57 ms·

There is absolutely no chance that this bill will pass. Crazy bills championed by people that either don't understand them, or are just posturing are semi-comm

by blhack 14y ago

There is absolutely no chance that this bill will pass. Crazy bills championed by people that either don't understand them, or are just posturing are semi-common. Just because it has been proposed, doesn't mean anything.

ctdonath 14y ago
Alas, enough of them pass with serious enough consequences that we do have to watch for and actively oppose them. Prime example is NY's recent passage of the "SAFE Act".
- jrockway 14y ago
  What's the problem with the SAFE Act? The provision where mental health providers have to become informants?
  - ctdonath 14y ago
    The provision making hundreds of thousands of cooperative upstanding law-abiding citizens into enemies of the state for owning common devices less dangerous than stairs.
Millennium 14y ago
This century has already seen far too many crazy bills pass to just dismiss something like this as having no chance.
nitrogen 14y ago
There is absolutely no chance that this bill will pass. There've been too many cases where it seemed this way, then the bill passed (or was only narrowly defeated), for us to ignore anything that appears to have no chance of passing.
- blhack 14y ago
  A bill like this would royally screw over the mapping, GIS, agricultural, real estate, and film industries, and those are only the ones I can think of off hand. I think we'll be okay.
  - uvdiv 14y ago
    They'll lobby for and obtain exemption, maybe a permitting process. They're not interested in making this available to the general public (on the contrary, they could benefit from inhibiting their competition). --cynic
samstave 14y ago
Many times, ideas start out as super crazy simply so they can be reeled back in to the degree they really want. For example - they could back-up from "complete ban" to "must have a license/permit" and wrap some bureaucratic process around any non-governmental drone programs. This could be a ruse to get some iterations done - they start with a drastic one to measure the reactionary sentiment to see what they can get away with.
- blhack 14y ago
  >wrap some bureaucratic process around any non-governmental drone programs. This is already 100% in place and has been for a long time.
  - samstave 14y ago
    How so? I can order a very wide variety of quadcopters online, or build my own - including a camera gimbals with zero interference from any governmental agency. These can be flown anywhere right now.
    - blhack 14y ago
      As long as you maintain line of sight to them, then yes, but calling these "drones" betrays the word "drone". If you want a true "done", that is: something that flys autonomously, that you don't have to watch, you need to apply for a Certificate of Authorization (COA) from the FAA. The people who are allowed to apply for these are major universities, and government contractors. Here is a list: http://www.scribd.com/doc/114639754/COA-Sponsor-List-as-released-by-FAA http://www.scribd.com/doc/114639754/COA-Sponsor-List-as-rele...
      - samstave 14y ago
        Awesome - thanks for the info and the clarification. I guess you're correct that we should be careful about the lexicon we use to describe these things. Personally, I don't even like the term Drone. I see it as an attempt to obfuscate the human element, especially when talking about military operations: i.e. they have a pilot who pulls the trigger - he is just not physically in the weapons delivery platform. This is a very important, yet very delicate, area that needs to be extremely well deliberated over in the next short while. I am not confident that politicians have the foresight and testicular fortitude to really make appropriate choices in this matter - especially given the vultures poised on the sidelines with watering mouths over the potential to sell such systems for domestic spying, control and TIA.

by blhack 14y ago

ctdonath 14y ago

Alas, enough of them pass with serious enough consequences that we do have to watch for and actively oppose them. Prime example is NY's recent passage of the "SAFE Act".

jrockway 14y ago
What's the problem with the SAFE Act? The provision where mental health providers have to become informants?
- ctdonath 14y ago
  The provision making hundreds of thousands of cooperative upstanding law-abiding citizens into enemies of the state for owning common devices less dangerous than stairs.

Millennium 14y ago

This century has already seen far too many crazy bills pass to just dismiss something like this as having no chance.

nitrogen 14y ago

There is absolutely no chance that this bill will pass. There've been too many cases where it seemed this way, then the bill passed (or was only narrowly defeated), for us to ignore anything that appears to have no chance of passing.

blhack 14y ago
A bill like this would royally screw over the mapping, GIS, agricultural, real estate, and film industries, and those are only the ones I can think of off hand. I think we'll be okay.
- uvdiv 14y ago
  They'll lobby for and obtain exemption, maybe a permitting process. They're not interested in making this available to the general public (on the contrary, they could benefit from inhibiting their competition). --cynic

samstave 14y ago

Many times, ideas start out as super crazy simply so they can be reeled back in to the degree they really want. For example - they could back-up from "complete ban" to "must have a license/permit" and wrap some bureaucratic process around any non-governmental drone programs. This could be a ruse to get some iterations done - they start with a drastic one to measure the reactionary sentiment to see what they can get away with.

blhack 14y ago
>wrap some bureaucratic process around any non-governmental drone programs. This is already 100% in place and has been for a long time.
- samstave 14y ago
  How so? I can order a very wide variety of quadcopters online, or build my own - including a camera gimbals with zero interference from any governmental agency. These can be flown anywhere right now.
  - blhack 14y ago
    As long as you maintain line of sight to them, then yes, but calling these "drones" betrays the word "drone". If you want a true "done", that is: something that flys autonomously, that you don't have to watch, you need to apply for a Certificate of Authorization (COA) from the FAA. The people who are allowed to apply for these are major universities, and government contractors. Here is a list: http://www.scribd.com/doc/114639754/COA-Sponsor-List-as-released-by-FAA http://www.scribd.com/doc/114639754/COA-Sponsor-List-as-rele...
    - samstave 14y ago
      Awesome - thanks for the info and the clarification. I guess you're correct that we should be careful about the lexicon we use to describe these things. Personally, I don't even like the term Drone. I see it as an attempt to obfuscate the human element, especially when talking about military operations: i.e. they have a pilot who pulls the trigger - he is just not physically in the weapons delivery platform. This is a very important, yet very delicate, area that needs to be extremely well deliberated over in the next short while. I am not confident that politicians have the foresight and testicular fortitude to really make appropriate choices in this matter - especially given the vultures poised on the sidelines with watering mouths over the potential to sell such systems for domestic spying, control and TIA.