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

The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

popularmechanics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 331 posts

Re: The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

#141

Post by superkuh »

deadbabe wrote: post #34

So you can’t even build your own DIY drone?

You can because unless you rock the boat you're unlikely to be charged. But according to the FCC original statement, https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-416839A1.pdf

... the import of any foreign made drone parts is also blocked. This includes things like ESCs and flight controllers. Not just items that actually transmit radio signals like camera modules and so are traditionally regulated by the FCC re: import.

The best coverage of the FCCs over-reach attempting to regulate all parts, and then their subsequent very tiny walking of it back is Joshua Bardwell's video: https://youtu.be/Dyr87--SDuc (9m47s)

Almost all the new exceptions are for government users. The only thing relevant to human persons is the back-stepping change that as long as the components of a drone are 60% made in the USA the entire thing can be considered domestic and imported. Or US retail importers can take the risk of saying that a tx'ing camera module has alternate uses, like as a security camera, and try importing it regardless of the ban.

"FCC Updates Covered List to Exempt Certain Drones and Releases FAQs" https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-updates-covered-list-exempt...

Re: The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

#142

Post by [deleted] »

b112 wrote: post #130
throw0101d wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't take one tragic mistake or bad-apple cop and draw conclusions about the fate of the country from it. As per a sibling comment: > The bad apples metaphor originated as a warning of the corrupting influence of one corrupt or sinful person on a group: that "one bad apple can spoil the barrel". Over time the concept has been used to describe the opposite situation, where "a few bad apples" should not be seen…

Regardless of all the rest, what a saying meant 1000 years ago is irrelevant. I find it bizarre anyone is providing historical usage as if proves something. You could pick endless words and sayings in English from 1000 years ago, which are entirely different now. So what? The modern usage is quite clear.

[deleted]

Re: The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

#143

Post by 542354234235 »

aardvarkr wrote: post #70
jayd16 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That logic also means they shouldn't be banned under 2nd amendment protections, no?

No, you can think of them more like unarmed artillery shells. Can you walk down the street to buy some artillery munitions? Even if they were considered arms for the purpose of 2a this isn’t a ban on drones but a specific manufacturer. They government can definitely refuse to grant a manufacturer license to sell on this country.

After Mcviegh, shouldn’t all U-Haul’s be seen as unarmed vehicular large IEDs? A drone isn’t like an artillery shell because an artillery shell is for putting in an artillery gun. A drone is for flying. Just because something can be modified to serve as some sort of weapon, does make it basically a weapon.

Re: The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

#144

Post by 8note »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #4

Alternative headline: The US Government Banned All New Foreign Drones. As every foreign-made drone is now on the FCC’s “Covered List.

sounds like the kind of thing that the supreme court would strike down, if the law has specifically named drones as disallowed

Re: The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

#145

Post by alex43578 »

ericmay wrote: post #133
alex43578 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'm inclined to think Ukraine is fighting our war for us. Is there a war we needed to fight with Russia in this decade, the next decade, or the last, and if so, is Ukraine even damaging the parts that matter? Russia nukes hold America at threat, not a bunch of conscripts and some old BMPs. America isn’t safer if Ukraine scores another 100K Russian casualties, and there’s even an argument that a destabilized, volatil…

> America isn’t safer if Ukraine scores another 100K Russian casualties Europe is safer though, so there's that at least. Russia can't invade the United States of course, but it can invade other countries in Europe, and it is actively taking action to do so.

Good thing NATO has consistently hit the 2% funding target, and Europe more broadly hasn’t neglected to maintain their defense spending in favor of profligate social welfare spending.

Re: The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

#146

Post by leptons »

alex43578 wrote: post #136
Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's absolutely wild to me that two people can watch the same video and come up with completely different conclusions as to what happened. > She sees he is there, puts it in drive, and pulls forward. The fact that her steering was cranked to the right is proof enough that she was not intending on hitting him.

[flagged]

He pulled his gun out before she moved the car anywhere. He was already intending to shoot her.

Re: The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

#147

Post by CrimsonCape »

IAmBroom wrote: post #46
anonu wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not that hard to make. USA will be fine. If some of the software and hardware manufacturing expertise can be built here thats great.

They're hard to develop . That is proven by the fact that DJI is by far the industry leader, and everyone else is trailing. We're not talking about duct-taping a Go Pro to an OTS drone.

Just looking at the injection molded shell of my Mavic Mini makes me cringe when thinking about the startup cost. It's the plastic shell; not the motors, nor the circuitry, nor the optical parts...and to think you could build that in the USA is laughable. DJI releases 2-3 models every 2-3 years... if you could even find a company in the USA machining the steel molds at that frequency (i don't think it exists) how are you going to afford the bill?

Re: The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

#148

Post by inetknght »

jjk166 wrote: post #113
glitchc wrote: post #84

This ban has more to do with how much geodetic data is being transmitted to China and less to do with the actual drone technology. People flying DJI drones are mapping the US on China's behalf, and that too with great fidelity.

Satellite synthetic aperture radar can have a resolution of like 6 inches. I can't imagine consumer grade drones are significantly improving on this, and even if they could do better I would question the utility of higher resolution data for anything military related.

> I can't imagine consumer grade drones are significantly improving on this

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43073808

It's not necessarily better than 6 inches. But it's pretty decent, down to 0.3m, roughly 12 inches.

> even if they could do better I would question the utility of higher resolution data for anything military related.

Oh boy. Suffice to say that it definitely is useful for many things military related.

Re: The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

#149

Post by AndrewKemendo »

ivell wrote: post #109
Kapura wrote: post #2

Seeing how drone warfare has become the new hot front in 21st century conflicts like Ukraine, it's hard not to speculate on the implications of this as political unrest continues to rise in the U.S. It's no secret that the current U.S. regime views a sizeable portion of its own civilian citizens as enemy combatants. They are already shooting people in the face and not even putting up a pretense of acting shocked at t…

My takeaway is that all previous U.S. administrations had pretense of morality and rules in both international and domestic politics (even when they did dubious stuff). The new administration has realized that there is no need for such pretense to stay in power. Previously Venezuelan attack would have been about "democracy" and "freedom" and "peace". Trump has made it clear that it is for oil. Overall it is probably…

> My takeaway is that all previous U.S. administrations had pretense of morality and rules in both international and domestic politics

This is a perspective that continues to boggle my mind.

Every record of the United States acting internationally has been either:

Explicitly horrific (Invasion of Grenada, Vietnam, Firebombing then nuking Tokyo, Iraq etc…)

Attempts to Subvert or ignore international law (IPCC, ICC, UN…)

Or benefits some major industrial corporation (NAFTA, WTO etc…)

Please point to any type of transcendent “morality or rules” that isn’t just straight up large scale international realpolitik and propaganda around maintaining global capitalism on behalf of American based owners.

Re: The U.S. Government Just Followed Through on Its Ban of DJI Drones

#150

Post by jameshart »

aeternum wrote: post #38
Kapura wrote: post #2

Seeing how drone warfare has become the new hot front in 21st century conflicts like Ukraine, it's hard not to speculate on the implications of this as political unrest continues to rise in the U.S. It's no secret that the current U.S. regime views a sizeable portion of its own civilian citizens as enemy combatants. They are already shooting people in the face and not even putting up a pretense of acting shocked at t…

Ah yes I'm sure it has nothing to do with the drones running closed proprietary software via OTA updates, with encrypted data connections back to China, while being outfitted with 8k cameras, gps, lidar, etc.

Much like the TikTok ban this seems like something that could be handled through actually regulating what tech companies are allowed to do, rather than just picking on specific products and saying ‘stop that, it’s making us nervous’.

Federal laws about data collection and retention, export, and algorithmic usage… as well as laws about software update channels for hardware devices, eg requiring that it be possible to replace firmware yourself… all sorts of regulations could be put in place that leave the software and hardware markets open, by making it clear where the boundaries are. If DJI or TikTok are doing something bad, prosecute and fine them and enjoin them from doing it again… but make it clear what specific behavior you have a problem with.

Post reply on HN