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

Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

gigaom.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 48 posts

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#31

Post by baddox »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #27

The key of course is that in Canada, you need a permit to operate it. You can't just fly drones anywhere whenever you want... Would that shit fly in the US? Needing to apply for a government permit to operate a drone? I know you all are sensitive about perceived 'freedom'. Like how we have gun control, drone permits (and thus restrictions), etc...

> Needing to apply for a government permit to operate a drone?

Are you talking about commercial flying? I certainly do not think I should need to apply for a government permit to fly a 15 gram quadcopter that could not cause injury or property damage if I tried.

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#32

Post by johan_larson »

baddox wrote: post #31
Mikeb85 wrote: post #27

The key of course is that in Canada, you need a permit to operate it. You can't just fly drones anywhere whenever you want... Would that shit fly in the US? Needing to apply for a government permit to operate a drone? I know you all are sensitive about perceived 'freedom'. Like how we have gun control, drone permits (and thus restrictions), etc...

> Needing to apply for a government permit to operate a drone? Are you talking about commercial flying? I certainly do not think I should need to apply for a government permit to fly a 15 gram quadcopter that could not cause injury or property damage if I tried.

Injury, no. But gross violations of people's privacy, yes.

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#33

Post by johan_larson »

notatoad wrote: post #19
bennesvig wrote: post #5

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. If there were laws about flying above a certain height or over people in well populated areas, that would make more sense than just banning commercial use. There are going to be a lot of drone-based businesses soon. I got a DJI Phantom 2 last month and have been amazed at the quality of footage that it can captu…

if the goal of the commercial use ban is to simply limit the number of things flying around the sky, it makes perfect sense. as soon as you allow drones to be used for commercial purposes, the number of them will skyrocket. a couple of hobbyists flying their toys around isn't going to cause problems, the tacocopter lunch rush could be a big problem.

You had me at "tacocopter".

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#34

Post by lotsofmangos »

bigiain wrote: post #14
bennesvig wrote: post #5

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. If there were laws about flying above a certain height or over people in well populated areas, that would make more sense than just banning commercial use. There are going to be a lot of drone-based businesses soon. I got a DJI Phantom 2 last month and have been amazed at the quality of footage that it can captu…

I don't think it's "bizarre" at all - getting paid _fundamentally_ changes things. Although the "ban commercial use completely" approach is a pretty big hammer to use - as a hobbyist RC pilot who's flown with a camera aboard for some time ( http://bigiain.com/Mini-Swift-RC-plane ) I've had _many_ requests to take photos/video for other people, many of whom have offered money for it, and almost _all_ of which would re…

If you will drop your own safety standards for money, that isn't a problem with drones.

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#35

Post by unclebunkers »

markdown wrote: post #6

Request: Please don't come and ruin it for the rest of us, like this irresponsible american drone operator potentially did (thankfully there have been no repercussions yet as the authorities haven't seen it). See the first few seconds of this video: http://vimeo.com/99295619 Flying anywhere near aerodromes is illegal just about everywhere.

Do you have more info handy? My immeadiate thought was it was a Fiji promotional video, and approved of. I'd love to read the intrigue on it.

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#36

Post by dragonwriter »

baddox wrote: post #30
Yardlink wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cooking too? Food safety has bigger risks if you're making 10000 donuts than 1. Restricting everyone equally would put an unreasonable burden on everyday life. Scale is a big reason why there's a difference. Unrestricted commercial drone flights would be much more common than hobby, and would therefore cause much more accidents.

Scale is completely separate from the legal ban of commercial drone operations. I can legally build a dozen quadcopters with 26" propellers and set them flying formations for fun. I cannot legally charge $5 to take extremely low quality photos of a field with a 20 gram.

> Scale is completely separate from the legal ban of commercial drone operations.

Its actually not. While the limit on commercial application doesn't directly limit scale, there is a very big difference in the overall expected scale when something can only be done for personal enjoyment vs. when it can be both done for that and for commercial purposes.

One can argue that prohibiting commercial use isn't the most desirable way to influence overall scale, but one cannot -- without willful blindness -- argue that banning commercial use has no impact on expected overall scale, even if it does nothing to directly limit either overall scale or the scale of any particular operation.

> I can legally build a dozen quadcopters with 26" propellers and set them flying formations for fun.

Yes, but how many people will vs. how many will when they can do it for fun or profit?

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#38

Post by sounds »

lnanek2 wrote: post #37

Good. I've seen people cut by those drones and it isn't pretty. The manufacturers should have put safety cages around each prop, even if it cut into performance. But since they don't, I think they should be banned.

I've been cut when hand-launching a drone. The prop embedded itself in my finger through my fingernail.

I still feel like safety cages and banning drones are not the solution. Proper training and respecting the tool are much more effective.

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#39

Post by ams6110 »

biot wrote: post #10
nadiaks wrote: post #3

Here is a link to the original article in the Financial Post ( http://bit.ly/1m1lGdi ) with the due credit to the original author, Quentin Casey, and the companies mentioned in the article, fluttrbox and Resson Aerospace (which is conveniently not mentioned by this author). I am the co-founder of fluttrbox(applied YC W15)

Actual non-Libya URL: http://business.financialpost.com/2014/09/07/canadian-startu...

Are .ly names out of favor now? Not too long ago they were de rigueur for startups.

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#40

Post by baddox »

dragonwriter wrote: post #36
baddox wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scale is completely separate from the legal ban of commercial drone operations. I can legally build a dozen quadcopters with 26" propellers and set them flying formations for fun. I cannot legally charge $5 to take extremely low quality photos of a field with a 20 gram.

> Scale is completely separate from the legal ban of commercial drone operations. Its actually not. While the limit on commercial application doesn't directly limit scale, there is a very big difference in the overall expected scale when something can only be done for personal enjoyment vs. when it can be both done for that and for commercial purposes. One can argue that prohibiting commercial use isn't the most desi…

> there is a very big difference in the overall expected scale when something can only be done for personal enjoyment vs. when it can be both done for that and for commercial purposes.

That only serves as an argument for regulating large scale drone operations (commercial or not). It doesn't work as an argument for prohibiting all commercial drone operations regardless of scale.

Post reply on HN