Privacy groups warn that flying plate readers could expand surveillance far beyond roadside cameras.

top 84 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 71 points 2 months ago (25 children)

Most depressing read of the week. RIP Bill of Rights.

https://aerocorner.com/blog/legally-take-down-drone/

Can I shoot down a drone?

It is illegal to shoot a drone out of the sky, even when the drone is flying over private property.

Is it legal to jam a drone?

Jamming any type of radio signal is illegal.

Can drones fly over houses?

Drones can legally fly over houses in most areas.

What should I do if I feel that a drone is invading my privacy?

If you believe that a drone is infringing on your right to privacy, there are several options available. You can contact the owner of the drone and ask them to stop flying it in your vicinity, report it to local law enforcement or file a complaint with the FAA.

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    It is illegal to shoot a drone out of the sky

    Yeah well, it's illegal to hold an insurrection against the US government, kidnap and imprison foreign country leaders, serially rape both adults and children, and defraud US elections, but it would seem being illegal doesn't actually mean anything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 2 months ago* (7 children)

    Can I fly my own drone really close to a surveillance drone? You know, one that’s coincidentally full of expensive parts?

    Well… Yes. But why would you do such a thing?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago*

    Automated drone that automatically fly in front of the flock drone's camera to block its view, from the minimum safe/legal distance away. Multiple drones if that's too far to have a decent effect.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    I doubt you could bump a drone out of the sky. Think you'd want to find a way to throw a stick in its spokes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago

    You absolutely could, if you fly down from above you will damage the rotors, and the drone will crash.

    You can also tape a stick to it and go jousting. There's videos online of Ukrainians doing both to counter Russian drones.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    A light net or long strings would work wonders.

    And you could definitely program it to home in, not that I would dream of doing such a thing…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    So its legal to shoot someone on your property if you have a sign about it on your fence but illegal to take down a drone? Feels like those priorities are pretty baclwards...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    eBay has drones for like $12. It’d be a bummer if they accidentally bumped into each other.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

    Those 12 dollar ones are less than 100 grams and are using WiFi and would not really put a dent in that drone. Maybe you fan fly it at the props of the survalience drone, but I doubt you can even reach the altitude the survalience drones where meant to run on. Micro drones are actually the best to learn on because they're so light its much harder to crash them. Once you are over 100-250 grams the force of the impact of a crash is much higher.

    You need a 5 inch frame, something that can use 4s, or 6s batteries that pull more amps. and you're gonna want fpv if youre doing dog fights. A decent 5 inch frame you build yourself is around 400 with the camera, transmitter, flight controller, motors, props, battery, etc. The radio and fpv head set you can get for maybe 200, but you really want spend around 600 for those. Youre gonna be over the 250 gram flight limit before you gotta start doing legal shit, but fuck the FAA.

    That and most of the "real" drones that arent just some bullshit dji consumer friendly drone don't fly easily. You get horizon, level, and acro. Acro is the mode you will actually use to fly, and you want at minimum a good 10-20 hours to be proficient enough to just hover/puts around without crashing. I'd say hitting another moving target is some where between 40-80 hours.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    But a small 100g drone can carry quite a bit of high tensile strength string... Let's see the big drone fly without it's propellers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    You cap out at a very short range. Those police drones are meant to hover really high up, and they'll often have permissions to fly them above 400ft.

    I don't know the flock ones much I imagine they're very similar to the dji drones our police force have. They have a lot of power but its not for flying in acro mode or spending a lot of throttle to zip around its using its energy to fight massive winds you encounter the higher up you go.

    It can be a mildly windy day in your back yard and it dramatically changes your battery time. Most of any of the 100 or sub 100 gram tiny whoops get 3-4 minutes tops when you fly aggressively. I imagine flying full bore just to approach the survalience drone is going to drian the battery to the point its unusable before you reach it. You'll get major voltage drop and won't be able to fight the wind which absolutely bullies you.

    And all that is with a 580 battery which those drones kind of cap out at before weight becomes a issue. Most fly best in the 350-480 range which have 2-3 minute flight times. Even if you used fishing line that weighs nothing and try to tangle the props I still think you will have a hard time even reaching it. Just to ensure you have reliable video and ample range on your radio you probably end up spending 600+ dollars you might as well upgrade the drone too.

    I just don't think its pheasable. I'm sure there's someone that is god like on the sticks, and knows every single motor manufacturers and their specs could pull off something like this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 47 points 2 months ago* (46 children)

    Pretty soon they'll just have drones in the air monitoring large public events. Then smaller events. Most definitely any kind of protest.

    Technology is advancing faster than the ability of our aging, decrepit electorate to regulate it.

  • source
  • hideshow 46 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    Police drones have been in use for many years for crowds

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

    Like how nsa and the spying was real since Snowden leaks.

    ...but it's going to be worse.

    Sometimes I wonder if social media was specifically funded by the FEDs to datamine. They spent years manipulating people and collecting data, and now they are building data centers and applying software to profile people. It seems clear they will use hardware for policing on a new level, as well as move from the police force to ICE. These new drones and flock style ai monitoring is like the datamining of the real world.

    I think people are too engrossed in cultural consumer and entertainment escapism to even understand how fucked up things are. And it's sad because that escapism is also feeding the datamining and marketing to further out people in hole soullessness and social manipulation. The path of our lives isn't even our natural path anymore, they use our life for reasons that aren't ours. Shit. That last sentence is a paraphrase from John Stockwell - a CIA whistle blower from the 80s.

    Death seems like it's slowly becoming more genuine than life. Like it seems obvious the goal of those in control has nothing to do with genuine humanity, but instead some psychotic ideology based off fear of freedom and natural existence.

    If we're lucky maybe someday they'll allow us assisted suicide for the ailment of understanding truth. ...but they'll probably just crucify us, or genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah that is the reason I quit going to protest in Morganton, NC of all places.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago

    Some local cops got in trouble this year because they were using their drones as PHYSICAL enforcement of the drone-ban for the 4th of July fireworks.

    As in, they didn't follow drones to find their owners, they tried to use their own drone to smash other ones out of the sky. They hit a car on the way down...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    You missed jpreston2005's entire point, possibly intentionally for a chance to virtue signal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I genuinely don't see what point I could have missed, they said drones will be used for something, but drones are already in use for that very thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago

    Pedantically, yes, they should've mentioned drones have already been used.

    More to the point, the vast majority of their comment highlights the bar is getting lower and lower for what drones will be used for.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (36 children)

    Big thanks to all the leftists who stayed home because their local Democrat wasn't left enough for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 36 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (35 children)

    Big thanks to the Democratic party who will only run genocidal neoliberal ghouls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (34 children)

    Found the "accidental" MAGA-enabler!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (33 children)

    Nope - the MAGA enablers are the party leaders who will not run or support candidates who are not genocidal neoliberal ghouls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (32 children)
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (31 children)

    What's the point in beating MAGA with a genocidal neoliberal?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (30 children)

    "What's the point in choosing to eat sand instead of poop (especially when not voting to eat poop means eating poop will be less likely to be one of the choices)? They both taste bad, so we may as well flip a coin."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (29 children)

    So let's go with that analogy shall we? What is the winning move in a restaurant that only serves poop or sand? It's not to order the sand - it's to tell them that you won't eat there at all until they offer good food. The democrats won't change while we keep electing their right-wing ghouls. They need to learn that we will sit it out until they run actual ethical candidates.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago* (28 children)

    So let’s go with that analogy shall we? What is the winning move in a restaurant that only serves poop or sand? It’s not to order the sand - it’s to tell them that you won’t eat there at all until they offer good food.

    Ah, so youre a "If I don't participate in how the driver drives this bus, I will be safe when it is driven off the cliff" type.

    To the metaphor, You must eat at the restaurant. Not eating at the restaurant physically cannot happen. Until enough people consistently vote to eat sand, the 50/50 flip between sand and poop will continue to go on unimpeded. Once sand wins consistently enough, paper will be offered. Once paper wins often enough, salads will be offered.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (27 children)

    Actually I don't have to eat at the restaurant. As much as the restaurant would like to give the impression that there is no choice except genocide, that is not true. The only winning move is to force them to change the menu. Not eating there is the only way to do this. Let's be real - salad will never be offered while they know they can sell you sand or shit. Let's look at this the other way - why are you so hostile to the idea of a restaurant that serves real food?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (26 children)

    Actually I don’t have to eat at the restaurant.

    You literally do.

    As an occupant of Earth, you are affected by US politics. Multiply that by a hundred times if you are an American united statesian.

    The only winning move is to force them to change the menu.

    Which is not accomplished by encouraging voter apathy, as you have done this entire thread (and even without glancing at your comment history, is probably a core part of your personality/modus operandi).

    Not eating there is the only way to do this.

    Then fire yourself into fucking space, because that's the only way you're avoiding the consequences of US elections (and as a benefit, the rest of us won't be dragged into fascism by your encouraging people not to vote against MAGA).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (25 children)

    You are confusing living with the results of a restaurant environment that only serves shit, with ordering off their menus. Answer me this - if it is SO important that we defeat the shit serving restaurant that you want me to order sand - why is it so inconceivable to you that the democrats might consider serving real food? If the consequences of not voting are so severe why is the only option that is off the table for you running candidates who serve real food? It seems very odd to me that that is the one thing you think is beyond the pale. Doesn't it seem to strange to you? Let's hope that in 2028 the democrats realize that the only way to attract customers is to serve real food. Come on - you can do it to stop fascism!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (24 children)

    You are confusing living with the results of a restaurant environment that only serves shit, with ordering off their menus.

    No I'm not. In the metaphor, votes are votes, and consuming the food is living with the consequences of US elections. You're the one whose mental-gymnastics/naivete decided you can live on Earth and not be affected by US elections.

    Answer me this - if it is SO important that we defeat the shit serving restaurant that you want me to order sand - why is it so inconceivable to you that the democrats might consider serving real food? If the consequences of not voting are so severe why is the only option that is off the table for you running candidates who serve real food?

    I never said it was; you're straw-manning me.

    It seems very odd to me that that is the one thing you think is beyond the pale. Doesn’t it seem to strange to you?

    I agree, your straw-man is very strange.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (23 children)

    It's not a straw man. I have told you I will not vote for a genocidal neo-liberal ghoul. Your position is that I must in order to 'stop fascism'. You continue to side-step the idea of why it is unreasonable to expect the democrats to run an option that is not a genocidal neo-liberal ghoul - why they can't be expected to serve anything but sand. You don't think there is any correlation between them insisting on only serving sand and people refusing to eat / vote for them. I think you are deeply confused.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (22 children)

    It’s not a straw man.

    It is.

    I have told you I will not vote for a genocidal neo-liberal ghoul.

    You have. This is an irrelevant bit to prove you are not straw-manning me, though.

    Your position is that I must in order to ‘stop fascism’.

    Technically it's that (encouraging people to) sit out elections rather than voting for a Lesser Evil is enabling MAGA/facism, but close enough to the point of splitting hairs and pedantry.

    You continue to side-step the idea of why it is unreasonable to expect the democrats to run an option that is not a genocidal neo-liberal ghoul - why they can’t be expected to serve anything but sand.

    No I don't. You haven't even introduced it until the most recent comment, and I addressed it. I'll expand to make you more comfortable, but it makes me a bit uncomfortable to essentially treat you like a fool for not realizing it's a belief I hold:

    Yes, the Democrats have failed to introduce strong enough candidates to be hugely better than MAGA in every way. They are the sand in the metaphor.

    You are implying I think eating sand is good or that serving sand is good, which is either an insult to my intelligence, an indicator of your poor intelligence, or a sign you are participating in this discussion in bad faith. I'm leaning #3, but I admit that's just a guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (21 children)

    Look - I don't think your position is either logically consistent or will lead to the practical outcomes you say you desire. I believe that the only way to create progress in the US is to refuse to vote for genocidal neo-liberals. If we vote for them just because the alternative is a little bit worse, we will literally never get progress. Your dream of a day when the democrats start serving real food will never come - let's be real - if they wanted to do that they would have done it already. The ONLY way to create real change is to let the democrats know that they will not win until they offer candidates who are committed to real change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (20 children)

    Look - I don’t think your position is either logically consistent or will lead to the practical outcomes you say you desire.

    Likewise!

    I believe that the only way to create progress in the US is to refuse to vote for genocidal neo-liberals.

    And again, fascists/MAGA are very, very happy you feel that way, especially when you convince others of it.

    Your dream of a day when the democrats start serving real food will never come - let’s be real - if they wanted to do that they would have done it already.

    Read a book sometime, especially about people like FDR.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (19 children)

    OK - so if we agree that what you are proposing won't work, why are you continuing to espouse that position? OK - so fascists are happy that democrats won't run real candidates - but it's somehow MY fault for not voting for them rather than democrats for insisting on running them despite the fact that they enable fascists? I'm well aware of FDR. FYI he was president 93 years ago, and much of the progress he made has been dismantled, a good deal of it by democrats. You are making my point for me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (18 children)

    OK - so if we agree that what you are proposing won’t work

    Another straw-man.

    Are you this bad at reading comprehension or do you know you're lying and you're just doing all of this in bad faith? I admit I'm curious and want to know before I block you for being a serial time-waster.

    Your dream of a day when the democrats start serving real food will never come - let’s be real - if they wanted to do that they would have done it already.

    I’m well aware of FDR. FYI he was president 93 years ago,

    lol. lmao, even

    Are you PLA, MAGA, or Kremlin-paid?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (17 children)

    I'm really not sure why you won't answer the very simple question - why is the only course of action that you think is unreasonable the democrats running real candidates? I will not vote for them until they do - if they believe that stopping fascism is less important than stopping real political change then the results are their fault - not mine. What point are you making about FDR? You brought him up as an example of a real democrat - sure - but that was almost a century ago. I think it's telling that he is your go-to example. What's funny about that?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (16 children)

    I’m really not sure why you won’t answer the very simple question - why is the only course of action that you think is unreasonable the democrats running real candidates?

    Because it's a bad faith question. Observe:

    Why do you eat babies?

    What point are you making about FDR? You brought him up as an example of a real democrat - sure - but that was almost a century ago.

    Because you said people like him have never existed. I mentioned he did. Now you say you knew all about him the whole time.

    So go argue with Terrorphin@thelemmy.club, because they disagreed with you about FDR's existence a mere two comments ago.

    Either you have significant cognitive impairments or the substance of our argument is less important than you doing mental gymnastics in service of a propaganda win.

    Whichever it is, I don't think it's a good use of my time to read and respond to you any more. Any reader that feels like wasting their time reading what you're saying can see you're participating in bad faith and come to their own conclusions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (15 children)

    It's not a bad faith question. You yourself said that the democratic party is like a restaurant that only serves sand. Why is it that the only thing that it's unreasonable to do in the fight against fascism is demand that the democrats run candidates worth voting for? It's a fair question. I don't eat babies. It's not remotely comparable - we both agree that the democratic party is serving sand. There's no dispute on the facts. I did not say that people like him never existed in history. My point was that he has not been on the ballot for a century. I was clearly talking about the contemporary democratic party - not ancient history.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (12 children)

    Lol this guy wants to argue and get themselves worked up. I find it funny.

    Do you think they got banned off of reddit?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (11 children)

    oh - so funny to be confronted with facts? Laugh it up so you don't have to confront that you are wrong? How amusing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (10 children)

    Guess your looking for a fight too 🤣

    Might want to glance at usernames before you swing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (9 children)

    lol - I have no idea what you are talking about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    Im shocked lol, but I'm taking about the other person you were talking to.

    As sun tzu said "seem victory then go to war"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (7 children)

    So - I'm not sure - but you seem to be saying that no one should dare to disagree with some particular person? Is that what you're trying to say? FYI- having a discussion is not 'going to war'. lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (6 children)

    I give you the answer but you keep guessing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (5 children)

    I have literally no idea what you are talking about. I suspect you don't either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    I actually do know what I'm talking about, but your level of confusion is hilarious.

    I could tell you the sky is blue and you'd trip out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    You're just stringing together random words in the hope of trolling people?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Nah you're just bad at communication or you want to be offended.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Why is it that the only thing that it’s unreasonable to do in the fight against fascism is demand that the democrats run candidates worth voting for?

    For the hundredth time, I never said that.

    You are the one who injected "abstaining from voting is a good choice" into the discussion. That is a dumb take, as I described above.

    When I suffer some form of traumatic brain injury and subsequently say "Demanding Democrats run better candidates is bad," feel free to make the above points.

    Doing so in this particular discussion is a waste of both of our time.

    I did not say that people like him never existed in history.

    Lmfao. I guess someone "hacked" your account when you said "Your dream of a day when the democrats start serving real food will never come - let’s be real - if they wanted to do that they would have done it already."

    Again, whether you take me for an idiot, you are an idiot, or you are trying to do a Russia/China/MAGA propaganda:

    Goodbye.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Once again you dodge the issue. Why is it my fault for not voting for terrible candidates, rather than the party's fault for refusing to run quality candidates? Why do you pretend that the question of why the party doesn't already run real candidates is a silly one? It is actually the central issue here. The democrats won't run quality candidates while they can be elected running genocidal corporate friendly ghouls. That's just a fact.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 42 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

    I remember years ago an engineer for the ARGUS-IS doing like a PSA warning about all of this. The missing piece then was a systems to sift through mountains of disparate data sources to pull together a single cohesive and relevant data point.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    Which I'm guessing is why data centers are so hot right now. Surveillance state brought to us by big tech, billionaires, and corporations. They sell this stuff to naive or malicious police and government officials. I'm not too surprised the police are on board but so very many politicians are signing their localities up for it and citizens aren't happy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 39 points 2 months ago* (3 children)

    AI bros who don't take "no" for an answer are the same people as cops are the same people as rapists are the same people as republicans are the same people as pedophiles are the same people as bots pushers are the same people who fucking ruin everything

    It's the "I know better than you" people

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago

    Yup. They're all over the perv-glasses threads telling people they have no right to privacy and it's no different that a cell phone camera. meanwhile, they're posting upskirts and downshirts, stalking videos, harassment, outright racist hate shit, all recorded with their cute lil fuckin perv-glasses.

    And meta keeps putting facial recognition shit in the APIs but denying it.

    the sad part is, they could be great tools for the disabled, but a bunch of shitkids have already ruined that use because meta wants profits more than helping people or -haha- letting people have privacy.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    "Citizen, our drone spotted you smoking marijuana in your bedroom. Do you have a prescription? Let's figure this out downtown."

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Including but not limited to licence plates

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    9 comments in c/fuckcars@lemmy.world view that post