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

FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 126 posts

Re: FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

#101

Post by nl »

Joel_Mckay wrote: post #76
dgellow wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has been leading in drones since a very long time. It’s not something they took from the US

Sure, China started manufacturing the $8 motors at a steep discount which drove amateur $27.50 competition out of business, than initially sold $60 LiPol batteries for $7 to starve other manufacturers out of business for years. Finally, purchased rare earth mines across the planet to secure their economic position long into the future. China party policy was successful, and just a bit better at state-backed monopolis…

> $8 motors at a steep discount

What does this even mean?

There are tens (hundreds?) of cheap electric motor manufactures in China. You can go and order some custom motor yourself and get a quote, and yes you get a discount if you order more.

That is what free enterprise is!

It seems odd that China seems to need to teach (presumably) US people this?

> than initially sold $60 LiPol batteries for $7 to starve other manufacturers out of business for years

You make it sounds like this was somehow strange or dodgy or something.

Yes, other manufactures couldn't produce them as cheaply. There was no magic Chinese government subsidy or something outside the normal tax reductions the local governments give for setting up factories in their district (the same as in the US!)

Re: FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

#102

Post by overfeed »

monster_truck wrote: post #41
anigbrowl wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this worse than 4k video, in this age of analytical abundance? The steel content of this argument is pretty low; it's essentially 'technology operates normally = national security risk.' Why not ban pencils? You can draw maps or schematics of secret things, plus they can be used to stab people!

4k video is worthless compared to LiDAR. You are never going to get sub millisecond dead reckoning from video processing. Previously this required things like extremely expensive, export controlled ring laser gyroscopes (they do not drift and cannot be easily interfered with or jammed like the cheap IMU in your phone) There are many more reasons LiDAR kicks ass but none of them have anything to do with why they are d…

> 4k video is worthless compared to LiDAR. You are never going to get sub millisecond dead reckoning from video processing

Will America's foes heinously attack the homeland by offering socialistic self-driving vehicles? What exactly the threat model here, that makes Lidar data dangerous? Space-based remote sensing is superior in almost every way.

Re: FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

#103

Post by Joel_Mckay »

nl wrote: post #101
Joel_Mckay wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, China started manufacturing the $8 motors at a steep discount which drove amateur $27.50 competition out of business, than initially sold $60 LiPol batteries for $7 to starve other manufacturers out of business for years. Finally, purchased rare earth mines across the planet to secure their economic position long into the future. China party policy was successful, and just a bit better at state-backed monopolis…

> $8 motors at a steep discount What does this even mean? There are tens (hundreds?) of cheap electric motor manufactures in China. You can go and order some custom motor yourself and get a quote, and yes you get a discount if you order more. That is what free enterprise is! It seems odd that China seems to need to teach (presumably) US people this? > than initially sold $60 LiPol batteries for $7 to starve other man…

One doesn't understand the economics of Dumping with a communist fully-subsidized labor force in some situations, or the strategic politics of the PRC party with western-trained engineers making decisions for decades.

>What does this even mean?

Selling products at a loss relying on government $0 labor cost subsidy for years. Ultimately, securing a monopolistic position over raw material supply chains, and retail consumer product value expectations.

Finally, leveraging new found consolidated market positions as political policy, where the prices climb back up to generate record profits after replacing entire market sectors.

To put it bluntly, it is why anyone can walk into a large retail outlet, and see the exact same factory pad-printed house-brand products regardless of the business.

>That is what free enterprise is!

Not really, as going to online sellers like e-bay/Walmart/Amazon just sell the identical nonsense products as Taobao. Thousands of product pages superficially indistinguishable from competitors, always initially cheaper than anywhere else, and more than likely poorer quality counterfeits.

>You make it sounds like this was somehow strange or dodgy or something.

Not really, it was a strategic subsidy that paid off for many China businesses. Now LiPol prices are back at $63/pack with all other potentiality competitive pricing pressures nonexistent for the next few decades.

My point was most North American firms could never compete with subsidized labor policies, lost consumer influence over rare-earth raw material supply chains, and can not make long-term rational policy choices. =3

Re: FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

#104

Post by ranger_danger »

blitzar wrote: post #27
PunchyHamster wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Elon thought that too and we still haven't seen any robotaxi

Hearing its definitely going to happen by the end of the year

Already happened since last month. They are on the road in Texas and Florida now.

Re: FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

#105

Post by fc417fc802 »

theptip wrote: post #91
fc417fc802 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already have that, and us maps of their country as well. Everyone has maps of everything at this point. If it's above ground then literally everyone that matters knows about it.

I don’t think that lidar maps are public knowledge. If they were why would Google be spending so much money creating their own? This is not the same thing as taking a picture from a satellite.

I realize that. I didn't say "publicly available" but rather that anyone important has access to the information that they want. I expect that any exceptions to that can be trivially remedied on a case by case basis.

It's a matter of scale. Satellite imagery gets you most of the way there. I can think of only a very few instances where you'd care about higher resolution and those should be few enough that any well funded actor (ie the ones we care about here) can perform targeted data collection.

Re: FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

#106

Post by mmooss »

gyanchawdhary wrote: post #100
mmooss wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't seem to address the prior comment ? > over time it allows other players (inside of that country) to fill that void .. and develop their own home grown solutions .. By eliminating competition, it forces Americans to subsidize second-rate manufacturers, and to pay more to get less. What incentive do local manufacturers have to improve? Also, the US only has a fraction of world output; they can't replicate…

> forces Americans to subsidize second-rate manufacturers I think Anduril Industries is not a second rate company (not that you said they are) ... they explicitly focuses on manufacturing cheaper, mass produced drones/weapons to disrupt the traditional defense industry .. and therefore helps gov spend less and gain more .. not that the US needs you or I to second their more than half a century experience in making ad…

> Anduril Industries is not a second rate company

Then they can compete successfully with non-US companies and protectionist tariffs are useless.

Re: FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

#107

Post by nl »

Joel_Mckay wrote: post #103
nl wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> $8 motors at a steep discount What does this even mean? There are tens (hundreds?) of cheap electric motor manufactures in China. You can go and order some custom motor yourself and get a quote, and yes you get a discount if you order more. That is what free enterprise is! It seems odd that China seems to need to teach (presumably) US people this? > than initially sold $60 LiPol batteries for $7 to starve other man…

One doesn't understand the economics of Dumping with a communist fully-subsidized labor force in some situations, or the strategic politics of the PRC party with western-trained engineers making decisions for decades. >What does this even mean? Selling products at a loss relying on government $0 labor cost subsidy for years. Ultimately, securing a monopolistic position over raw material supply chains, and retail cons…

> Selling products at a loss relying on government $0 labor cost subsidy for years

You are going to need proof for this.

There is zero evidence of anything like this occurring in these fields.

The ILO has a report on Chinese wage subsidies here: https://www.ilo.org/media/421136/download

They do have wage subsidies, but they are pretty standard things like a (fairly small) subsidy for employing a long-term unemployed person. That's nothing that most other counties don't do, eg:

> An employer who recruits a targeted unemployed person is given an annual tax deduction of 4,800 RMB per person recruited, as well as social insurance subsidies.

Regarding batteries, it's true that China had tax rebates for EV purchases (along with most Western countries). In China the subsidy is paid directly to the manufacturer and only domestic production is eligible, which is unique.

But:

> By far the largest recipient of purchase subsidies was Chinese NEV manufacturer BYD, which in 2022 alone received purchase subsidies amounting to €1.6 billion (for about 1.4 million NEV) (Figure 4). The second largest recipient of purchase subsidies was US-headquartered Tesla, which received about €0.4 billion (for about 250,000 BEV produced in its Shanghai Gigafactory). While the ten next highest recipients of purchase subsidies are all Chinese, there are also three Sino-foreign joint ventures (the two VW joint ventures with FAW and SAIC as well as SAIC GM Wuling) among the top 20 purchase subsidy recipients.

https://www.intereconomics.eu/contents/year/2024/number/4/ar...

Re: FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

#108

Post by Joel_Mckay »

nl wrote: post #107
Joel_Mckay wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One doesn't understand the economics of Dumping with a communist fully-subsidized labor force in some situations, or the strategic politics of the PRC party with western-trained engineers making decisions for decades. >What does this even mean? Selling products at a loss relying on government $0 labor cost subsidy for years. Ultimately, securing a monopolistic position over raw material supply chains, and retail cons…

> Selling products at a loss relying on government $0 labor cost subsidy for years You are going to need proof for this. There is zero evidence of anything like this occurring in these fields. The ILO has a report on Chinese wage subsidies here: https://www.ilo.org/media/421136/download They do have wage subsidies, but they are pretty standard things like a (fairly small) subsidy for employing a long-term unemployed…

>You are going to need proof for this.

Are you asking for proof China is not Communist? It is common knowledge Party Service Centers and State-Directed Industrial Policy support have been active for decades. One may talk with US customs about why industries had anti-dumping levies on China exports.

Also, the PRC Party embeds advisors in almost every large successful domestic firm. So businesses couldn't really have 'free enterprise' even if they wanted a free market.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect

>Regarding batteries, it's true that China had tax rebates for EV purchases

That is a different subject, and part of a late stage market exploitation phase post state planning. BYD and DJI make some great products, but that success did not just magically appear out of thin air.

Over 93% of Solar/EV/Battery industries are currently China based. That isn't going to change anytime soon, and wasn't by accident given its massive oil reserves are still finite. The Party wanted independence from global trade politics, and now produces most of the worlds "Green" power products.

Communism is interesting, as such economies must control supply, demand, and public opinion to persist. =3

"In America you can change political parties, but you can't change policies. In China you cannot change the party, but you can change policies."

Re: FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

#109

Post by nl »

Joel_Mckay wrote: post #108
nl wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Selling products at a loss relying on government $0 labor cost subsidy for years You are going to need proof for this. There is zero evidence of anything like this occurring in these fields. The ILO has a report on Chinese wage subsidies here: https://www.ilo.org/media/421136/download They do have wage subsidies, but they are pretty standard things like a (fairly small) subsidy for employing a long-term unemployed…

>You are going to need proof for this. Are you asking for proof China is not Communist? It is common knowledge Party Service Centers and State-Directed Industrial Policy support have been active for decades. One may talk with US customs about why industries had anti-dumping levies on China exports. Also, the PRC Party embeds advisors in almost every large successful domestic firm. So businesses couldn't really have '…

>>> Selling products at a loss relying on government $0 labor cost subsidy for years

>> You are going to need proof for this.

> Are you asking for proof China is not Communist?

No, I literally quoted exactly what I'm asking for proof for.

Re: FCC moves to ban Lidar-equipped foreign drones from US

#110

Post by gyanchawdhary »

mmooss wrote: post #106
gyanchawdhary wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> forces Americans to subsidize second-rate manufacturers I think Anduril Industries is not a second rate company (not that you said they are) ... they explicitly focuses on manufacturing cheaper, mass produced drones/weapons to disrupt the traditional defense industry .. and therefore helps gov spend less and gain more .. not that the US needs you or I to second their more than half a century experience in making ad…

> Anduril Industries is not a second rate company Then they can compete successfully with non-US companies and protectionist tariffs are useless.

national security > free market capitalism
Post reply on HN