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

DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

dronedj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 742 posts

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#431

Post by bluescrn »

somehnguy wrote: post #368
kuschku wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends entirely on your definition of "behind". The MK4 delivers pretty much the same quality at the same speed as the P1P. Paying 30% more to get an open-source, fully modular, fully repairable and customizable product that's made sustainably with fair wages is not a huge markup. I'd gladly pay 30% more to get an Android phone that's fully modular, open-source, repairable, upgradable and made in the EU.

The speed of the MK4 for the same quality isn't even close to the P1P due to it being a bedslinger vs CoreXY gemoetry.

Speed isn't everything, especially when more speed means more noise

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#432

Post by mrguyorama »

redserk wrote: post #239
klipklop wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except you can totally use a DJI drone for war. I saw a video the other day of such a drone modified to drop airsoft grenades. Does not take much to replace it with the real thing.

Might as well just shut down and ban all RC hobby shops because RC Airplanes can carry heavier payloads than all of DJI's consumer/prosumer lines -- and are much easier to modify.

Ease of piloting is a huge differentiating factor and the entire reason why public drone regulation didn't exist until every tom, dick, and harry could reasonably keep something in the air long enough to bother someone else, despite hobby RC airplanes being around decades before drones.

Non-FPV drone flyers can drop 40mm grenades from 100ft and hit a CEP of like a couple feet, and that's with literally four drops of practice and unsophisticated munitions. Untrained RC plane pilots can NOT do that.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#433

Post by dji4321234 »

hackernewds wrote: post #415
dji4321234 wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It can only be side-loaded on Android, because their app breaks a number of policies on privacy and data gathering. I don't think this is the reason, I think it's more that they're just too lazy to jump through the approval and maintenance hoops that come with an app store, especially because their home market (China) doesn't even use the Play Store. The iOS version of their app is Apple-approved and present in the…

> sufficient product telemetry is indistinguishable from surveillance malware Isn't this mandatory given the restrictions required of them to disallow flying in banned areas?

No; this functionality is actually accomplished in a reasonable way, with a local database stored on the drone and checked by the drone's flight control software, and exemptions granted by uploading a signed payload to the drone detailing an unlock region and timeframe.

It's also worth noting that these restrictions aren't government imposed in countries besides China, and aren't government-linked besides a request-based "please make this location a no fly zone" process - DJI basically just exported a Chinese concept with hope of building goodwill internationally, and the no-fly zones were invented by DJI from public land use data. That's why other drones don't have no-fly zones but are still allowed for sale, there are frequent mismatches between DJI no-fly zones and real no-fly zones (both false positive and false negative), and why DJI disabled their own no-fly zone feature in much of Europe earlier this year (European mandated no-fly rules passed the responsibility to the consumer instead).

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#434

Post by lima »

dji4321234 wrote: post #350
TheChaplain wrote: post #328

I don't trust DJI. I was looking to replace my GoPro with the DJI Action, but their app was not on the Play-store. It can only be side-loaded on Android, because their app breaks a number of policies on privacy and data gathering. I believe I saw a site that decompiled their app and found a number of worrisome things.

> It can only be side-loaded on Android, because their app breaks a number of policies on privacy and data gathering. I don't think this is the reason, I think it's more that they're just too lazy to jump through the approval and maintenance hoops that come with an app store, especially because their home market (China) doesn't even use the Play Store. The iOS version of their app is Apple-approved and present in the…

What about consumer apps in Local Data Mode?

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#435

Post by Workaccount2 »

dji4321234 wrote: post #350
TheChaplain wrote: post #328

I don't trust DJI. I was looking to replace my GoPro with the DJI Action, but their app was not on the Play-store. It can only be side-loaded on Android, because their app breaks a number of policies on privacy and data gathering. I believe I saw a site that decompiled their app and found a number of worrisome things.

> It can only be side-loaded on Android, because their app breaks a number of policies on privacy and data gathering. I don't think this is the reason, I think it's more that they're just too lazy to jump through the approval and maintenance hoops that come with an app store, especially because their home market (China) doesn't even use the Play Store. The iOS version of their app is Apple-approved and present in the…

>I don't think they're explicitly a CCP data-collection front

In China you cannot not be explicitly a CCP data-collection front.

China doesn't bring evidence to a judge in order to get a subpoena for data. They just go to DJI an get it. DJI has zero legal recourse if the CCP wants access to all DJI's stored data. Doesn't matter where that data is stored. Same thing for tiktok and why legislators are killing that too. You're a Chinese company? You ultimately work for the state. No discussion.

China is not the US. People need to stop fitting the way things work in the US to the way things work in China.

Edit: For the whataboutists: Yes, everyone is aware that american three letter agencies have backdoor access to every computer, broken RSA and AES, and control the USA's puppet government. Thanks.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#436

Post by aeyes »

nsvd wrote: post #413
michael_vo wrote: post #306

I wish there was a way for the public to vote on all of these bills! We need to be able to give feedback to these senators about what the public wants. And to me the public wants DJI.

Yes, if only there was some kind of democratic process in this country, where citizens could influence the laws that are passed...

Is this some kind of sarcastic joke? Anti-China legislation is popular with both parties. So who do you vote for in a two-party system?

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#437

Post by bityard »

freedomben wrote: post #347
beloch wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking as a Canadian, U.S. trade protectionism is nothing new. It happens all the time and frequently targets allies like Canada rather than rivals like China. What U.S. citizens should watch out for is when U.S. protectionism winds up hurting the U.S.'s own economy. e.g. Tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber may have helped out a few U.S. softwood lumber producers with good lobbyists (and Jimmy Carter), but the incr…

Indeed, and we never seem to learn. Lumber prices in the US during Covid were eye-watering and wreaked havoc through the whole economy that is still being felt today, and it was almost entirely due to US protectionism of lumber.

I'm not a fan of protectionism either, but that particular example is not true at all.

Lumber prices rose because at the start of the pandemic, the industry predicted a housing crash and took drastic steps to downsize and then the exact opposite happened. And we were left with a garden-variety supply vs demand situation.

If it was just protectionism, prices in Canada would not have had sharply increased lumber prices at the exact same time: https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/lumber-prices-covid-19-cost...

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#438

Post by cm2012 »

team_gold wrote: post #336

As someone who has a DJI Mini what are the options for a consumer drone made by a US company? Everything on https://www.diu.mil/blue-uas-cleared-list is either widely different, 15x as expensive, not purchasable by civilians at all, or all of the above. Parret appears to have stopped selling their consumer model entirely. Skydio 2+ seems like the closest thing but it also no longer appears to be for sale either. All…

The market will open up for new companies after the China ban takes effect. Right now they can't compete.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#439

Post by cm2012 »

henvic wrote: post #28

DJI is, by far, the best drone equipment brand for photography, industrial usage, etc. It's disheartening to witness the US embracing protectionism for high-tech. If the United States does this, it might as well join the European Union's decadence in killing tech startups by stifling the competitiveness of their market...

The risk of relying on China for anything military related is too high. They have an aggressive, expansionary mindset and threaten war over Taiwan all the time.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#440

Post by aeyes »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #194

Does this just ban importing DJI products (bad enough) or does it also ban owning and/or flying a DJI drone you already own? (really bad if that's the case, but also would be difficult to enforce)

The text specifically calls out that software and "services" are to be banned: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/2864...

Since the software phones home it most likely won't work anymore once the ban is in effect.

Post reply on HN