Live data from Hacker News

DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

dronedj.com

191–200 of 742 posts

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#192
post #37
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have Skydio for that. There is no profit in consumer-oriented drones. The money is in lower volume professional & semi-professional use drones. You cannot compete with China even if we annexed Mexico for cheap labor in order to manufacture high volume low profit drones.

This is exactly the problem. The military needs single-use drones in high volume, and the production capacity/scale for that can only exist if it's subsidized by the consumer industry. > You cannot compete with China even if we annexed Mexico for cheap labor in order to manufacture high volume low profit drones. DJI isn't making drones by hand, they have automated factories. But its only worth building an automated f…

High volume single-use drones and DJI drones are almost completely orthogonal in terms of technology, production, and procurement. The only thing they really share is MEMS gyroscopes and brushless motor windings. Making a million FPV bomb drones and making a million consumer camera drones are such dramatically different tasks that there is not a chance this theory holds water.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to also be fair, I just recently returned from Europe and I was shocked at how maddeningly frustrating it was to simply use the Web. Between shockingly obtrusive GDPR consent forms and outright blocks on Websites from EU consumers, it was a wild look at what Europeans have to go through under the guise of consumer protections. Like, the pendulum swung WAY too far in the other direction.

As much as the idea of GDPR (and specifically cookie consent) is well intentioned, the actual laws themselves aren't great. Cookie consent is especially frustrating because it encourages the creators of the consent popups to use dark patterns to try and trick people into just accepting them.

Cookie consent only apply to non-necessary cookies.

The laws are great because every cookie consent form is essentially saying, "we as a company want you to accept a cookie that is unnecessary."

If you don't install unnecessary cookies, you don't need to have a consent form.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#195
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, those pesky consumers getting in the way of the innovation of the free market with their protections. If only they could be fully exploited for maximum value extraction without interference.

That's exactly what I think when I read one of these "EU stifles innovation" comments. It sounds to me like the equivalent of not wanting socialized healthcare because "the poors" might get it, not caring about the fact that you're the one who will benefit. This is the "everyone in the US is a temporarily embarrassed millionaire" of consumer rights. Everyone in the US is a temporarily embarrassed capitalist overlord.

This is a strawman.

"Rich" people don't want socialized healthcare because of perceived or real disadvantages of that system. Not because "the poors might get it".

Also the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" is another strawman, used by those who dislike capitalism. People can and do support a variety of causes and policies without they themselves benefitting from them.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#196

It's interesting to see how the reactions differ between here and the articles on the ban on TikTok. And some even thought that the users who wrote to their government representatives were bots! Whenever the US bans or sanctions something, that impacts people, whether it's drone nerds or teens looking at silly videos. It just so happens that most people here seem to be outside of the TikTok target demographic, so we…

[flagged]

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#197

Everyone in the comments seems to be against this: why? Let's build up a great domestic drone company here in the US.

Banning foreign drones just gives domestic drone companies even less incentive to compete on quality. If the foreign drone company is benefiting unfairly from subsidies, then the way to beat them is to subsidise US drone companies, creating fair competition.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#198

This is so misguided it's breathtaking. Even if one buys into the supposed "harm" it's apparently trying to address, by targeting a specific corporate entity the proposed legislation won't do anything meaningful toward those ends. But it will confuse the market and hurt U.S. hobbyist consumers while being largely unenforceable anyway. It's one of those things that's just so dumb you assume it's only congressional ele…

[deleted]

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#199
post #73

For people wonder how this got there, the blame goes to Rep. Elise Stefanik: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/2864 That bill was tacked onto a big "must pass" defense authorization and may not have survived on its own. Here's an article with some speculation on why Stefanik introduced this bill: https://dronexl.co/2024/06/06/drone-industry-outrage-stefani...

[deleted]

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#200

This is so misguided it's breathtaking. Even if one buys into the supposed "harm" it's apparently trying to address, by targeting a specific corporate entity the proposed legislation won't do anything meaningful toward those ends. But it will confuse the market and hurt U.S. hobbyist consumers while being largely unenforceable anyway. It's one of those things that's just so dumb you assume it's only congressional ele…

Why would ou think it's "dumb", when we've already had TikTok ban, tariff on Chinese EV, and chip ban on China?

It's very clear that China is an enemy that has to be dealt with by US

Post reply on HN