|reply to Link Logger |
Re: San Fransisco police getting drones
said by Link Logger:and related:
Our drones have a much bigger range of 'visual' then humans as our sensors can see things that no human eye can...
said by Link Logger:One thing is to watch a remote target from a distance (potentially violating their privacy) and another is to correctly access safety of surrounding 3D-area full with flying objects within. If it's not obvious yet, next time try to drive your car looking ahead only through x12 binoculars...
Interestingly there are people who think the sensors are an invasion of privacy and others who think they are inadequate for flight.
said by Link Logger:It's good to know that there are some people who still value privacy of others... not trying to monetize on selling snooping devices and related technologies.
The FAA was to have picked 6 cities to host UAVs last month from a rumored list of 30 interested cities, but delayed their decision based on privacy concerns, not technology concerns.
said by Link Logger:I don't care about your ordinance (which could make things even worse) or cost of your lost equipment at all. But what if your home is right beneath? Or may be mine, or may be someone else's? I know that you, trying to sell the drones, don't care. But ask the rest of the people. Do they want to see your drone to go vertical right above their heads?
The other thing is if my drone is going down, I don't mind going vertical if it means I miss everything, ie my drone doesn't even register on the importance scale (ie I'm not trying to save it) unless of course it has ordinance onboard in which case a nice big bay is always a good place to lose the boom to (reason why the English Channel is full of all sorts of goodies).
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...