300 Drones Formed a QR Code That Rick Rolled Dallas on April Fools' Day | Hacker News Reader

300 Drones Formed a QR Code That Rick Rolled Dallas on April Fools' Day

dallasobserver.com

385 pointsjaboutboul153 comments

Anybody know if there are considerations or plans for things like:

- Mandatory periodic ID transmit (via RF) by drones at specific altitudes or in specific areas

- Standardized visual marking schemes for drones by class, for example municipal, commercial, federal, etc.

Just wondering because for example my city announced that they'll be using drones for power pole checks, which will include a lot of backyard operation. I'd like to be able to identify them if needed.

There are. See things like: https://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/remote_id/

If your city or local electrical grid utility is using drones for power line inspections they'll be operated by a FAA part 107 licensed remote pilot, who is familiar with all the legal requirements. No need to be overly concerned about it.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/commercial_operators/

I gathered that the point of the question is whether one would be able to distinguish between a power company drone and some random person flying in their back yard.

Some companies do use things like a mavic 2 pro for inspections, which consumers also purchase, there are no specific marking requirements (other than strobe if authorized for night operations) that a part 107 operated UAS would have that would be visible from the ground compared to the same hardware operated by a hobbyist.

If it's large and expensive the likelihood that it's some random person decreases, it's easy for a UAS with a thermal camera to be $8,000+.

> If it's large and expensive the likelihood that it's some random person decreases

We have identification requirements for other types of planes that cost significantly more.

On the other hand, I've seen utility-branded work clothing at Goodwill.

> If it's large and expensive the likelihood that it's some random person decreases, it's easy for a UAS with a thermal camera to be $8,000+.

Or it's a fake thermal camera for $8 -- just some plastics but nothing inside. How is anyone a bit away going to know?

Threat modeling wise, these things could be bad & dangerous in one, two, three, four, more, different ways

I'd be vastly more concerned about the number of people dying from getting shot or in traffic accidents/drunk driving every year in the USA than people weaponizing hobbyist level drones.

> Threat modeling wise, these things could be bad & dangerous in one, two, three, four, more, different ways

you could say that about a Toyota Camry

You can be concerned about gingivitis even though heart disease continues to exist.

Especially because of heart disease: https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/gum-d...

I don't think anybody is going to break into my house because they surveilled the place with a drone. I do worry about feeling less secure on my property because someone keeps watching me in the backyard with a drone and I have no way of finding out who it is. There are plenty of fantastic things that drones can do, I just want greater accountability in knowing who is doing what. There's a reason trucks from Rando Contractor LLC carry a giant "VERIZON CONTRACTOR" sign on the side.

You won’t be able to do this, even once Remote ID is in effect. Only the FAA and law enforcement will be able to.

How would you distinguish a rando with a clipboard and high-viz vest from a city worker with a clipboard and a high-viz vest?

The city worker carries credentials and is usually driving a marked government vehicle. Neither one gets to be in my backyard without talking to me first.

Do you have power poles literally in your backyard, on an easement or something?

It's pretty common. My first house was connected to a pole in my neighbor's backyard, and my current house has one in the front yard.

No, but I have underground pipes managed by a metro district. I've had people come by who were supposed to be inspecting a meter and they do have reasonable requirements for giving notice that they're entering or doing work. I've also had people come by to mark utilities who didn't realize they weren't in the right place until my dog's presence in the back yard made them talk to me first, so this is an expectation I care about maintaining.

Are you suggesting a drone inspecting power poles would be unable to see over a fence?

Are you suggesting a person on a power pole is unable to see over a fence?

Yeah but you're replying in a thread below where I already answered your question about how these concerns get addressed with a person.

Yes the done inspecting the 20ft power pole can see over the 6 ft fence.

Generally in the US it is legal for a random person to fly a drone above your private property. Only some states and localities have laws against it.

This is something that needs to change ASAP. Drones are the worst kind of modern pollution -- acoustic, visual, and surveillant pollution all in one.

> Mandatory periodic ID transmit (via RF) by drones at specific altitudes or in specific areas

Remote ID in the US will be in effect September 2023. It functions like a license plate: you won’t be able to identify the operator, but law enforcement will be able to. It will broadcast the location of the drone, the altitude, and the operator’s position.

All drones that need to be registered will also need Remote ID unless they’re flown in a (yet to be designated) FRIA zone (so sub-250g flying recreationally are exempt)

> Standardized visual marking schemes for drones by class, for example municipal, commercial, federal, etc.

None, unless it’s something required by their Certificate of Authorization, which a municipality may be operating under (otherwise it’s Part 107). Realistically, if such a requirement were stipulated it would likely be lights of a certain color / pattern.

> Remote ID in the US will be in effect September 2023.

Not if RDQ can help it - https://www.racedayquads.com/pages/faa-legal-battle-to-save-...

Wonder how long it will take for a project similar to FlightAware to pop up from the people who have SDRs set up to monitor RF in their area.

If those IDs are fixed, then third parties will be able to collate identities and owners or operators over time.

Do you have any details / references on the specification?

There’s a randomization aspect to it to thwart that. The specs haven’t been finalized, but they’ve been given to ASTM to flesh out. The Federal Aviation Regulation basically spells out the requirements at this point.

I believe this is a draft [0] (it could be final too at this point). From there, here’s the specific ID randomization:

> UTM (UUID): A UTM-provided unique ID traceable to the Registration ID that can act like a “session id” to protect exposure of operationally sensitive information.

[0] https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoDownloadDocument?pubId=&...

So long as the identifier is constant over time that does not matter.

From your reference:

UAS ID Type 1. Serial Number, 2. Registration ID, or 3. UTM U

(page 10)

That is: there is a single identifier, constant over time, that is assigned to each drone aircraft.

The UUID standard appears to be RFC 4122:

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4122

And again: so long as that's transmitted in the clear, ANY party may accumulate a database of UUIDs and locations over time, which would tend to identify the party(ies) associated with a specific drone. That might not be precisely the operator, but if drone ID "8daf5e654951a033175fb71e0a2ecc03"[1] keeps showing up at Your Fine City's Police Department ... or sewage department, or electric utility ... you might begin to draw some inferences regarding its likely owner/operator.

It might be easier to do so if the identifier had, say, a specific entity element to it (say, as with LDAP or X.500 entity attributes), but the lack of such an element to the identifier itself is at best a small hinderance to owner/operator identification.

________________________________

Notes:

1. md5sum of the randomly-selected string "random drone id"

Is this an attack we care about preventing? You can do the same with license plates, for example.

It's been a question of interest within this thread.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30923274

I really don't mind if people can trace my drone back to me. I'm a licensed ham radio operator and my call sign is linked to my real identity. And I want to know who is flying drones over my property. The two police departments that regularly fly helos over my house use the same paint scheme as their squad cars to make it obvious who they are. They use the tail numbers N911DC (Washington DC) and N911PG (Prince George's County) for the same reason.

There’s a diversity of allowed identifiers to support different hardware. The fixed identifiers are intended for retrofit modules, since they need to have as little impact on the drone’s center of gravity as possible. Newer hardware will likely incorporate it into the receiver’s functionality.

You've made no credible representation that identifiers will be time-variable in a non-predictable manner.

Which is required to defeat any level of time-based observational collection and correlation by third parties. As is commonly the place with present aviation tracking systems.

Shouldn't the public know who's flying drones over their property? I wish the drone IDs were publicly listed, just like N numbers.

Why does anyone think they deserve a right to privacy for their aircraft in flight? That is a ridiculous invasion of public space.

There is a reason you can’t just plug in anyone’s vehicle license plate and get their name and address.

The information is widely, if not (yet) universally, available.

https://www.eff.org/pages/automated-license-plate-readers-al...

Sounds like we need to fix that with regulation too?

I'd be on board with that.

that's not quite the same thing, as it doesn't provide "name and adress", no?

Considerably more than for those with access.

Again: once an identifier is available, correlating it with other information is trivial.

Thanks for your input. I'm sincerely asking out of ignorance and curiosity around these things.

A fairly classical example of readily de-anonimisable data is location, at postal-code resolution.

With nothing more than two postal codes (ZIP codes in the US), representing home and work, it's possible to individually identify about 90% of the population. That information is available via, say, geocoded location using mobile phone or tracking cookie data.[1]

In the case of device or vehicle tracking such as with drones, it's highly likely that a given device would be used within a particular jurisdiction or activity region. If you can pinpoint specific locations and times within those (e.g., police activity around an address + drone activity, activity following specific infrastructure such as power lines or gas distribution, training locations, etc., etc.) you can probably come up with a strong idea of who operates or owns the equipment.

That is more-or-less the process that was used to identify CIA-operated aircraft used in renditions for "enhanced interrogation" (torture) by amateur plane watchers. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendition_aircraft https://web.archive.org/web/20130616175922/http://www.common...

________________________________

Notes:

1. The home+work ZIP anecdote is the one I recall. I'm not finding that specifically though this paper mentions four spatio-temporal locations sufficing for 95% of the population: Yves-Alexandre de Montjoye, César A. Hidalgo, Michel Verleysen & Vincent D. Blondel, "Unique in the Crowd: The privacy bounds of human mobility", Scientific Reports volume 3, Article number: 1376 (2013) https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01376

In some European countries you can in fact do exactly that. Useful if you need to ask someone to move their vehicle for example.

I'm sure there's some kind of hypothetical downside, but not one that me or anyone I know have encountered at least.

You also can't drive your car onto my property without permission. There are valid reasons for a drone to do exactly that, and I'd like to know who is looking at my house. It would be nice to Google a drone ID and realize that it's just the power company looking for branches that might take down a power line.

Batman has something to say. Joking aside it would be interesting to see this used my a malicious actor leading people to a malicious website.

Seems like an obvious use. Not getting caught doing so while managing a large number of drones may be a different matter.

That has terrible ROI compared to publishing a link on the Internet.

Add an animation to cycle between the QR code and the text "FREE BITCOIN". Problem solved.

I'm amazed that 300 is enough - especially at distance and at questionable angle / conditions. Just shows how resilient QR codes are

Does it even work? QR code made of lights?

Or do you need to manually invert a photo before decoding?

Most software is able to read color-inverted QR codes.

QR border color indicates this.

It even works with the photo used in the article.

In my experience most modern QR decoders ignore the spec and gladly decode white-on-black codes as well. I guess people just started making them and then got mad when decoders couldn't handle them, so everyone just kind of went along with it.

2018 CES - I was really impressed by the Intel drone light show over the Bellagio fountain pool area. Thought it was some weird kind of Vegas wire-pulling effect at first.

There were no drone sounds, just strings of lights moving in increasingly strange and impressive ways.

Kept trying to figure out how they were able to pull such impressive moves until I saw some guy wearing a shirt that said something like "Intel drone team" and the penny finally dropped.

Some "magic" is fun once in a while.

Edit: This is what it looked like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7HNQ1NBzgg

Intel did one in Walt Disney World for a short while in late 2016. I was completely amazed by it, and it was nowhere near as elaborate as the ones shown since.

So Star Trek's 3d holograms are real now. Didn't think drones was gonna be the technology that would make it happen.

An interesting phishing method… i.e. the new “leave a usb drive in the parking lot” trick.

Reminds me of the "Do not look at the moon" writing prompt. "Do not scan the QR code in the sky"

https://www.reddit.com/r/WritingPrompts/comments/8aec6t/wp_i...

Thanks for sharing, such a good prompt and story!

There's a "solution" posed in Different Kinds of Darkness ( https://www.lightspeedmagazine.com/fiction/different-kinds-o... ) - some of the background of the world is https://www.nature.com/articles/44964

Super cool. As someone who knows nothing about drones I would love to see a write up on how to do something like this. Where do you purchase that many drones cheaply, and how do you tell them to coordinate like that? How can you get the positioning so accurate?

I'm founder of https://and-lights.eu and it's not that simple of just purchasing. There are mainly three aspects.

First you have the hardware itself, your drones. Best is to create them yourself. As there aren't many of the shelf products and they are mostly coming from China where safety concerns aren't that high valued as US and EU. For example letting them do a return to home, is a nightmare. As they will just fly across your other drones and hit other while doing. We have also incorporated lots of redundancy, so that we have different ways to communicate with the drone. And also a manual override so that you can steer the drone personally into safety.

Next you have the software. That will steer the drones. You have two possibilities for that. Either pre-program all drones with a gps path and send a start signal. Or do it our way and realtime manage the drones (ofcourse with backup path if communcation fails). On the lower level of the software we have our red box that does collision avoidance. So even if you ask the drones to go through each other, that box will stop them before they hit eachother. On top of that we have the real route planning that should produce non-hitting paths. Real-time planning is harder to implement. But it makes sure that you can replace drones if pre-flight checks doesn't let the drone fly. And also makes sure you can adapt the show mid-air. For example to sync up with a live performance.

And then the 'boring' part. Getting a license. We have already created more than 800 pages of certification and safety procedures. Just to get a license. That is because in a lot of countries drones are certified as airplanes. So procedures are also like airplanes. Flying a normal drone is possible, but for drone shows you have to get 3 exceptions certified. Namely flying at night, flying in formation and automatic flying. And by creating your own drone, you also need to homologate and certify your drone.

Hope I gave you a little hint of what is needed ;)

Are you swapping out batteries of drones mid show?

Great.

But if one has to start where one to start. I assume it is more open and not just one firm.

And you need to hardware, software and license. No chinese unsafe components, but which is the safe to go to (> one). Software any open source. The license probably depend upon country but for us, Canada, uk and eu how hard it is?

The OP is literally an ad for a company that does this professionally.

Love Field is 6 miles from "downtown Dallas" and the article says they just hovered there. Maybe people living next to Love Field saw it but this is more of a marketing stunt than getting permission to fly 300 drones over downtown Dallas. Still, really cool and I click the little heart or upvote on any drone animation videos I see. The tech is super impressive and the article even talks about the kind of support equipment they need (trailers, rigs, etc). I am not downplaying the task, just surprised me with the headline.

the sort of people who can do a 300 UAS light show know enough not to operate in the class bravo

class bravo airspace is shaped like an upside down wedding cake.

you can check the free FAA PDFs for VFR operations in the metro area in question if you want to see its tiers.

  > class bravo airspace is shaped like an upside down wedding cake.

Roughly stepped-funnel shaped?

I attended an aviation camp when I was 15 and I couldn't believe that the FAA allowed any pilot to fly VFR next to an airport. (Then I moved to Washington DC where you can't fly VFR anywhere.)

It would be even cooler to have a lot of drones with red, green and blue LEDs. You could have them fly in a grid and coordinate the brightness of the RGB lights to play a video.

With one wire for power going through them vertically you could go really high and stay there “forever”.

Could also connect them just at the top, so you can have a wire that is not isolated and higher voltage (less loss)

> Could also connect them just at the top, so you can have a wire that is not isolated and higher voltage

You could also just hang up an electric wire with light bulbs at this point.

Not 1024 of them in parallel really high in the sky to show a movie to all of the city

in 32p resolution?

Yes, like this art installation by Jim Campbell back in 2006: https://bampfa.org/program/jim-campbell-home-movies

Only power and ground were supplied through the two wires connecting to each pixel. The pixels were PIC micro-controllers which contained the brightness levels for that pixel, which would play on loop independently. As I remember, the whole array would loose power intermittently to deal with clock drift.

That isn't a Rick Roll, though, it's just mass deployment of the Ludovico Technique at that point.

Seeing that first picture, it looks like there might finally be some content for https://picturesofpeoplescanningqrcodes.tumblr.com/

That site has really aged in the last 2 years.

Anyone else hope they just die before the night sky itself is commercialized. We already got rid of the stars at least leave the darkness behind

It's not entirely clear to me that this was legal in the first place - surely there are light pollution laws in Dallas? And also 'disturbing the peace' laws, etc. I wonder if there are any chance of legal consequences for stunts like this.

I would hope that people got a good laugh out of it before things like this become commonplace and then made illegal/enforced.

The company that did it is a real company that puts on real drone shows. Presumably they are familiar with the laws relating to their industry.

Way to make my thoughts turn to darker things again! I was just enjoying the prank aspect of it, but you pulled me back into reality. While a small part of me feels like drone displays in the sky would be awesome, it would of course be awful in practice (after the novelty wears off).

If they don't figure out holograms, seems like this is how they'd pull off those megacorp holographic displays of ads you see in media like Blade Runner/Cyberpunk 2077.

I'm more worried about this with smart glasses. Hopefully we don't get personalized, dynamic, moving ads covering everything or everywhere.

Surgical implants with ads that you can't turn off.

Oh did you want the premium ad-free eyesperiance?

"Where'd you go?"

"Babe I'm right here, what's wrong?"

YOUR CREDIT CARD HAS EXPIRED, PLEASE UPDATE YOUR PAYMENT INFORMATION TO CONTINUE YOUR EYESEEU PLUS SUBSCRIPTION

I see you haven't been on the internet lately.

But in all seriousness, despite it breaking my heart, there will likely be a market for a ublock origin type product for smart glasses.

I'm not too worried, at least where I live. Light pollution has become a talking point in the EU.

My city has already started installing high powered parking-lot style LED streetlights all over the city. IMO the battle is already lost.

It's legitimately heartbreaking.

Other parts of the world have realized that this is impacting insects and birds and have started cutting down on light pollution.

> already got rid of the stars

Coincidentally, there was an episode about this yesterday on NPR's Shortwave:

https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1089593627

Apparently, despite having a population of 140,000, Flagstaff, Arizona has decided to become a "dark sky city" and succeeded well enough that you can see the Milky Way from downtown. And there are people working to preserve areas that are currently dark and reclaim night sky darkness in other areas.

2024: You're having dinner after a long day, winding down. An unexpected red flash comes from the window, an explosion? No, the blast never came, and now there's more red flashes, as if coming from the sky, oh please let this not be a meteor! You get to the window, and cautiously look up...

TURNING RED 3

COMING TO DISNEY++

THIS SPRING

SCAN THIS TO BUY

LIMITED STREAMS AVAILABLE

Decodes to http://www.d52.io/

Does it even work? QR code made of lights?

Or do you need to manually invert a photo before decoding?

It works for me, using Firefox to scan the QR code in the video.

Do you have a smart phone? You could try it yourself.

It's all fun and games until 300 drones form a QR code that send unsuspecting people (the same people who would scan a QR code for fun) to a phishing link.

Why not both?

In all serious you would want to do both so that people think it is just a joke still.

> to a goatse link

With the resurgence of QR codes, it's only a matter of time until someone starts printing phishing link QR code stickers and sticking them over innocent looking QR codes for restaurant menus and such.

Or people that are placing sticker QR codes everywhere are disabled when someone pulls off part of the alignment corners or other destructive ways to make valid QR codes unusable.

Some of the local city parking lots have switched to mobile app payment systems expecting people to scan QR codes. These have been disabled by making the QR code unreadable.

However, it would also be "easy enough" for people to make a payment system that looks like the legit system, and scam unsuspecting people attempting to pay for parking only to find their cars towed because it wasn't a legit payment.

There are certain things where QR codes are NOT the answer.

This is not a flaw of QR codes, though. If they used an URL or a phone number instead, people could replace it with a phishing one just as easily.

No, it's just a flaw in people using QR codes poorly. Too many people assume the best out of other people which is nice and all in lalaland kind of way, but in the real world, people actively look to get one over on people. QR codes are just way too susceptible to being interfered with by anyone with just enough knowledge and inclination to do so.

If the app payment system is the way to go (why not? not expensive onsite equipment), then it needs to be something other than a QR code that is easy to manipulate.

The problem is, for most people a QR code is just magic, they don't understand that it's just an encoded URL nor have any understanding of how that can be exploited.

It's not just an encoded URL. It could be any data. If you encode the infamous AV test string as a QR code, you can cause some mischief for things randomly scanning for codes. There was a post here not long ago about it. So they can be way more dangerous than just a Rick-roll or spam redirect

Why steal the money completely? I bet it would last way longer if you just skim a bit off the top but then use the rest to pay for their parking so they're not towed and don't have reasons to question anything.

It’s been done: https://www.austintexas.gov/news/fraudulent-qr-codes-found-a...

Some people print flyers about fundraisers and leave them in the break room at work, where the only identifying information is a QR code.

I don't know if it's a widespread practice - is this how most people get their Girl Scout cookies now?

I suppose it's no less secure than putting a tinyurl or bit.ly into your ad.

I feel the same way as restraunts forcing menus to be QR codes. Now, instead of anonymously reading a menu, you now are forced to read a menu with who knows what kind of tracking enabled to order. Such a stupid stupid thing

Only a matter of time, but that time is now already.

https://www.bitdefender.com/blog/hotforsecurity/us-police-pa...

A gas station near me has stickers on pumps with a QR code that supposedly links to a rewards app. I may be wrong, but I think it says something about paying through the app. Seems perfect for phishing.

How would that work? "Please enter your Gmail password to continue placing an order"?

It's all fun and games until 300 drones form a QR code that send unsuspecting people (the same people who would scan a QR code for fun) to a phishing link.

2032: Elon Musk puts a giant QR code on the moon.

Sometimes, I think I’m reading SimCity 2000 news flashes.

China does the drone light shows and qr codes drones quite a bit now. Surprised it isn't that used in the West

Imagine being the rights holder to this song

Imagine being Rick Astley, who is not the rights holder

I imagine he is now invited to perform at live Rickroll events...like i remembar was done once at a previous Macy's Thanksgiving's Day parade. So, my hope is that he is able to make a nice living off of his music (assuming it is his music).

Best headline I've read in while.

am I the only one who has literally never thought Rick rolling was even slightly funny? It’s so bizarre to me every time it comes up and everyone reacts like it’s the funniest thing they’ve ever seen.

Same with the image of whatever football guy with the T-shirt over his head or whatever.

Edit: Imagine downvoting this LOL. Get a life

I think the amusement value is less about the intrinsic humour in the linking to the video, and more about the cultural context.

Yeah I don’t “get it”

There are trillions of memes with cultural context that are actually funny, and aren’t replacing a supposed piece of content with nothingness.

it is a meme for "made you look." "Made you look" is seldom "funny," but it _is_ a thing. Folks have fun with ever increasingly obscure ways for "made you look" in this context.

And thank goodness we got away from the shock sites that were the original "made you look".

That's absolutely it. Insofar as it's funny, it is so because of the lengths taken to achieve the "made you look". It's the same reason why putting an Austin Seven on the roof of the Senate House in Cambridge* is funny, which is to say it isn't funny in any way you can explain, but is clearly hilarious for the pure whimsy.

*https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-2160459...

Intellectual challenges where one would expect them to exist.

"Mystery as Santa hats appear on college chapel statues" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-5938698...

Because when you see the "Rick roll" video you know it's a joke. If it's some other random video it'll take awhile to get the joke.

That's why the joke is popular almost 15 years after it started.

I’m glad people enjoy it but man when you don’t enjoy it, it’s just flat out annoying.

If you are scanning random QR codes in 2022 then you deserve the Rick Roll, or whatever you get.

Nah.

this method can be used or absued by people to bombard people with propaganda message or drop a link to malware at mass.

I think you mean "en masse", although you might also mean dropping links to malware during a liturgical service. I don't judge.

Indeed. The people that want to spam propaganda were limited to newspapers and TV. I shudder to think what they’ll be able to do with this newfound QR power.

Pretty soon any random person will be able to put a QR code on their car.

depending on wether your definitions of propoganda and malware include rick astley, thats exactly what they did

the new "fly over and drop paper propaganda fliers in enemy territory" - just launch a bunch of drones to share your message and have them disperse before the authorities arrive.

I don't think it's any more effective than paying someone $15/hour to drive a billboard truck around town. I live in Washington DC, and I saw two of them near church this week.

It's not funny now that Google puts ads in front of every YouTube video. That is the one video they should exclude from ads.

I pay for premium so I can still experience a pure, unsullied rickroll.

Values.

Word.

> That is the one video they should exclude from ads

I wouldn't be very happy about that if I were Rick Astley!

uBlock Origin will prevent you from ever seeing a YT ad again. Install it.

Hmm, I do have that installed. Do I need to set a parameter?

In Firefox at least, it's disabled by default in private windows.

In Chrome, you may just be out of luck - I don't remember details, but uBo doesn't work as well there.

Yes, you have to set some custom filters/rules.

see: https://github.com/easylist/easylist/wiki/Youtube-Issues

Thank you!

I pay for premium, so I wouldn’t notice - but holy crap, that would certainly put a dent in the whole gag, for sure.

Man, drones are scary. This approach could be adopted for a whole slew of malicious techniques.

IF THIS WERE A VIRUS

YOU WOULD BE DEAD NOW

FORTUNATELY ITS NOT

THE METAVERSE IS A DANGEROUS PLACE;

HOW'S YOUR SECURITY?

CALL HIRO PROTAGONIST SECURITY ASSOCIATES

FOR A FREE INITIAL CONSULTATION.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com