DJI No Longer Blocks Flights over Airports and Military Bases
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: DJI No Longer Blocks Flights over Airports and Military Bases
#2[deleted]
Re: DJI No Longer Blocks Flights over Airports and Military Bases
#3Again, clearly we are in a Cold War with China. Why are they allowed to be connected to the Internet? Hopefully, on day one of the next administration, backbone operators will be prohibited from connecting to any network that connects to China.
Re: DJI No Longer Blocks Flights over Airports and Military Bases
#4Again, clearly we are in a Cold War with China. Why are they allowed to be connected to the Internet? Hopefully, on day one of the next administration, backbone operators will be prohibited from connecting to any network that connects to China.
I don't think implementing our own Great Firewall is the direction I'd want to see from the alleged bastion of freedom and democracy.
A destroy-on-sight policy for unauthorized drones in restricted airspaces seems like a good enough solution for this problem without online censorship. Don't want your expensive drone blown to smithereens? Don't fly it where you ain't supposed to be flying it.
(And on the flip-side, the FAA and other authorities need to provide real-time public access to maps of those restricted areas - which I wouldn't be surprised if they're already doing, but still)
Re: DJI No Longer Blocks Flights over Airports and Military Bases
#5I’m not taking sides, but I do have a question for anyone with legal understanding. I feel like, if I worked for a drone company and wanted to roll out a new feature to block flights close to ‘restricted zones’, then the legal department would throw a fit. I can imagine them saying that the new feature would expose the company if the feature ever failed or didn’t have a complete list of locations to block. It’s better to not have any restrictions than to have some and for them to be incomplete or broken.
I just don’t see how this feature wouldn’t be a major liability to DJI. Am I wrong?
Re: DJI No Longer Blocks Flights over Airports and Military Bases
#6I’m not taking sides, but I do have a question for anyone with legal understanding. I feel like, if I worked for a drone company and wanted to roll out a new feature to block flights close to ‘restricted zones’, then the legal department would throw a fit. I can imagine them saying that the new feature would expose the company if the feature ever failed or didn’t have a complete list of locations to block. It’s bette…
If the alternative is getting your product banned, I suspect legal would figure something out.
Given the continuing drone idiocies with the California fires, I would expect a blanket ban coming unless an automated system can instantly comply with FAA airspace restrictions.
Re: DJI No Longer Blocks Flights over Airports and Military Bases
#7Again, clearly we are in a Cold War with China. Why are they allowed to be connected to the Internet? Hopefully, on day one of the next administration, backbone operators will be prohibited from connecting to any network that connects to China.
I don't think implementing our own Great Firewall is the direction I'd want to see from the alleged bastion of freedom and democracy. A destroy-on-sight policy for unauthorized drones in restricted airspaces seems like a good enough solution for this problem without online censorship. Don't want your expensive drone blown to smithereens? Don't fly it where you ain't supposed to be flying it. (And on the flip-side, th…
https://skyvector.com/ for one.
Re: DJI No Longer Blocks Flights over Airports and Military Bases
#8Again, clearly we are in a Cold War with China. Why are they allowed to be connected to the Internet? Hopefully, on day one of the next administration, backbone operators will be prohibited from connecting to any network that connects to China.
I don't think implementing our own Great Firewall is the direction I'd want to see from the alleged bastion of freedom and democracy. A destroy-on-sight policy for unauthorized drones in restricted airspaces seems like a good enough solution for this problem without online censorship. Don't want your expensive drone blown to smithereens? Don't fly it where you ain't supposed to be flying it. (And on the flip-side, th…
Re: DJI No Longer Blocks Flights over Airports and Military Bases
#9Again, clearly we are in a Cold War with China. Why are they allowed to be connected to the Internet? Hopefully, on day one of the next administration, backbone operators will be prohibited from connecting to any network that connects to China.
I don't think implementing our own Great Firewall is the direction I'd want to see from the alleged bastion of freedom and democracy. A destroy-on-sight policy for unauthorized drones in restricted airspaces seems like a good enough solution for this problem without online censorship. Don't want your expensive drone blown to smithereens? Don't fly it where you ain't supposed to be flying it. (And on the flip-side, th…
> alleged bastion of ... democracy.
They're referring to the new administration, so pivoting away from this designation.
Re: DJI No Longer Blocks Flights over Airports and Military Bases
#10I’m not taking sides, but I do have a question for anyone with legal understanding. I feel like, if I worked for a drone company and wanted to roll out a new feature to block flights close to ‘restricted zones’, then the legal department would throw a fit. I can imagine them saying that the new feature would expose the company if the feature ever failed or didn’t have a complete list of locations to block. It’s bette…
If the alternative is getting your product banned, I suspect legal would figure something out. Given the continuing drone idiocies with the California fires, I would expect a blanket ban coming unless an automated system can instantly comply with FAA airspace restrictions.
> If the alternative is getting your product banned, I suspect legal would figure something out.
I appreciate the response, but it seems the opposite is happening. They have the feature already and are actively rolling it back. So they must believe the feature’s existence is a bigger threat to the company than not having it at all, right?