Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by axau | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

axau

I hope one day drones are regulated similarly to guns, i.e. de facto banned unless some exception applies, such as:

- you're in the middle of nowhere

- you're doing it exclusively on a property you own (and the property is large enough)

- the use case is in the public good (e.g.: police can use guns)

In other cases, the downsides are large given potential for abuse/voyeurism/sabotage, and upsides seem nil.

View on HN

That seems very excessive, though regulation so far has been positive. Not that this is you, but fear of "voyeurism" is often said by people who aren't familiar with drones. I've owned multiple drones and would never consider them a spying tool since they aren't discrete/sound like a flying lawnmower. Additionally, most drones are equipped with wide-angle lenses which means you'd have to get pretty close to spy.

My main worry about drones comes from terrorists using them where crowds of people are gathered (concerts, events, etc), as other people have mentioned.

It doesn’t really matter how discrete or not they are if even if you know about it you can’t do much about it.

I’m also not convinced by a “don’t worry the camera is bad” argument; looking at drone footage online it seems to have plenty of resolution to distinguish people in one’s backyard, for example, and I’d expect those to only get better over time.

> I hope one day drones are regulated similarly to guns

What country are you in?

USA, which, contrary to popular belief, has lots of restrictions on the use (though not necessarily ownership) of guns. Try discharging a weapon anywhere near a major metropolitan area and let me know how it goes :)

> Try discharging a weapon anywhere near a major metropolitan area

I used to do it all the time in a major city. Shooting ranges exist inside major metropolitan areas you know.. ;)

Yes, I know that isn’t what you meant, but broad waving statements deserve this kind of response imho.

Yes, and those could fall under the properties you own exception (or have permission to use from the owner).

Again, wrong. If I own a property in a major metropolitan area, I generally can’t discharge a firearm in the city just because I do it on my own property.

This is why I said, in my original comment, "and the property is large enough" (implying it doesn't interfere with others; or you have a permit, ...).

I'm sure you knew that though. What exactly is your point? Would you like me to rewrite my original post in fully specified legalese just so you can't nitpick? :P

Where did you say “the property is large enough”?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16404025

Done here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com