SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the we'll-do-what-we-want-or-not dept.
Days ago, South Korean authorities announced that they'd capture any drone that got too close to Olympics event facilities. If you have a DJI-made craft, you won't even be able to get close. The UAV maker is releasing a software patch that creates a no-fly zone around Olympic areas.
For the duration of the games, DJI drones won't be able to fly through areas in the South Korean cities of Pyeongchang, Gangneung, Bongpyeong and Jeongseon.
"Safety is DJI's top priority and we've always taken proactive steps to educate our customers to operate within the law and where appropriate, implement temporary no-fly zones during major events," the company said in a statement, according to TechCrunch. "We believe this feature will reduce the potential for drone operations that could inadvertently create safety or security concerns."
Source: Engadget
Related: DJI introduced new software to stop its drones from flying in restricted airspace.
DJI Will Ground Drones If They Don't Apply a Software Update
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 08 2018, @06:54PM (6 children)
How about we nip thos shenanigans right in the bud, instead of first giving them our money and then going through a lot of hassles, including a non-negligible risk of bricking the drone?
Start being a grown-up! Think of the consequences first, and then act accordingly.
(Score: 2) by insanumingenium on Thursday February 08 2018, @07:04PM (5 children)
I don't know about these drones in particular other than a reputation for being the best. In the general case however, I definitely can see the value in buying the best hardware (presumably for cheaper that I could replicate it, that is how economies of scale work), and then removing that which I don't want/need. That isn't ignoring consequences, in fact I would argue it can be wise shopping. I would love for the best hardware to be affordable and respect my liberties, but I am no RMS, I live in a pragmatic world, and I firmly believe in the right to do as I wish with my own possessions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 08 2018, @07:32PM (1 child)
You call it pragmatic, while I smell an egotistical and short-sighted worldview.
Some time, you should try applying Kant's categorical imperative to your actions and see where that Gedankenexperiment leads you. I'm not sure I want to live in the world you're helping to create with your pragmatism.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by insanumingenium on Thursday February 08 2018, @09:35PM
I am not sure what bringing up Kant is supposed to do here, you are judging me with your philosophy not mine, which would make such judgment absolutely immoral. Do you see the irony there?
You can't buy a computer that doesn't require proprietary code to boot. I would love if you could. Pretending otherwise won't make it so, and I need a computer today.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday February 08 2018, @07:34PM
I was given a DJI Spark for my birthday last year, and the actual drone hardware is very good. The video quality is amazingly good actually (for my use at least).
However, I probably would not have bought it myself, as it forces the user to create a DJI account to even use the thing, and goodness knows what data it sends to home base. I agree with the concept of owning the hardware I buy, but that is not really an option with the DJI products.
However, as it was a gift it would be churlish to complain, so I just enjoy using it.
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Friday February 09 2018, @01:51AM (1 child)
Just because you bought and now own a car, doesn't mean that you can drive it wherever you want and however you want. You are not permitted to drive it onto an airport tarmac, onto someone else's property behind a gate without invitation, on the wrong side of the road, through red lights etc. And I think that you know and accept that - you can't just do _anything you want_ with something just because you own it.
The same ideas apply to drones. The problem is that we can't enforce limits to drones the same way that we currently do for cars (at least, not without _really_ high fences). DJI is attempting to bring at least some control to stop the idiots who can't act responsibly from harming others. There was an incident last year (can't remember the details) where a drone crashed into a sporting participant, injuring them during an event (a race, I think). I'm perfectly OK with DJI preventing some idiot from crashing into athletes at the Olympics.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 09 2018, @02:15AM
except for the FACT that Ford/GM/etal don't try to prevent me from driving onto an airport tarmac, onto someone else's property behind a gate without invitation, on the wrong side of the road, through red lights etc or force me to create an online account just to use my car. See the difference? Drones (at present) do not require registration, nor insurance. Driving a car (legally) does. The morality is irrelevant. There will always be assholes.