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

DJI Mini 4 Pro

dji.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 452 posts

Re: DJI Mini 4 Pro

#441

Post by thombee »

rmbyrro wrote: post #432
mardifoufs wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>us reputation is way better Where? Maybe in the west, certainly not in the rest of the world. China didn't start a war that killed 1million people not even 20 years ago. Westerners don't care about that but that's to be expected.

You are right, Chinese govt didn't kill only 1 million. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine The US military complex is beyond dirty and its grip on govt power makes everyone sick in the West and the East. But reducing the US to that and then doing a comparison with the Chinese government and ideology is unfair, in my opinion.

bit of a random comparison. You're comparing one country's propensity to invade/ bomb other countries and kill their citizens to another country's internal famine. You could say the Chinese gov was incompetent then, but that famine isn't an example of foreign interference, like the US wars etc. dont think the comparison here holds

Re: DJI Mini 4 Pro

#442

Post by thombee »

rmbyrro wrote: post #383
PeterStuer wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace 'China' with 'USA' in your post, and for most of the world both would be identically true.

The thing is: a lot of people want to live in the US. That's not true for China. Have you ever been to China and the US? You may think they're equally awful, but a LOT of people disagree. China's reputation is in really bad shape among people in the West. Despite also being under surveillance, that's why many prefer American or European tech.

Not saying it's all of it, but could some of this reputation be from propaganda and attempts to smear chinese tech? Seems like a pretty common MO from the USA

Re: DJI Mini 4 Pro

#443

Post by RhodesianHunter »

semanticist wrote: post #424
RhodesianHunter wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What's worse is that I don't think it actually works how you've assumed. Holy irony man

Yes, based on my experience with the device I can extrapolate how that software could work. What experience did you base your assertions on? Nothing at all? Right.

15 years of working on SaaS products and a "how I would build it" guess. So basically exactly what you're doing.

Re: DJI Mini 4 Pro

#444

Post by hashtag-til »

cheesemayo wrote: post #148
hashtag-til wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t have any of these, but is the software some apk you download, and at that point can’t that be inspected?

The APK is a thin shell that downloads even more code to execute, from the internet. So, what you download and inspect isn't what's executed, and what you execute now might be different in 5 minutes.

Ok understood. That was the context I was missing. Thanks

Re: DJI Mini 4 Pro

#445

Post by WendyTheWillow »

rmbyrro wrote: post #431
WendyTheWillow wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing simplistic about asking for evidence that this is occurring. Yes it’s not easy, but without evidence you’re spewing speculation, and when you claim speculation as certainty it ventures into the realm of bull shit.

There's plenty of evidence that the CCP forces Chinese tech businesses to do surveillance: 1. https://www.google.com/search?q=ccp+chinese+tech+surveillanc... The word you're trying to find is not "speculation", but "suspicion": 1. a feeling or thought that something is possible, likely, or true. 2. cautious distrust. You may like China or think there's no difference between the US and China. But saying there's no rea…

That’s too broad. The claim is specific, so the evidence needs to be specific.

I never claimed I “liked” China or equated China to the US at all, nor did I say suspicion of Chinese made electronics was without merit. What I said was the specific claim being made was unsupported by evidence that would be trivially collectable if the claim were true.

And no, my word choice was intentional. You seem to be arguing against the common criticisms of your position, but you are ignoring my actual issues. I recommend rereading what I wrote and trying again.

Re: DJI Mini 4 Pro

#446

Post by TheHappyOddish »

palata wrote: post #437
TheHappyOddish wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that different to Wikipdia. Trust, but verify. It's usually correct, but regardless it's a useful starting point for a topic.

Wikipedia shows sources, does not hallucinate, and shows the same content to all the users (meaning that if there is a mistake, someone else can actually report it). That is very different to me.

Those are accurate details, but if you zoom out they're still contextually very similar - a swathe of text on a subject written by someone (or something) you have no veritable trust in but is usually fairly accurate.

You should independently fact check either source. Wikipedia is slightly easier, but after you have a base subject matter understanding you should have the terminology to validate anyway.

I suspect you just don't like it, which is perfectly fine.

Re: DJI Mini 4 Pro

#447

Post by prawn »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #52

The product they make, that I think is a lot cooler than their drones (but probably was inspired by them), is their Osmo Pocket minicam[0]. [0] https://store.dji.com/product/pocket-2?vid=98631

I have a Pocket and used it a few times but it's sat idle for a while now. For general casual filming, the workflow on a good phone is better. For anything the phone won't do well enough, use a proper camera.

Main remaining use of the Pocket is having rotating timelapses. That's the only reason I still pack it, and even then only use it on 1/10 trips.

Re: DJI Mini 4 Pro

#448

Post by palata »

TheHappyOddish wrote: post #446
palata wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia shows sources, does not hallucinate, and shows the same content to all the users (meaning that if there is a mistake, someone else can actually report it). That is very different to me.

Those are accurate details, but if you zoom out they're still contextually very similar - a swathe of text on a subject written by someone (or something) you have no veritable trust in but is usually fairly accurate. You should independently fact check either source. Wikipedia is slightly easier, but after you have a base subject matter understanding you should have the terminology to validate anyway. I suspect you j…

> Those are accurate details, but if you zoom out they're still contextually very similar

I cannot go against that. To me, the points I listed make them fundamentally different.

> I suspect you just don't like it, which is perfectly fine.

Because you don't understand why I see it as a problem that people don't make the difference between Wikipedia and ChatGPT does not necessarily mean that I am just making up arguments because I don't like it...

Re: DJI Mini 4 Pro

#449

Post by andersrs »

ryandrake wrote: post #215
andersrs wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if you're joking. Apple's business depends on them bending the rules for China.

Is there actual evidence that Apple is bending the rules for them? If true, that would be quite a scoop!

Apple’s strict on App Store rules but gives WeChat a free pass (2020) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36882467

Of course there is no smoking gun but you'd have to be dumb to believe it's not happening. Apple want to make phones in China and sell phones to China Wechat (China) is allowed a free pass on the app store.

Re: DJI Mini 4 Pro

#450

Post by TheHappyOddish »

palata wrote: post #448
TheHappyOddish wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are accurate details, but if you zoom out they're still contextually very similar - a swathe of text on a subject written by someone (or something) you have no veritable trust in but is usually fairly accurate. You should independently fact check either source. Wikipedia is slightly easier, but after you have a base subject matter understanding you should have the terminology to validate anyway. I suspect you j…

> Those are accurate details, but if you zoom out they're still contextually very similar I cannot go against that. To me, the points I listed make them fundamentally different . > I suspect you just don't like it, which is perfectly fine. Because you don't understand why I see it as a problem that people don't make the difference between Wikipedia and ChatGPT does not necessarily mean that I am just making up argume…

That's fair. I think we're arguing semantics here. Expanding my "you just don't like it" would be "you have immovable philosophical issues with one, ergo you won't pick it regardless of its accuracy". I didn't mean to imply you were just trying to be contrary - apologies if it came across that way.

I do like the ideals you have there, but I think for most people a tool is just a tool, and if it ms mostly accurate they're happy.

Post reply on HN