Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones • Hacker News Board

Re: Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones

#321

Post by blaser-waffle » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 2:10 PM UTC

dalbasal wrote: post #260

JackFr wrote: post #123

As I read the article, there was not actually a single confirmed death by explosive armed drone. I suspect that ultimately it’s likely impractical To kill people by drone as compared, on a cost basis, to other more pedestrian means of killing people. Drones may be cheap, but drones that can lift more than 2 kilos aren’t. The logistics of getting a drone near enough to the intended target to kill them are going to be…

I agree that this article is talking about drones because it's newsish, where bribery and guns are less so. But, that's not really how the economics of violence works. It's more of a whatever-works, and whatever you can get your hands on element. Guns, bombs, hard men, threats and bribes are still in use. Infantry still exists, even though ICBMs exist. They don't have to choose. This is quasi military conflict we are…

> At the fully militarized level, drones have seen a lot of use.

For sure. ISIS and Syrian insurgents have used them for targeting and dropping what are essentially hand grenades with fins on them.

The "Not-Russians" fighting in Ukraine used them ruthlessly effective artillery spotting. At least one UKR armoured column was halted due to extremely effective on-target artillery fires.

Re: Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones

#322

Post by sudosysgen » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 2:27 PM UTC

gpm wrote: post #316

kumarvvr wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is logistics. For this solution to work, the counter swarm should be more capable than the incoming swarm (faster, more AI capabilities, etc), and their quantity should be more than the incoming swarm. You cannot have millions of drones everywhere, but the enemy just has to be lucky and send a million drones to attack you. Also, you can have advanced tactics, like releasing the swarm, but programming them…

The counter swarm can be cheaper/worse in some dimensions. Smaller batteries since they don't need to travel far. Nets or or even nothing instead of explosives, they need to stop drones not people. The above two mean a lighter air frame. The above 3 all mean more speed with the same motors (probably good) or less capable motors (seems like a bad plan). Communications only need to be short range. Autonomy is plausible…

Communications can be jammed.

Counter drones like anti-missile missiles need to be bigger than one would think and require much more energy, because they need to be much faster and more maneuverable than the drones they are hitting. That means bigger motors, higher discharge batteries, and a stronger airframe.

I'm fairly certain they would be more expensive than the attackers drones, and you would need around two orders of magnitude more of them than the attacker.

Re: Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones

#323

Post by andrewtbham » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 2:31 PM UTC

JackFr wrote: post #123

As I read the article, there was not actually a single confirmed death by explosive armed drone. I suspect that ultimately it’s likely impractical To kill people by drone as compared, on a cost basis, to other more pedestrian means of killing people. Drones may be cheap, but drones that can lift more than 2 kilos aren’t. The logistics of getting a drone near enough to the intended target to kill them are going to be…

the costs are dropping

Re: Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones

#324

Post by Pet_Ant » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 2:32 PM UTC

gleapsite wrote: post #318

ISL wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A drone need not enter a home to cause havoc within. I do not believe the assumption that one is safe within a home/car is a viable one. To discuss specific implementations of an attack would seem to violate both a personal code and what I imagine to be the spirit of HN.

> violate both a personal code and what I imagine to be the spirit of HN. Thanks for throwing up the Ethics flag. Discussing/brainstorming this in a public forum is volunteering your brainpower in support of murderers.

> Discussing/brainstorming this in a public forum is volunteering your brainpower in support of murderers.

If you think that you in a few moments on the back of a napkin will come up with something that someone funded and fuelled by an ideology that they are willing to die for can't with months of planning, then that's arrogance of an epic scale. This is as ridiculous as don't talk about hacking/spoofing/phishing because otherwise the bad guys won't figure it out.

Re: Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones

#325

Post by viro » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 2:32 PM UTC

JackFr wrote: post #294

ashtonkem wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High value targets will justify expenditure of more resources. For most targets a few men with AK-47s might do the trick, but for the well protected target this would be a pretty decent strategy. It certainly would strike fear into the hearts of men otherwise protected against more pedestrian threats, which is probably part of the point.

So how will a drone attack me in my house? Mind you my house is not a hard target but is air conditioned, so I keep the doors and windows shut. How will a drone attack me in my car? I don’t have a great car, but I’m pretty sure it can outrun an off the shelf quadcopter. So assuming I’m safe in my home and in my car, I guess other opportunities exist to kill me, but you need to have an operator ready with a drone in p…

>but I’m pretty sure it can outrun an off the shelf quadcopter.

depends which shelf... $544 buys you a drone that goes 145 mph. $322 for 99 mph.

Re: Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones

#326

Post by 0x737368 » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 2:41 PM UTC

fuoqi wrote: post #277

drran wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russians use drones at regular basis to throw[1] old ВОГ-17[0] grenades for automatic grenade launchers at Ukrainian soldier at Donbas. [0]: https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%9E%D0%93-17 [1] https://www.slovoidilo.ua/2020/06/11/novyna/bezpeka/bojovyky...

You mean mostly Ukranian citizens against Ukrainian army which was unconstitutionally deployed against them? (note that I do not deny Russian involvement, but foreign involvement in civil wars is a really common matter) Ukrainian army uses similar simple drones to throw grenades at rebels as well [0][1]. And interestingly enough Chinese develop similar drones [2], so I think they will be more and more common in futur…

Why is this comment being downvoted?

Re: Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones

#327

Post by fuoqi » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 2:53 PM UTC

0x737368 wrote: post #326

fuoqi wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean mostly Ukranian citizens against Ukrainian army which was unconstitutionally deployed against them? (note that I do not deny Russian involvement, but foreign involvement in civil wars is a really common matter) Ukrainian army uses similar simple drones to throw grenades at rebels as well [0][1]. And interestingly enough Chinese develop similar drones [2], so I think they will be more and more common in futur…

Why is this comment being downvoted?

Because the first sentence in the comment contains an inconvenient truth which goes against the dominant propaganda narrative and which is really hard to refute, so the only tool left for "fighting" with this information is downvotes?

Re: Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones

#328

Post by raducu » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 3:02 PM UTC

JackFr wrote: post #294

ashtonkem wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High value targets will justify expenditure of more resources. For most targets a few men with AK-47s might do the trick, but for the well protected target this would be a pretty decent strategy. It certainly would strike fear into the hearts of men otherwise protected against more pedestrian threats, which is probably part of the point.

So how will a drone attack me in my house? Mind you my house is not a hard target but is air conditioned, so I keep the doors and windows shut. How will a drone attack me in my car? I don’t have a great car, but I’m pretty sure it can outrun an off the shelf quadcopter. So assuming I’m safe in my home and in my car, I guess other opportunities exist to kill me, but you need to have an operator ready with a drone in p…

Ask Ukraine how they lost billions in ammunition due to a incendiary grenade dropped with a regular drone.

Someone does not need to kill you in your vehicle or your house -- they can start a major fire while you are in there, drop a defensive hand grenade while you're playing with your family in the back yard, touch you with some high voltage wires, dust you in some ultra-potent synthetic opioid.

A lot of people DO leave their windows open, and it is beyond the point anyway, as windows can be blasted away with the first drone, and while you naturally will inveatigate, the second drone will get you -- just immagine 4 AM, you are sleeping, boom the first drone blasts your windows open, 5 seconds later the next one detonates a defensive grenade in your bedroom.

This is obviously for higher value targets, but I'd say an assasin has a much greater chance of evading capture from a mile away, than doing the deed in person.

Re: Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones

#329

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 3:09 PM UTC

JackFr wrote: post #123

As I read the article, there was not actually a single confirmed death by explosive armed drone. I suspect that ultimately it’s likely impractical To kill people by drone as compared, on a cost basis, to other more pedestrian means of killing people. Drones may be cheap, but drones that can lift more than 2 kilos aren’t. The logistics of getting a drone near enough to the intended target to kill them are going to be…

[deleted]

Re: Drug cartel assassinates its enemies with bomb-toting drones

#330

Post by coldtea » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 3:10 PM UTC

JackFr wrote: post #294

ashtonkem wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High value targets will justify expenditure of more resources. For most targets a few men with AK-47s might do the trick, but for the well protected target this would be a pretty decent strategy. It certainly would strike fear into the hearts of men otherwise protected against more pedestrian threats, which is probably part of the point.

So how will a drone attack me in my house? Mind you my house is not a hard target but is air conditioned, so I keep the doors and windows shut. How will a drone attack me in my car? I don’t have a great car, but I’m pretty sure it can outrun an off the shelf quadcopter. So assuming I’m safe in my home and in my car, I guess other opportunities exist to kill me, but you need to have an operator ready with a drone in p…

>So how will a drone attack me in my house?

With enough explosives to reduce it to rumble from outside?

>How will a drone attack me in my car? I don’t have a great car, but I’m pretty sure it can outrun an off the shelf quadcopter.

It can only outrun it if (a) it can see/hear it coming, (b) it can move freely (e.g. not in congestion)