhere my nose diving metal eagle raining sudden drone death from above is in good fun. Now I am the law. Besides the killer bird will obviously be powered by an AI, can't blame me for nothing.
    - google234123 4y ago
      I would be happy to call the police on you in this hypothetical situation. It would be a pretty open-and-shut case :)
badwolf 4y ago
5-8 flights up to ~30 seconds each. I think that's pretty acceptable, vs a constant buzzing
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- TowerTall 4y ago
  I live on a beach in Thailand on a small tropical island and it is absolutely frown upon if someone fly with drones. It is not just the beach where I live but on all beaches island-wide where there is a high chance for that you will be asked to put your drone away. Nobody wants a camera to record their beach trip. Maybe snaps drone is more acceptable as it seem to primarily trying to be a flying selfie stick that records you and not the entire beach area, but it still emit a buzzing that will annoy everybody. Imagine if this product category takes off and having 10 or 20 of these on a beach becomes norm. Well, there goes your nice holiday. Enjoy your trip.
germinalphrase 4y ago
Cyclists as well. Someone should popularize an ultrasonic directional Bluetooth speaker for these use cases that won’t destroy the peace of public spaces.
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  And what if we could mount these directional speakers directly on someone’s head! Then we could reduce the volume a lot so it’s even quieter to neighbors. Maybe use some sort of physical bell or cup shape to direct it right into someone’s ears without ultrasonics (for cost reasons). Then we might save enough that we can use 2x speakers to get L/R audio streams.
  - germinalphrase 4y ago
    To address your point rather than your sarcasm: headphones are unsafe while cycling because they block environmental sounds (though it’s true that music from a speaker can impact attentional blindness. There is also the shared experience of listening to music with another person. The ability to create a “music bubble” around you without disturbing others satisfies both parties. Ultrasonic speakers aren’t even exotic tech. I first encountered one in a museum at least ten or fifteen years ago.
    - InGoodFaith 4y ago
      I'm not the person you replied to but just dropping this here for others interested: There are some 'open-back' and 'open-ear' headphones that let you hear your environment passively. Others that have more active environment passthrough such as Ambient Sound from Samsung, also exist. This might be a useful gift for a cyclist or jogger that needs situational awareness.
      - jjkaczor 4y ago
        Bone conduction? (Am fairly certain they aren't great if you are going for audiophile level reproduction - but from a safety perspective, they let you hear your environment - note, I have personally never tried them)
megablast 4y ago
Somehow the car park and road alongside the beach arent a problem Though??
- kennywinker 4y ago
  They are a problem. Just one we’ve all learned to tolerate. Do you know how much nicer a beach without car noise is compared with one off a highway? Do we want to just have to accept that our public spaces are full of car noise and drone noise in 10 years - or do we want to hold the line and maybe try to re-route cars wherever possible?

wyager 4y ago

Destruction of light/sound pollution sources in places otherwise free of such pollution is totally morally justified IMO. I was in Vegas a few weeks ago at a pool club. The bouncer was checking everyone's bags; not for guns, drugs, or alcohol, but for bluetooth speakers.

BrandonWatson 4y ago
This will be a very underappreciated observation.
ryan_j_naughton 4y ago
> Destruction of light/sound pollution sources in places otherwise free of such pollution is totally morally justified IMO. What do you mean by "destruction"? If you mean actually breaking someone's speaker, then you're wrong and fundamentally don't understand externalities. If you read the original Pigouvian and Coasian theory behind externalities, you'll realize that inherent to the nature of an externality is each side, by getting their way, is externalizing on the other. If you mandate silence, you're forcing that silence on others just as much as them playing music is forcing that sound on you. It's morally equivalent. You just have a belief that the absence of sound is the preferred state but that's not inherent. If birds are making tons of concurrent bird songs, that might sound like a cacophony to you, but you have no right to just go and destroy the birds. You are right and where I sympathize with you is that those with speakers basically thrust their noise on others with no system to push back and find a socially optimal equilibrium. And that is unfair. But what we could/should do is either: (A) create beach decibel maximums such that a person's music cannot be heard beyond X feet from them. That way they would have to find a place where they aren't externalizing on others. I always try to do this when I go to the beach anyway. (B) create beach areas where noise is allowed and areas where it isn't. But this shouldn't be limited to just music. Boisterous people can disrupt a serene beach environment too. Both of these solutions attempt to create win-win solutions with some compromise, which is the whole point of how an externality is internalized. Just blanket letting one side win or the other side win is not solving the problem.
- genidoi 4y ago
  I don't see how there are 'sides' to this. Blasting a BT speaker with your music, which the majority of people aren't likely to enjoy because of the huge variety of peoples taste in music, is a uniquely selfish thing to do. I don't know about you, but blasting my Spotify likes on a BT speaker in a crowded, and particularly an enclosed environment, would not be an enjoyable experience. I can imagine it's only enjoyable if one is sufficiently self absorbed enough to think that their music is universally enjoyed by everyone.
  - throitallaway 4y ago
    Go to any nature area with hiking trails near decent population centers and you're likely to encounter this. If you want to "enjoy" music while in nature, wear headphones... I'd rather hear birds, the wind hitting leaves, approaching wildlife, etc. I don't want to hear your shitty music from 40 feet away.
  - jyrkesh 4y ago
    Yeah, because you defined a line where the vast majority of people would agree. But you can slide the line over to a point where people would be more split on the issue. E.g. say you're alone on a public beach playing your music, and one other person walks up to also enjoy the beach and who doesn't want to hear your music. Should you turn off the music? Is there a db level that's acceptable? Should the other person be required to find a quieter spot further down the coast? Or should you have to relocate to an empty spot?
    - ericd 4y ago
      Use headphones.
      - ryan_j_naughton 4y ago
        What about when it is a small group playing very low music such that it is quickly drowned out by the sound of the waves and the birds after 10 feet of distance. Headphones are actually impede their enjoyment of the situation there because (a) they cannot easily talk to one another with headphones in (b) they cannot enjoy the mixing sounds of nature and music. In many cases, folk music or classical music at low volume mixed with nature can be very enjoyable for people. The problem here is you see no value to their enjoyment of these things and thus weight their enjoyment of such experience at zero while their interruption of your situation as an invasion. But if you force them to stop listening to music, you too are disrupting or invading their lives. That's the two-sided nature of any negative externality and attempts to internalize it. We all need to view this from the perspective of social costs and social benefits (i.e. a utilitarian perspective across all people's happiness). The result is almost always a compromise between the two extremes.

recuter 4y ago

I am so tempted to start a hardware company that makes auto aiming bbguns, slingshots and one more thing... predator drones (in-app purchase doom metal and eagle noises).

1024core 4y ago
It's against the law.
- leaflets2 4y ago
  In the US?
  - 1024core 4y ago
    Yes.
- recuter 4y ago
  I think if people are allowed their buzzing flying camera doodads everywhere my nose diving metal eagle raining sudden drone death from above is in good fun. Now I am the law. Besides the killer bird will obviously be powered by an AI, can't blame me for nothing.
  - google234123 4y ago
    I would be happy to call the police on you in this hypothetical situation. It would be a pretty open-and-shut case :)

badwolf 4y ago

5-8 flights up to ~30 seconds each. I think that's pretty acceptable, vs a constant buzzing

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
TowerTall 4y ago
I live on a beach in Thailand on a small tropical island and it is absolutely frown upon if someone fly with drones. It is not just the beach where I live but on all beaches island-wide where there is a high chance for that you will be asked to put your drone away. Nobody wants a camera to record their beach trip. Maybe snaps drone is more acceptable as it seem to primarily trying to be a flying selfie stick that records you and not the entire beach area, but it still emit a buzzing that will annoy everybody. Imagine if this product category takes off and having 10 or 20 of these on a beach becomes norm. Well, there goes your nice holiday. Enjoy your trip.

germinalphrase 4y ago

Cyclists as well. Someone should popularize an ultrasonic directional Bluetooth speaker for these use cases that won’t destroy the peace of public spaces.

vineyardmike 4y ago
And what if we could mount these directional speakers directly on someone’s head! Then we could reduce the volume a lot so it’s even quieter to neighbors. Maybe use some sort of physical bell or cup shape to direct it right into someone’s ears without ultrasonics (for cost reasons). Then we might save enough that we can use 2x speakers to get L/R audio streams.
- germinalphrase 4y ago
  To address your point rather than your sarcasm: headphones are unsafe while cycling because they block environmental sounds (though it’s true that music from a speaker can impact attentional blindness. There is also the shared experience of listening to music with another person. The ability to create a “music bubble” around you without disturbing others satisfies both parties. Ultrasonic speakers aren’t even exotic tech. I first encountered one in a museum at least ten or fifteen years ago.
  - InGoodFaith 4y ago
    I'm not the person you replied to but just dropping this here for others interested: There are some 'open-back' and 'open-ear' headphones that let you hear your environment passively. Others that have more active environment passthrough such as Ambient Sound from Samsung, also exist. This might be a useful gift for a cyclist or jogger that needs situational awareness.
    - jjkaczor 4y ago
      Bone conduction? (Am fairly certain they aren't great if you are going for audiophile level reproduction - but from a safety perspective, they let you hear your environment - note, I have personally never tried them)

megablast 4y ago

Somehow the car park and road alongside the beach arent a problem Though??

kennywinker 4y ago
They are a problem. Just one we’ve all learned to tolerate. Do you know how much nicer a beach without car noise is compared with one off a highway? Do we want to just have to accept that our public spaces are full of car noise and drone noise in 10 years - or do we want to hold the line and maybe try to re-route cars wherever possible?