Am I the only one who looks at this and thinks about all the bad consequences of such a technology? Sometimes it is hard to imagine the consequences of "cool technology" but here I think it is pretty obvious. Drones in forests, drones in caves, drones in urban environments, drones inside buildings. I guess Pandora's box is open.
Eric, you and I go way back to your JPL days (I was at IDC) and I agree with about 99% of your assertions/assumptions, but not this one. I have provided an enormous amount of research over the past 3 years regarding UAS (unmanned aerial system) applications and I can tell you commercial UAS's are under assault, not for fear of idiots spying on people or intrusion and being a nuisance.
Low-cost UAS’s provide solution access to numerous industrial, geo-imaging, precision agriculture, construction site monitoring, real estate, mining, oil/gas (exploration and rig flair up), water management, maritime security, first responders/search and rescue, broadcast/commercial aerial photography/movie production, forest management, forest firefighting, private property management/geo-spatial imaging for <$20k USD. In-fact, recently a farmer looking to ascertain crop yields was served a cease and desist order from the FAA for utilizing UAS’s over his farm.
Currently, companies sitting on the advisory board to the US Congress/FAA/NTSB regarding UAS’s include Ratheon, McDonald Douglas, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, L-3, General Dynamics, Monsanto, companies with enormous vested interests in keeping adoption of commercial UAS’s out of the hands of low-cost solution providers. The ruling by an NTSB judge recently ruled in favor of the FAA and place a $10k fine on a commercial photographer based on the fact that his UAV when used as a hobby was within the legal guidelines. Once it was used commercially, this UAV became prohibited. Monsanto, MD and NG have designs on owning the crop management and delivery systems industry with larger, extremely high cost drone solutions that can carry payloads for insecticides etc. or serve the oil/gas/mining industry says Brendan M. Schulman Litigation/Aviation Law attorney focused on commercial UAS’s user rights. Currently, anyone seeking to commercially fly a UAS must get a FAA Section 333 application and the process is daunting.
The benefits of low-cost UAVs far outweigh any danger they may pose. Once again, the US is about to be passed up in this application by other countries such as Brazil, China, Malaysia and Mexico who do not place bans on low-cost UAS’s. UAS’s could be instrumental in helping to solve the Western US’s drought with low-cost precision farming and crop management - >50% of irrigation water is lost each year to evaporation during transit and crop distribution.
I urge anyone who takes an interest to get involved and get informed. The optoelectronics commercial opportunities could be formidable. -RT
I also have a concern with everywhere surveilance by everyone. Even by people with bad intentions og good intentions but bad side effects.
Drones already sell like hot cakes. Look a some years into the future and see drones at 1/10 the cost, 10 times easier to use, 10 times more capable, 10 times smaller and so on. Every bad or good person, business or other countrys spys could have a cloud of flie size drones to surveil everyone they want. It would be practicly impossible to keep private, business or national secrets.
What they have done is amazing... it's the first real example of proper collision avoidance. But RealSense is limited to 1.5m range! In fact they use a longer range and very fast sensor for altitude control based on time of flight technology: www.teraranger.com/teraranger-one/ . This is probably the future....
EPFL and ETH from switerland already do for years amazing UAV based artificial intelligence even more advanced than this... just check: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CR5y8qZf0Y
Am I the only one who looks at this and thinks about all the bad consequences of such a technology? Sometimes it is hard to imagine the consequences of "cool technology" but here I think it is pretty obvious. Drones in forests, drones in caves, drones in urban environments, drones inside buildings. I guess Pandora's box is open.
ReplyDeleteEric, you and I go way back to your JPL days (I was at IDC) and I agree with about 99% of your assertions/assumptions, but not this one. I have provided an enormous amount of research over the past 3 years regarding UAS (unmanned aerial system) applications and I can tell you commercial UAS's are under assault, not for fear of idiots spying on people or intrusion and being a nuisance.
DeleteLow-cost UAS’s provide solution access to numerous industrial, geo-imaging, precision agriculture, construction site monitoring, real estate, mining, oil/gas (exploration and rig flair up), water management, maritime security, first responders/search and rescue, broadcast/commercial aerial photography/movie production, forest management, forest firefighting, private property management/geo-spatial imaging for <$20k USD. In-fact, recently a farmer looking to ascertain crop yields was served a cease and desist order from the FAA for utilizing UAS’s over his farm.
Currently, companies sitting on the advisory board to the US Congress/FAA/NTSB regarding UAS’s include Ratheon, McDonald Douglas, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, L-3, General Dynamics, Monsanto, companies with enormous vested interests in keeping adoption of commercial UAS’s out of the hands of low-cost solution providers. The ruling by an NTSB judge recently ruled in favor of the FAA and place a $10k fine on a commercial photographer based on the fact that his UAV when used as a hobby was within the legal guidelines. Once it was used commercially, this UAV became prohibited. Monsanto, MD and NG have designs on owning the crop management and delivery systems industry with larger, extremely high cost drone solutions that can carry payloads for insecticides etc. or serve the oil/gas/mining industry says Brendan M. Schulman Litigation/Aviation Law attorney focused on commercial UAS’s user rights. Currently, anyone seeking to commercially fly a UAS must get a FAA Section 333 application and the process is daunting.
The benefits of low-cost UAVs far outweigh any danger they may pose. Once again, the US is about to be passed up in this application by other countries such as Brazil, China, Malaysia and Mexico who do not place bans on low-cost UAS’s. UAS’s could be instrumental in helping to solve the Western US’s drought with low-cost precision farming and crop management - >50% of irrigation water is lost each year to evaporation during transit and crop distribution.
I urge anyone who takes an interest to get involved and get informed. The optoelectronics commercial opportunities could be formidable.
-RT
RT, just to be clear, my concern is equipping these devices with obstacle avoidance intelligence, and hunter-killer capability. -EF
DeleteI also have a concern with everywhere surveilance by everyone. Even by people with bad intentions og good intentions but bad side effects.
DeleteDrones already sell like hot cakes. Look a some years into the future and see drones at 1/10 the cost, 10 times easier to use, 10 times more capable, 10 times smaller and so on. Every bad or good person, business or other countrys spys could have a cloud of flie size drones to surveil everyone they want. It would be practicly impossible to keep private, business or national secrets.
Drones with payload flying alone the pre-planned GPS path ...
ReplyDeleteWhat they have done is amazing... it's the first real example of proper collision avoidance. But RealSense is limited to 1.5m range! In fact they use a longer range and very fast sensor for altitude control based on time of flight technology: www.teraranger.com/teraranger-one/ . This is probably the future....
ReplyDeleteEPFL and ETH from switerland already do for years amazing UAV based artificial intelligence even more advanced than this... just check: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CR5y8qZf0Y
ReplyDelete