Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[10ebbor10]

After.

Even if the Hindenburg hadn't failed, and nothing had been confiscated by Germany, the airship industry would not have survived the war. Major advances in aircraft were made at the time, while airships stood at a standstill.

[Aseaheru]

True that.

[PTTG??]

Frankly, I think delivery drones are an awesome idea. If they are cost-effective (and only if), then really, what's the difference between a truck carrying things to your house and an air vehicle doing the same thing?

Why does everyone suddenly want rednecks to shoot down drones when, if they were to shoot at fedex trucks, it's a whole different story (well, ok, there's a guy in one of them, but that doesn't mean if you steal a fedex truck, everything inside it is now yours)?

[Ghills]

Frankly, I think delivery drones are an awesome idea. If they are cost-effective (and only if), then really, what's the difference between a truck carrying things you your house and an air vehicle doing the same thing?

Why does everyone suddenly want rednecks to shoot down drones when, if they were to shoot at fedex trucks, it's a whole different story (well, ok, there's a guy in one of them, but that doesn't mean if you steal a fedex truck, everything inside it is now yours)?

Because Amazon's talking about the commercial rollout of a very new technology, that will involve heavy robots flying over people's houses, heads and cars.  There needs to be a lot more publicly available info on safety, navigation, etc. Google's not doing so well with their self-guided cars, which have a much easier challenge.  Think about the weapons drone programs - those things do have lots of human guidance, and still manage to miss targets by quite a bit.  These are smaller and not loaded with explosives, but a decently-sized book + robot falling from a couple hundred feet is going to hurt.   

There's also the potential to jam up airspace, accidents with powerlines, impact on low-flying wildlife - human living space just isn't built to have robots flying in it, and Amazon's got the same reputation as Google for jumping in with both feet.  The shoot-it! reaction is overplayed, but I think it's based in some legitimate concerns about the lack of information. 

Awesome idea, yes.  Possible, probably. Safe, practical, useful? Not enough info.   

[Another]

I guess that many people had not honestly assessed if they would really shoot at an RC-helicopter operated by a kid in a public park and how that would be different from shooting at a delivery drone.

[alexandertnt]

I guess that many people had not honestly assessed if they would really shoot at an RC-helicopter operated by a kid in a public park and how that would be different from shooting at a delivery drone.

I assume that having drones get shot may be a concern where the drones fly over someones private land.

[Another]

I guess that many people had not honestly assessed if they would really shoot at an RC-helicopter operated by a kid in a public park and how that would be different from shooting at a delivery drone.

I assume that having drones get shot may be a concern where the drones fly over someones private land.

Would it be a concern if they fly over a public road with traffic?

[alexandertnt]

Would it be a concern if they fly over a public road with traffic?

Anyone who shot downa drone in public space would probably be breaking some sort of law.

I dont think it would be a big concern (at least over public land), but it is something that may have to be taken into consideration.

I am pretty sure this drone thing isnt going to happen anyway, at least not for a while.

[PTTG??]

Because Amazon's talking about the commercial rollout of a very new technology, that will involve heavy robots flying over people's houses, heads and cars.  There needs to be a lot more publicly available info on safety, navigation, etc. Google's not doing so well with their self-guided cars, which have a much easier challenge.  Think about the weapons drone programs - those things do have lots of human guidance, and still manage to miss targets by quite a bit.  These are smaller and not loaded with explosives, but a decently-sized book + robot falling from a couple hundred feet is going to hurt.   

There's also the potential to jam up airspace, accidents with powerlines, impact on low-flying wildlife - human living space just isn't built to have robots flying in it, and Amazon's got the same reputation as Google for jumping in with both feet.  The shoot-it! reaction is overplayed, but I think it's based in some legitimate concerns about the lack of information. 

Awesome idea, yes.  Possible, probably. Safe, practical, useful? Not enough info.

Air vehicles are much, much easier to automate than land ones. Think about it; there's all these obstacles lying around on the ground, while in the air, there's only one big obstacle and it's always below you. We got air drones to work years ago, but we're still having trouble getting cars to work.

Say what you will about the morality of how combat drones are used, but when they hit something, it's because that's the target. They don't miss, but sometimes (too often, in fact), they're given the wrong target.

And anyway, you already trust 300 million morons to drive huge cars full of gasoline right next to you. A couple hundred drones that are being driven by a proven reliable AI is if anything safer.

Other than those points, I do agree we need more information before giving Amazon a free pass. But there's no reason to expect disaster.

[10ebbor10]

Unless you want to operate your airvehicles in cities. Many obstacles, some hard to detect (powerlines). Meanwhile, buildings cause turbulence, making it much harder for a drone to maintain a stable course. While the turbulence won't be strong enough to knock the thing out of the air, it can get lost.

[kaijyuu]

Wouldn't these things be equipped with GPS devices so they wouldn't get lost? Granted they might still get stuck somewhere.