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

521–530 of 742 posts

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

#521

Post by MaxHoppersGhost »

dji4321234 wrote: post #280
gandalfgeek wrote: post #265

Keep seeing DJI drones at local police dept open houses. They even have a "drone unit" that specializes in SAR, hazardous recon type scenarios. Given extensive existing use throughout US local law enforcement, fire depts etc, not sure if this will actually happen. Or maybe they all mass-migrate to Anduril solutions?

It's going to be a disaster for SAR, policing, firefighting, and all kinds of public good. The whole thing is an incredibly shortsighted move that will literally cost lives. The goal, I think, is that these organizations will migrate to Skydio or BRINC (as they have the only reasonably viable drones for most of these use cases IMHO). The reality is that they'll buy Autel (just as Chinese as DJI) or just keep using DJ…

In five years the US will have a prolific consumer drone industry and will have hardly skipped a beat. This is a good move for the US from a long-term security and economic standpoint. There are some short term pains but long-term this is good.

Did you get paid 50 cents to write all these posts?

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

#523

Post by deciplex »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #435
dji4321234 wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It can only be side-loaded on Android, because their app breaks a number of policies on privacy and data gathering. I don't think this is the reason, I think it's more that they're just too lazy to jump through the approval and maintenance hoops that come with an app store, especially because their home market (China) doesn't even use the Play Store. The iOS version of their app is Apple-approved and present in the…

>I don't think they're explicitly a CCP data-collection front In China you cannot not be explicitly a CCP data-collection front. China doesn't bring evidence to a judge in order to get a subpoena for data. They just go to DJI an get it. DJI has zero legal recourse if the CCP wants access to all DJI's stored data. Doesn't matter where that data is stored. Same thing for tiktok and why legislators are killing that too.…

> For the whataboutists: Yes, everyone is aware that american three letter agencies have backdoor access to every computer, broken RSA and AES, and control the USA's puppet government. Thanks.

You're deliberately overstating the issue, to the point of absurdity, to avoid legitimate criticism. Three-letter agencies do have a high level of access to this data, and in many cases that's because the companies involved just voluntarily hand it over (no need to get the courts involved). Even when the courts do get involved, these are secret courts where the decisions are classified, and in any case from what we do know they act as a rubber stamp anyway.

So, this is a matter of the US wanting access to that data in addition to, or possibly exclusive from, the CCP. Frankly, as I'm not currently under the jurisdiction of the Communist Party of China, I'd prefer they have unlimited access to that data as opposed to the US government, if I have to choose one or the other.

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

#524

Post by rainsford »

redserk wrote: post #504
Workaccount2 wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don't think they're explicitly a CCP data-collection front In China you cannot not be explicitly a CCP data-collection front. China doesn't bring evidence to a judge in order to get a subpoena for data. They just go to DJI an get it. DJI has zero legal recourse if the CCP wants access to all DJI's stored data. Doesn't matter where that data is stored. Same thing for tiktok and why legislators are killing that too.…

To start: I do not trust the CCP, but my trust in the American legal system has been waning. What's the legal recourse for a US Citizen served with a dodgy FISA-related subpoena/warrant? Or if a government agency wants to purchase tracking data that includes my phone from a data collection agency? Say the state of Texas purchases geotracking data for app users who cross state lines.

Apple famously told the FBI to go pound sand when asked to help access an iPhone in an actual terrorism case (i.e. it wasn't about going after dissidents or journalists or anything), even though such help was definitely within Apple's technical power.

Now, while admitting that I am no way claiming the US is perfect, does anyone actually think something even remotely similar would ever happen between a Chinese company and the Chinese government?

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

#525

Post by rayiner »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #381
rayiner wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politicians have put aside their personal beefs with Trump in response to their constituents . The republican base doesn’t want foreign wars and tax cuts, they want to kick the illegal immigrants out of the country and curtail foreign trade. Remember when Joe Biden told black voters Romney “wants to put them back in chains?” The Republican base wants their version of that guy, and that’s Trump. For Stefanik, Cruz, et…

I understand that, and I think it's a fair point, but there is also the issue of leadership . E.g. there are tons of Republican "elites" who know that the whole "stop the steal" stuff and falsehoods around Trump winning in 2020 are complete, total, and utter bullshit. We know this because they've said it! My favorite example is when Liz Cheney wrote in her book that Republican Rep Mark Green said, as he was signing e…

I agree in the abstract, but I think that’s encompassed by my point that the Republican base wants to fight fire with fire: https://youtu.be/iRYB6N8fBKQ?si=-bSwtvosf-o4PE0z.

I think “principled Republicans” don’t know what time it is. Trump’s only mistake was not saying “I formally concede” before spending years saying the election was stolen. That’s the new normal and has been since 2000.

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

#526

Post by kube-system »

rubytubido wrote: post #497
kube-system wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just because USA likes tampering with proprietary code and using NDA’s with Silicon Valley to bug just about anything they want (because they can), that paranoia consumes them that other countries are doing the same. During times of war, other countries absolutely do the same.

When you can't justify the actions of your country - but..but..but other countries they do the same! Just looks at the western reactions about 'foreign agents' bill in Georgia.

Who said I'm trying to justify anything? I don't think it is justifiable to do during peacetime.

But obviously an existential crisis is not the time that many governments stand on their principles, which is why 'war powers' tend to be justified under extenuating circumstances when countries end up at war.

There is no question, if there is another major war between world powers, they will invoke the authority to compel their industries to cooperate with the effort. If they don't, they'll quickly cease to exist.

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

#527

Post by echelon »

nashadelic wrote: post #405
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?

And what happens when you taking dumping to the logical extreme? You wind up with nobody domestically that can do any advanced work at all, because everyone gets put out of business. Then we have nothing to export and no skill or capability gradient to climb.

BYD exists because of Chinese economic protectionism. China carved out a space for its domestic products to grow. We should do the same.

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

#528

Post by cruffle_duffle »

kragen wrote: post #502
jpgvm wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> direct internet access or an account with the manufacturer to work Unfortunately this is required by regulators in many countries. In Thailand you can't fly a drone without a license. You need to obtain the license before activating the drone and provide your information and the license number at time of activation (which is tied to drone serial number). It sucks but it's the law here.

shitty laws in thailand are no excuse for human rights infringements in the other 99% of the world

Requiring an account to use a DJI drone is a human rights violation?

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

#529

Post by toss1 »

redserk wrote: post #504
Workaccount2 wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don't think they're explicitly a CCP data-collection front In China you cannot not be explicitly a CCP data-collection front. China doesn't bring evidence to a judge in order to get a subpoena for data. They just go to DJI an get it. DJI has zero legal recourse if the CCP wants access to all DJI's stored data. Doesn't matter where that data is stored. Same thing for tiktok and why legislators are killing that too.…

To start: I do not trust the CCP, but my trust in the American legal system has been waning. What's the legal recourse for a US Citizen served with a dodgy FISA-related subpoena/warrant? Or if a government agency wants to purchase tracking data that includes my phone from a data collection agency? Say the state of Texas purchases geotracking data for app users who cross state lines.

Whatever slim you want to think your recourse is in the US, it is FAR better and broader than in the country that has uncounted mobile execution vans with zero available records of who is executed.

At least the US is trying to be a democracy, and has largely functioning checks and balances.

CCP is flat-out 'you cannot even talk or access information on things that make us look bad, such as Tibet or Tiananmen Protests' and 'make the wrong criticism at the wrong time and it is over for you'.

There is a MASSIVE difference. Playing false equivalence games will end very badly.

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

#530

Post by deciplex »

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...

> It's disheartening to witness the US embracing protectionism for high-tech.

Worth noting that this is a different kind of protectionism than that sometimes practiced by developing nations to build up their local infrastructure and industry. In both cases you end up with higher domestic prices and lower quality of goods (at least at first) but at least in the case of the developing nation you do actually build up some domestic infrastructure and industry in the meantime. (Or, at least, you have the opportunity to do so.)

That's not what's happening here as there is no build-up for us to do. This is just the US government acting on behalf of US companies to shield them from competition so they can soak the domestic market for every cent without interference. There's no way any of this is going to reverse or even slow down the trend of enshittification - in fact, it's going to accelerate it.

Post reply on HN