271–280 of 353 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Delivery drones are larger and therefore quieter (larger propellor = more pleasant tone and lower RPM) and fly higher than the consumer drones you’re probably familiar with.
I still find it pretty distracting. I'm just sitting there trying to chill, and there's this constant buzzing above. Not a fan.
Are you looking forward to jet-propelled delivery drones?
In my neighborhood (rural) a drone hovering over someone's property would be likely used as target practice. If delivery drones become commonplace, there are going to have to be regulations about which air corridors they can use (altitude and routes) or it will be chaos.
For what it's worth, shooting at aircraft (including drones) is a federal offense, and the FAA takes that one pretty seriously. Drones also have cameras.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately it runs afoul of the same laws against training apes to steal[1] or pickpocket[2]. 1. Dunston Checks In (1996) 2. Monkey Trouble (1994)
These are the kinds of references I’d love to see more of on HN.
I live in the path of the drones mentioned in the article and it's an incredibly frustrating experience to be outside and have them fly over the property. they are noisy, intrusive, and increasingly more frequent ( maybe a pass nearby every half hour on a busy day ) Living in an urban environment always will entail some unwanted sounds, dogs barking, passing cars, the occasional helicopter or whatever, but to have a…
I hope the current strategy is to prove demand and when it's time lean into efficiency and hopefully non-obtrusiveness. If they don't, the volume of complaints is a threat to the whole business model. A drone delivering lunch potentially takes a combustion engine off the road for dozens of minutes and leaves more room on congested streets for other traffic. If the tech can be optimized to sound like a bird (essentially inaudible), we've probably gained something overall.
Legislating low noise propellers etc.
Drones make a lot of sense versus having a 2 ton truck drive around to hand you a package. Much better if we figure out a workable solution here
Earlier quoted context omitted.
whats sad is that in many jurisdictions, it's perfectly legal to shoot animals on your property, including other peoples' pets. In my home state, there was recently an issue where a neighbors dog dug under the fence or otherwise got into the back yard, in a residential suburban neighborhood. The property owner blasted it (with a gun) and there was nothing the DA could do. It made the news due to the outrageous use of…
The reason why it's illegal to shoot at airplanes has nothing to do with "Bezos's trillion-dollar empire", it's because it's categorically unsafe and you're likely to kill people by doing it, eiter in the sky or on the ground. It's just a really dumb idea. As for killing animals that wander onto your property... that's been controversial for at least the last 160 years, when a similar incident almost started a war be…
Follow the money
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The question is so common that it has its own section in the FAA’s drone FAQ > Can you shoot down drones above your property? > It’s illegal under federal law to shoot at an aircraft. A private citizen shooting at any aircraft – including unmanned aircraft – poses a significant safety hazard. An unmanned aircraft hit by gunfire could crash, causing damage to persons or property on the ground, or it could collide with…
At what height above your property does that come into effect though? According to US v. Causby the FAA only holds jurisdiction above the "minimum safe altitude". Anything below that is your private property. Naturally the FAA wouldn't be inclined to advertise such lines of thought.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
that's a good fantasy. but here's how I think it would play-out in reality: * your new window was $1800, so even with treble damages, it's still under $10k, which means it is a small claims issue. * sue AMZN (or some subcontractor/"third party") in small claims, they don't show up. you get a default judgement * good luck collecting. the moment you do, they start denying it on technical grounds. Oh you were a prime me…
Which is why you never join prime. And if you think damages are less than 10k from some kid getting hit in the head by a drone crashing through his/her window, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. In the US, healthcare alone is not that cheap. Finally, you suing AMZN is not how things work in the US. In the US, the relevant insurance companies work it out with each other. What I mean by that is, it is AmFam sui…
More like amfam buys you a new window and raises your premium.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quite probably it's more to avoid dealing with possible collision dangers.
Very possible but we're out in the middle of absolute nowhere. The ascent in particular looks robotic in its precision, takes maybe 30 seconds. It's really quite cool to see.
[1] been decades since I've read the textbook on it, but IIRC it involves higher load on rotor and engines than "running" methods that utilize ground effect and provide horizontal momentum against wind gusts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The question is so common that it has its own section in the FAA’s drone FAQ > Can you shoot down drones above your property? > It’s illegal under federal law to shoot at an aircraft. A private citizen shooting at any aircraft – including unmanned aircraft – poses a significant safety hazard. An unmanned aircraft hit by gunfire could crash, causing damage to persons or property on the ground, or it could collide with…
At what height above your property does that come into effect though? According to US v. Causby the FAA only holds jurisdiction above the "minimum safe altitude". Anything below that is your private property. Naturally the FAA wouldn't be inclined to advertise such lines of thought.