Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

dronedj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 742 posts

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

#401

Post by dchristian »

team_gold wrote: post #336

As someone who has a DJI Mini what are the options for a consumer drone made by a US company? Everything on https://www.diu.mil/blue-uas-cleared-list is either widely different, 15x as expensive, not purchasable by civilians at all, or all of the above. Parret appears to have stopped selling their consumer model entirely. Skydio 2+ seems like the closest thing but it also no longer appears to be for sale either. All…

Autel Nano or Lite+.

Some Autel drone are made in the USA, but not all.

Edit: added the Lite and fixed formatting

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

#402

Post by permo-w »

ok_dad wrote: post #258
lawlessone wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What an utterly ridiculous response. To be fair to them, i think it was sarcasm.

On HN, you can be sure there are several people who literally believe the world would be better without any regulations or laws forcing businesses to do anything. This place is the pinnacle of anarcho-capitalism.

at least here there's a spectrum of views that largely get by peacefully, and the entire place isn't focused on that conflict, a la twitter. yes there are lot of right-wing headcases entirely taken up by their own bottom-line, and yes the place itself is broadly funded and owned by people who think like, or at the very least, act like anarcho-capitalists, but they only really float to the surface when a post about regulation comes up, and even then, the discussion stays mostly civil. it could be a lot worse

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

#403

Post by hi-v-rocknroll »

henvic wrote: post #28

DJI is, by far, the best drone equipment brand for photography, industrial usage, etc. It's disheartening to witness the US embracing protectionism for high-tech. If the United States does this, it might as well join the European Union's decadence in killing tech startups by stifling the competitiveness of their market...

Yep. That's basically what's happening. It's China success envy syndrome. And instead of competing in healthy ways, political concerns roll out crushing policies that harm both investing opportunities and the ability of consumers to choose freely.

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

#404

Post by kuschku »

somehnguy wrote: post #368
kuschku wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends entirely on your definition of "behind". The MK4 delivers pretty much the same quality at the same speed as the P1P. Paying 30% more to get an open-source, fully modular, fully repairable and customizable product that's made sustainably with fair wages is not a huge markup. I'd gladly pay 30% more to get an Android phone that's fully modular, open-source, repairable, upgradable and made in the EU.

The speed of the MK4 for the same quality isn't even close to the P1P due to it being a bedslinger vs CoreXY gemoetry.

That's... quite misleading? The MK4 with input shaping is limited by extrusion speed, not the motion system.

The printers are both pretty identical in performance today. And while CoreXY has significantly more headroom in case you'd like to upgrade the current bottlenecks, that's not an option with the Bambu printers anyway.

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

#405

Post by nashadelic »

sschueller wrote: post #178

So I guess the new viable business strategy in the US is: 1. Find a sector which a foreign companies dominates 2. Enter this sector even with a bad product 3. Go to congress and get the other ones banned because they are "insert reason here".

The effect is that the US loses its competitive edge in international markets. Is another country going to buy Tesla or BYD? Are they going to buy a DJI or an overpriced US drone? It might protect companies locally but for how long?

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

#406

Post by mrguyorama »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #193
glitchcrab wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Hell, a lot of the 3rd party companies who are contracted to build the cookie consent forms are even following the spirit of the law (barely) by including a one click "reject all" button or link in the pop ups. They are often somewhat downplayed, like being in a smaller font or slightly hidden, because fuck you, but are you really so damn lazy that clicking "reject all" once every hour is such an objectionable activity that you'd rather just dump any and all consumer protections of data?

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

#407

Post by throwaway48476 »

henvic wrote: post #28

DJI is, by far, the best drone equipment brand for photography, industrial usage, etc. It's disheartening to witness the US embracing protectionism for high-tech. If the United States does this, it might as well join the European Union's decadence in killing tech startups by stifling the competitiveness of their market...

How can it be protectionism when the US has no consumer drone industry to protect?

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

#408

Post by permo-w »

freedomben wrote: post #377
lawlessone wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If the United States does this, it might as well join the European Union's decadence in killing tech startups by stifling the competitiveness of their market... I can still buy a DJI drone here in Europe. What stifling are you referring to?

I think the situation is far more nuanced than what will be debateable here, but I've had friends that tried to do tech startups in Europe and ended up moving to the US and doing it here. This is surely not a representative sample so take with a grain of salt, but generally speaking this is their (paraphrased) analysis: In Europe it just takes a lot more capital investment to get started. You can't do it as a side-gi…

I suspect you're over-egging the amount of compliance that needs to be done and under-egging the filter of the existing big players mostly being American, who buy up competitors in order to maintain market dominance

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

#409

Post by peoplefromibiza »

mike_d wrote: post #354
segasaturn wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with you, I doubt banning Chinese tech will remedy this problem. My experience is that American brands are much, much more aggressive about making you connect to the internet, install our apps, create an account, subscribe to our newsletter etc. Look at the difference between iRobot and Chinese robot vacuums on Amazon - the difference is night and day.

> American brands are much, much more aggressive about making you connect to the internet, install our apps, create an account This whataboutism ignores one very important point. When you connect a device to an American company they might do things that we consider privacy violations, while still staying generally within the bounds of the law. We like to joke about data going to the NSA or something, but in the extre…

> This whataboutism ignores one very important point.

Reverse whataboutism is still whataboutism.

For example this predicate

> while still staying generally within the bounds of the law.

Completely ignores the fact that US companies have been found lying and deceiving to circumvent the barriers posed by the law.

But not only US companies, remember the diesel gate?

This other predicate

> (In China) by law every company is part-owned by the government itself

It's completely false, while this one

> The Ministry of State Security literally has employees who show up to these companies every day like normal workers

It's pure intellectual dishonesty . Every sufficiently advanced intelligence agency has spies. With the USA agencies being the largest employers for spies on the entire Planet.

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

#410

Post by satvikpendem »

mrtksn wrote: post #271
simplyluke wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d flip the question and ask you by what metrics Europes tech sector is performing comparatively well. Employment? Average salary? ARR? I struggle to think of a metric that’s a positive outlier.

Longevity, happiness, health, leisure, life satisfaction. Companies are there to make these possible, not to maximise the stock trading price. Some achieve that by making EUV lithography machines, others do chemicals or pharmaceuticals. Are you aware that you can use the developer tools in your browser to set the price of the stock or your bank account balance to anything you like? You don't have to crumble your infr…

> Longevity, happiness, health, leisure, life satisfaction. Companies are there to make these possible, not to maximise the stock trading price.

No? This is exactly the opposite of why companies exist, they are specifically there to increase the stock price via development of their products. That we get better happiness via rising wealth standards is just a coincidence, albeit a very useful and historically true coincidence. And even then, companies can last quite a while trudging along but it will stop at some point if new innovation is not kept up in the form of new companies (as older companies are usually at capacity for hiring). Look at the youth unemployment rate in many European countries compared to the US.

> Are you aware that you can use the developer tools in your browser to set the price of the stock or your bank account balance to anything you like? You don't have to crumble your infrastructure, run from the mentally ill homeless people or bankrupt sick people to see those numbers.

Changing a measure does not change the underlying thing it's measuring, no more than I can time travel by changing a clock. Obviously people are talking about what those numbers represent, not the numbers themselves. GDP is a useful enough concept as I mentioned above, one that correlates well to overall citizen wealth. Europeans are generally quite a bit poorer than Americans, even with the addition of the value of free (or rather, "free") healthcare. Tech employees are even more so advantaged, as their health insurance is excellent while they make multiples of their European counterparts. It is not "libertarian" to acknowledge this fact, and it's one of the main reasons you see many European tech people moving to the US and Silicon Valley.

Post reply on HN