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

DJI Mavic Mini

dji.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–187 of 187 posts

Re: DJI Mavic Mini

#181

Post by mithr »

kbenson wrote: post #151
alistairSH wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see the same thing with selfies on vacations - at Machu Picchu, the Scottish Highlands, Iceland, Florence - people spending the entirety of their visit to some tourist spot trying to get the perfect selfie, to the exclusion of nearly everything else. Yes, I also carry a camera and take a lot of photos, but I don't run off the tour bus or out of the car, in an effort to get a shot before anybody else gets there (var…

> people spending the entirety of their visit to some tourist spot trying to get the perfect selfie, to the exclusion of nearly everything else. There is a sweet spot, since I'm at the far extreme other end of the spectrum, and have my own regrets. I don't take pictures. I just looked, and there's probably between 10 and 20 a month in my phone over the last few months, but the vast majority of those are for stuff I g…

I'm somewhere in the middle. I enjoy taking photos, especially on trips, but will rarely pull my phone out during an event, and almost never post anything on social media in any case.

One way that has perhaps been personally helpful in moderating the amount of photos taken is that I mostly use a film camera. This has its downsides, but one upside is that you're limited by the amount of film you physically brought, and so you take a single photo of something rather than 20 (which, incidentally also cuts down on the amount of time you spend picking the "perfect one" -- you either got it or you didn't, and that's it).

That being said, as phone cameras have gotten better, I have found myself taking more photos with those devices as well... but perhaps due to habits developed with a film camera, I still manage to find a balance between just looking at what's around me, device in pocket, and taking it out to snap a nice picture here and there.

Re: DJI Mavic Mini

#182

Post by roywiggins »

Scoundreller wrote: post #101
roywiggins wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll just note that laws and regulations can get struck down for vagueness. If there's no hard rule about what kind of drones are regulated how, then it becomes more burdensome- or even impossible- to know whether you're complying with the law.

Or the law is perfectly clear, but the police and prosecutors pick and choose which cases they put forward. Or the intensity of enforcement varies in the first place. And chances are you’re doing something else illegal anyway. Or can be followed until you do. And if you don’t, there’s always the routine traffic stop.

> the police and prosecutors pick and choose which cases they put forward

someone has to decide which cases to bring, unless you fund the police and prosecutors so they can bring every plausible case, which sounds like a strictly worse universe to live in. Is this discretion abused? Yes, all the time. But bringing every case seems more like a police state than a free society.

Re: DJI Mavic Mini

#183

Post by 205guy »

leetcrew wrote: post #171
205guy wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a fascinating discussion that I think gets to the heart of the matter, but is still missing the key point: can you ever own something with software? I up voted the sibling comment (diminoten) even though it was a bit aggressive. Leetcrew say s/he doesn't trust the controls programmed "crudely" by others. But the sibling logically points out that leetcrew's actions could be just as crude from the others' point…

I'm glad you brought up ham radio licenses. drones can certainly be dangerous if they are misused. although it would be inconvenient for me, I would not oppose stricter licensing requirements for drones and other potentially dangerous products. it could even be required to buy one in the first place. requiring a license says something like "we need to know that you understand the rules and are capable of following th…

But the free market is working: there are permitless drones available (with idiot-proofing software), or you can buy or build a "DRM-free" drone, and now the gov't essentially says you need a permit/license to fly it. I've seen youtube channels of the commercial drone pilots (ads/TV/cinema) who had to spend $10K+ to get a pilot's license.

There is still a middle ground of "unlocked" drones that you only need to register with FAA to use, but you still need to follow the rules yourself. But it is in the drone manufacturers interest to self-regulate to avoid being banned altogether. If too many yahoos and others (see Gatwick incidents) cause problems, authorities can easily kill their profitable industry. So I think these "personal-responsibility" drones will quickly be phased out by the industry.

Re: DJI Mavic Mini

#184

Post by hnick »

nradov wrote: post #168
hnick wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or their idea thereof... when I use my GPS it surprises me how low my car actually reports my speed compared to reality. It probably explains all the slow drivers in the right lane over here. Go on the M4 though and 10 over is too slow for many!

How are you checking the real speed? Most GPS receivers display more accurate speeds than car speedometers do.

I'm assuming the GPS is accurate. I've driven through speed traps with it just on or over the limit and been fine. My car on the other hand is reporting around 5 kmh higher, depending what angle I'm holding my head at.

Re: DJI Mavic Mini

#185

Post by [deleted] »

sneak wrote: post #15

As someone who wants hardware that does what I instruct it to after I have purchased it, regardless of the manufacturer's wishes, I don't think I can support buying DJI's otherwise-excellent products any longer. The firmware updates and activation locks and flight restrictions imposed by the DJI Go app are too onerous. If I buy a tool, and the tool now belongs to me, the manufacturer attempting to restrict my use of…

[deleted]

Re: DJI Mavic Mini

#186

Post by vannevar »

sneak wrote: post #157
rrdharan wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why, despite that fact, are no mass murders committed with machine guns? Because it’s cheaper and easier to get and use a bump stock? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting

Why aren’t more mass murders carried out with bump stocks, then, instead of just the one? Why aren’t there more IEDs when gasoline is sold on every corner? Why is the flying of private aircraft (small or large) as weapons still an insanely rare event? Why don’t we see hundreds of mass stabbings with knives? It turns out that most people do not want to harm or endanger others. We don’t need technological restrictions.…

We don’t need technological restrictions. Laws and education are more than sufficient, as is presently being demonstrated every day in our society.

Yes, these events are rare. The vast majority of people are not murderous sociopaths. That doesn't mean we shouldn't take prudent precautions agains those who are, or simply against otherwise good people who may be careless.

Sure, you can do bad things with gasoline. But it's not that easy, you need a lot of it to do significant damage. And you can't just jump in a plane, their use is strictly regulated for precisely the reasons we're talking about. To do bad things with an airplane, you still have to be in it to boot, which cuts down the number of potential bad guys by a couple of orders of magnitude. And there are lots of stabbings, but if you're going to do a mass attack, guns are so easy to get here in the US that it makes no sense to do so. Mass stabbings only happen in places where guns are tightly regulated, and it's worth noting that the death toll is (predictably) much lower than in a mass shooting with semi-automatic weapons.

We clearly do need restrictions on the availability and use of potentially destructive technology, which is exactly why we already have them in many cases. That need is demonstrated every day in our society.

Re: DJI Mavic Mini

#187

Post by bitL »

yardie wrote: post #161
bitL wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phantom line seems to be killed, DJI doesn't care, so welcome to unstable drones in the future. I still can't understand why did they kill their best drone series a grandpa could fly?

The Phantom was just in a weird space. Too large and expensive for casual flight photography. Not up to snuff of the capabilities of what a pro needs in the Inspire. I’ve met plenty of photographers who go out on a casual shoot with just the Mavic Pro. The Mavic can be thrown in a photo bag. The Phantom is it’s own bag.

It was in a perfect space for me and for many people. It was still the best-selling drone, despite competition offering smaller drones. Inspire is not easy to fly by a grandpa.
Post reply on HN