Hacker News Reader

Comment by ultramancool | Hacker News Reader

> He warned that any moves to enforce geo-fencing rules would be vulnerable to being hacked by "somebody who could get round that software".

Indeed very impressive that an elected official understands this.

Someone with a little reverse engineering talent can patch something like that without much work for near-free (think bypassing those FCC regulations turning up TX power in your router firmware). Someone with a little regular engineering talent can spoof or jam GPS for relatively cheap.

View on HN

Realistically speaking, what it means is that this particular minister somehow managed to employ a "technical expert" who actually is just that. Oh, and that this technical expert is both a) competent, and b) has managed to gain the trust of the minister. The combination is probably easier said than done, so props to whoever that person is :).

I don't really care whether my `competent politician' is actually a single human, or a bunch of people working together.

(Just like people usually attribute speeches to a mythical, composite `Obama' person, even though the roles of performer and speechwriter are done by different people.)

Effectively delegating tasks is a skill and I know it’s a skill because I suck at it.

I think the geofencing has the same value as a door lock; it keeps the honest people honest.

So we'll only really have to worry about dishonest terrorists and or plastic bags

Right, as opposed to also worrying about a careless teenager flying their drone too close to an airport to get a sick camera angle of a landing plane.

Why worry about something that hasn't happened? Why not worry about a careless teenager wanting to get a sick Camera angle of the inside of your fridge? It's as valid a concern.

But people flying drones over airports has happened: https://youtu.be/QGMDQ-vaV9Y

Normally I would agree with you, I often chide people for inventing problems to solve. But it is a little different when it isn't a hypothetical as much as an inevitable future occurrence.

As for refrigerators, I am just as worried about people trying to fly drones around my house as I am about people flying drones around planes, yes. I have it on good authority that anyone with the funds can purchase access to 3D drone-generated map of my city, my house included. A gentleman here in town who replaces windows doesn't bother to measure them anymore; he just uses the drone photos.

https://www.google.com/maps/streetview/

Now imagine that without Google Privacy, better cameras, and shot from the air.

That's a public website, no Google privacy is relevant.

Google Privacy is the program which blurs (things that looks like) faces and license plates.

We will always have to worry about intelligent, motivated people who wish to do us harm. Isn't that enough to worry about without being vulnerable to careless people, behaving unintelligently, who put lives at risk through their ignorance? Keep in mind, the latter group is much bigger.

Or a linter. It helps to stop you inadvertently doing something stupid.

I use multimotors, and think the current hysteria about drones is deplorable, and that this minister's response (and indeed the whole article) is great.

That said, geofencing is not to protect planes from terrorists, it's to protect them from stupid.

Not to mention there is free flight controller software with autonomous capabilites, e.g. APM.

or you could just build a drone without GPS.

Geofencing only works if people stick to the rules. Criminals normaly don't.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com