5 ms·
Seattle Man Hovers Drone Over a Family’s House for ‘Research’
- a3n 13y agoI imagine a full-on garden hose would bring the thing down or interfere with it. Of course you have to see it first, but if it's there over your property you'd have an educational court adventure in your near future.
- Zimahl 13y agoI can see it now: automated water cannons on top of every house as anti-aircraft/drone! Safe for wildlife (birds) but not for electronics. Then, waterproofed drones. Followed by silly-string cannons to gum up any rotors. Where will it end?
- mseebach 13y agoIt's not the water that's the problem, it's the force of the impact. Quad-copters are very lightweight, they'd easily be thrown wildly off balance by a good burst of water.
- dangrossman 13y agoYou underestimate quadcopter AI's ability to correct for experienced forces! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyGJBV1xnJI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyGJBV1xnJI
- lobotryas 13y agoIt will end with drones capable of neutralizing AA guns with bomblets, followed by homeowners installing Surface-Air missiles, followed by drones using ECM, followed by... Actually, good point! On the bright side, this seems like a great business opportunity.
- cobrausn 13y agoThe man told him that he was doing “research” and the camera was transmitting the images to his glasses. I find myself unsurprised that this guy was probably wearing Google Glasses...
- shabble 13y agoFPV[1] flight controls have been around a lot longer than Google Glass. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Person_View https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Person_View
- ComputerGuru 13y agoCompletely copy and paste blog spam. Original story: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/05/so-this-is-how-it-begins-guy-refuses-to-stop-drone-spying-on-seattle-woman/275769/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/05/so-thi... EDIT: Yes, downvote me to oblivion because I pointed out this post is in blatant violation of HN rules: Please submit the original source. If a blog post reports on something they found on another site, submit the latter. The content is exactly the same as The Atlantic article. The Atlantic is not where the incident was first reported, but it is the source of all the legal analysis and commentary on the issue.
- sharkweek 13y agoWell if we're playing that game; a local Seattle blog reported it first: http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2013/05/chs-x-files-capitol-hill-drone-pilot-spotted-glowing-orbs-phone-thief-on-wheels/ http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2013/05/chs-x-files-capito...
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- tarr11 13y agoThanks for the link to the original. That said, the content of the articles are not the same. I wouldn't consider this to be blog spam.
- sharkweek 13y agoI have one of those drones -- and I also live in Seattle. I mostly just fly it in public parks where most people think it's pretty cool. I can completely understand why people think it's creepy though, and definitely foresee municipal law challenging airspace rights. People in the area are pretty sensitive to the concept especially considering the local police department's recent effort to use patrol drones (the program was recently cancelled).
- tocomment 13y agoHow much does it cost? What's the battery life?
- sharkweek 13y agoThey run about 300 bucks -- the stock battery will last about 15-20 minutes of fly time, but you can upgrade that pretty easily
- tocomment 13y agoThanks. I guess I should have also asked where to buy one?
- sharkweek 13y agogot mine off Amazon - http://www.amazon.com/Parrot-AR-Drone-Quadricopter-Controlled-Android/dp/B007HZLLOK/ http://www.amazon.com/Parrot-AR-Drone-Quadricopter-Controlle... Here's a picture of my coworkers inside the office that I flew up to scope out -- http://i.imgur.com/sSpxQAL.jpg http://i.imgur.com/sSpxQAL.jpg
- jstalin 13y agoPolice can legally do this without a warrant. In Florida v. Riley, from the US Supreme court, it was ruled that police did not need a warrant to hover over someone's house with a helicopter to peer into the roof of a greenhouse to check for marijuana. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_v._Riley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_v._Riley
- tptacek 13y agoThe police can do a lot of things without a warrant that you and I shouldn't and often can't do. For instance: they can pull your car over and then shine a flashlight through the windows to inspect what's visible in plain sight in the passenger compartment.
- freehunter 13y agoThey can pull your car over with cause, yes. This is something we cannot do. However, it's not illegal for you or I to view the contents of someone's car, even with a flashlight. If it's in plain sight, it's perfectly legal. There's a lot that maybe we shouldn't do but is completely legal anyway.
- potatolicious 13y agoI doubt this was fully legal. It's been repeatedly upheld that a private home has a reasonable expectation of privacy (this is a legal, not lay distinction) - which is to say that recording inside a private home, even without trespass, can be illegal. Something being in plain sight is not a sufficient condition for legally photographing it. You cannot, for example, point a camera into your neighbor's bedroom, photograph the results, and distribute it on the internet, even if, say, the camera was on public sidewalks.
- crosvenir 13y agoDoes it matter that they may go to jail when you've had your ass kicked or worse[1] (personal friend). Crazy is everywhere and you don't really know when it's going to pop up. [1] http://brandonhydrick.com/brandons-death/ http://brandonhydrick.com/brandons-death/
- incision 13y ago>The man told him that he was doing “research” and the camera was transmitting the images to his glasses. Sounds like some pretty irresponsible "research". Even if the intent is utterly benign, it's pretty easy to see how this could end badly. I'd say drone-man lucked out if this is how it all went down.
- madaxe 13y agoUnless of course his intent was to draw attention to the fact that this is going to become a major problem, and soon, due to the absence of regulation around drone airspace, in which case, success!
- thesis 13y agoSuccess? Sounds like a good way to get in trouble in more ways than one. I don't think I would have been as gracious as "ok I'm going to go call the police". Even if he was trying to bring the issue to light... there has got to be better ways then potentially getting your ass kicked by strangers.
- freehunter 13y agoAnd if flying the drone is legal, you would have been taken to jail for assault, thereby turning the man into a martyr. You can't kick someone's ass out of the blue for doing something that's perfectly legal to do.
- mbillie1 13y agoYou could always compromise the drone via a hose or some such, without any physical confrontation with the owner.
- madaxe 13y agoYeah, but he bugged out and remains unidentified, so it remains perfectly possible that this was an attempt to draw media attention to the problem of drone surveillance. Then again, it could be some dude who's discovered that he can remotely perv on people, in which case, this is still a general success, as it draws attention to the problem of drone surveillance.
- thesis 13y agoMy paintball gun would have been put to good use in this instance.
- freehunter 13y agoDestruction of personal property?
- pyre 13y agoWho says he would be shooting at the drone? :P
- saraid216 13y agoHow is this particular incident a legal grey area? It should be covered under peeping Tom laws. Does WA state not have these? ETA: Did some more research and found a claim that only nine states have peeping Tom laws. Am surprised.
- danso 13y agoThis immediately brought to mind the story by Heinlein in which an argument is made that several world countries "own" the moon, since land rights should be extended from Earth ground level into the heavens: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Sold_the_Moon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Sold_the_Moon > Harriman seeks to avoid government ownership of the Moon. As it passes directly overhead only in a narrow band north and south of the equator, he uses a legal principle that states that property rights extend to infinity above a land parcel. On that basis, Mexico, Central and parts of South America, and other countries in those latitudes around the world, have a claim on the Moon. The United States also has a claim due to Florida and Texas. By arranging for many countries to assert their rights Harriman persuades the United Nations to, as a compromise, assign management of the Moon to his company.
- uptown 13y agoYou mean those moon plots that have been sold on radio and late-night TV for decades on TV weren't real? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/11/opinion/the-man-who-sells-the-moon.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/11/opinion/the-man-who-sells-...
- taneliv 13y ago"Air is a public highway" Supreme Court ruled in 1946. Maybe it is time to consider a minimum altitude, which must be obeyed outside public areas? Something like 300 or 1000 feet depending on local conditions (building height, terrain etc). Would that make sense?
- will_brown 13y agoI would argue this at least creates a cause of action (civil law claim/lawsuit) for Nuisance, for disrupting one's right of private enjoyment of their property. Such a argument might lose and I am not aware of any criminal charge on point, in which case the defacto remedy...flying drones over this guys house 24/7 until he agrees (in writing) to no longer fly his drones over/near private properties.
- Jun8 13y agoSo, if the couple had shot down the drone (by a gun with a legal permit, or some other means, e.g. slingshot or a counter drone) would the creepy man be able to press charges?
- pyre 13y agoSounds sort of like the Creepy Cameraman[1], also from Seattle. I wonder if they are related. Both instances seem like they could have the aim of making a point/raising an issue. [1] http://blog.seattlepi.com/thebigblog/2012/10/31/who-is-seattles-creepy-cameraman/ http://blog.seattlepi.com/thebigblog/2012/10/31/who-is-seatt...
- matt-attack 13y agoSo is "drone" the new word for RC plane/helicopter?
- alan_cx 13y agoLook, I build these things as a hobby. I am not a hysterical nay sayer. But.......... Firstly, planes and helicopters are a lot harder to fly. So there is a skill barrier that puts most people off. Secondly, these drones are very stable. Couple that with now cheap HD corrected cameras, and any one can literally spy right in to your daughter's bed room. And this is the real shit of life right now. Almost everything fun and cool is also threat to privacy and freedom, as much as it protects privacy and freedom. The game has changed. Even a year ago my drones were "cool". People loved to see them and we fascinated by them. Today, they fear them, they are suspicious of them, and now my motives get questioned.
- aaronbrethorst 13y agoI'm very happy to see the Capitol Hill Seattle blog[1] get a nod in this article. Justin, the creator, has been doing a fantastic job of reporting on news that's relevant to Capitol Hill for several years, now, and he's also proving that 'hyperlocal' news can actually work under certain circumstances. Justin's reporting lacks the hyperbolic nature of TV news, and keeps me on top of things that are actually relevant to me. Plus, he's just a stand-up guy. edit: crap, CHS is down. I wonder if that's my fault, or the Atlantic and BetaBeat articles. Here's a cached version from yesterday: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:P3SuMBN6H0cJ:www.capitolhillseattle.com/+capitolhillseattle&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:P3SuMBN... [1] http://www.capitolhillseattle.com http://www.capitolhillseattle.com
- devindotcom 13y agoGreat blog, good guy. Community is involved too. He's pretty dedicated, though, not sure you could get the same effect with a nationwide network of stringers. I'm on the lookout for this drone guy, btw.
- alan_cx 13y agoMy once fun hobby is now creepy :(
- ChuckMcM 13y agoThis stranger seems to have achieved his objective of demonstrating a capability and pushing the conversation about drones along. The home owner could have dones his part by destroying the drone (I'd prefer a shotgun but if it really was that close simply shooting a net at it would have worked) such that the "researcher" would suffer a property loss which could then give him action to sue. Then we could have the whole thing walk through the court system and draw out the folks who are pushing behind the scenes because they would not want case law on the books that made done use over private property ruled illegal or property owners destroying drones over their property ruled legal.