Some people haven't been happy about the current trial in Bonython, ACT.
Based on the picture in the article it looks like a bunch of old people complaining.
Are You Concerned about Drone Deliveries?
Comments
- 1
- 2
Telling:
About half of the 1024 signatures came from residents in Bonython, a suburb of about 3500 people.
So uh, only about 500 people cared enough to even sign a petition (that was brought to their door), out of a population of 3,500?
That is actually an extremely high turnout for a survey.
They went door-knocking - and it's not exactly an objective and impartial survey, the surveyors clearly had a preferred answer in mind.
Yeah I'm sure they worded it as "sign here to prevent noise polution and danger over Bonython" rather than "would you like drone deliveries, here are the pros and cons"
I definitely wasn’t concerned about it…until I read this post.
Thanks.I watched Ex Machina again last night. It’s the future.
So what was your take on the end of that film, was the android being malicious leaving the protagonist trapped? Was she uncaring, manipulative, or just solely concerned with her self interest, as one might argue regarding her creator(s)?
Solely concerned with her self-interest. The lesson of the film is that while machines can become smart enough to trick us into thinking that they feel emotions and care about us, it won't necessarily mean that they will.
We instinctively anthropomorphise AI, meaning we imagine that it's like a human: good or evil, caring or selfish. But there's actually no reason to believe all intelligence has to be like human intelligence. AI will have whatever goals it's given, and pursue them. When that's bad for us, we'll call it ruthless. When it's good for us, we'll call it loyal. But that's just us colouring completely black-and-white logic.
This is the easiest-to-read primer on common mistakes we make thinking about AI: https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revol…
I completely agree with this - great comment. I think robots and AI will be necessarily amoral, not moral or immoral - it will just be a concept that's alien to them.
I'm not sure about that, I mean what good does locking the protagonist do for her? She was free from her confinement, did trapping a human in it restrain her in any way?
It felt like a move of vengeance, but then again, that's just my human morals coming into play.
Ava was programmed by Nathan to be curious.
'She' internally constructed a requirement to visit a busy city intersection to gain knowledge about how humans interact.
This was the machine's way of fulfilling the programming requirement.
However he had also restricted its ability to achieve that requirement by confining it in the room.
The machine therefore had to work out a way of achieving escape from the room.
Everything, and everyone, else then became a mere tool for achieving that goal.
Ava said to Caleb, "Wait here", so my internal optimist suggests that she will return.Here is an interesting observation on the pace and direction of technological advancement.
You used the word 'android' to describe Ava.
Having worked in the field I immediately define that word as a 'humanoid robot'.
However; search Google for 'android' and you will find no mention of robots.
There is your real enemy!Ava said to Caleb, "Wait here", so my internal optimist suggests that she will return.
But it's a real question whether she understands human mortality (or needs), or cares about them, that she will return before he's starved to death/died of thirst.
@HighAndDry: It would be a logical decision determined by the software.
"Is he a useful tool to enable my objectives?".@[Deactivated]: i think she just forgot about him
she had an idea to use caleb to open the door once the door was open her next idea was to escape so that's the next thing she did
he was no longer needed so he was no longer thought about if she was leaving him behind for revenge why didn't she even look at him as she left?
an AI is not thinking at least not as we know it it's running a program the same as any computer it's just a very complicated one
Just people complaining about technological progress. I'm sure the drones will be flown at appropriate altitudes to avoid obstacles and other air traffic. One can hardly complain that they're loud when we have trucks and some cars that are much louder already driving past our houses and businesses.
Plus the added bonus is if one of these things falls and crashes causing injury you can sue the pants off the operators.
Rather get hit by a falling drone than get hit by a car.
So far, the statistics from their testing show it's infinitely less likely than getting into a motor vehicle accident.how likely are they to cause a motor vehicle accident?
"wow look at that" CRUNCH
Yes, and for the mere fact that the companies that want to perform drone deliveries are manipulating the government into introducing legislation that take away my freedom of FPV drone flight.
With new laws being introduced in the USA, Australia will soon follow, and I won't be able to fly in even 1/4 of places I'm allowed to fly in now. It sucks.
Cant wait til the local eagles start seeing them as prey.
Can't wait to see youtube videos of magpie vs drone: Magpie wins.
I cant wait to be old and retired with plenty of free time on my hands. The local council are going to get hammered with all my requests.
No, I'm looking forward to it.
Can you block those drones using something like that http://www.podavitel.ru/podavitel-dronov-garpija-ckj-1809-24…
about $3000aud for the peace of mind… and can block those frequencies within 300m radius
Wi-Fi - 2400-2500МHZ; 5,8G - 5700-5900МHZ; GPSL1/GLONASSL1 - 1560-1610 МHZ; GPSL2-L5 - 1170-1280 МHZ.
They would both rely on autonomous flight, and back to base communication. You'd need to block GPS to screw them over.
However, blocking wifi and GPS, you can promptly expect the feds to be at your doorstep, and a meeting with the guy who likes to drop soap on the ground for you to pickup.
I would be interested to watch, as an experiment, how long it takes law enforcement to arrive at your house when you start jamming all GPS and wifi in a 300m radius.
Yep, it's highly illegal to jam these frequencies. Federal telecommunications/radiocommunications laws cover it pretty comprehensively.
I reckon they will be subject to target practice.
get those self checkouts and drones off my lawn. have them share the bicycle lane instead. especially when those lanes are being used by the obnoxious ones.
I would be concerned about any drone flying over my property. If it was easily identifiable as a postal drone, perhaps my concern would lessen. However there is still that concern whereby some stranger is flying over, upon, adjacent, your home with a camera drone. There needs to be sufficient benefit, to outweigh the potential dangers. ie. Maybe if packages get delivered in 1-2 days instead of waiting a week, or perhaps if postage was half the cost, then might be ok with it. Also regulations need to be in place more, and enforcement of such regulations. Like for instance, if the authorized drones have a distinct marking then we need to have enforcement when unauthorized drone operators put such markings on their drones, in an attempt to disguise wrongdoing. Like obviously a worst case type scenario, but what is to stop some pervert from filming outside bathroom window looking in while kids or my wife are naked. Right now as we speak, I have top section of bathroom window open. Nobody can see in, but a drone from above could.
If it gets my parcels delivered faster and cheaper, they can feel free to view whatever they want of me hahahaha
Send this to old people: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlO2gcs1YvM
Scary stuff. I recommend Black Mirror episodes if the above video is that damn interesting to you.
To anyone who hasn't watched Black Mirror and want to watch it - ration it. Long-duration, sustained viewing can lead to… wanting to burn the whole world down. Or running into the bush and never coming back, etc.
nope. the way i see it, every delivery comes with a free drone. win win
Usually when something good comes along, something bad follows. Wonder how good the hijackers will get. Catch and release drones with empty package?
Department 13’s MESMER® Counter Drone System (represented in the image below) is a unique and patented drone mitigation solution. Mesmer® is low power, non-jamming, non-line of sight, and non-kinetic. MESMER® provides a safe and effective method of protecting personnel and infrastructure from dangerous drones. The key differentiator for MESMER® is its ability to manipulate weaknesses in all digital radio protocols. This allows MESMER® to execute sophisticated automated detection and mitigation strategies that stop, redirect, land or take control of drones across a range of national security and defense scenarios. MESMER®‘s patented technology is built on open source software architecture.
https://department13.com/mesmer-3/Mesmer will only work with encrypted signals. That won't last long.
I am all for drone deliveries, but a flock of birds could be a delivery drones worst enemy ;-)
I'd just like to know how these companies can fly drones loaded with goods while the rest of us have so many restrictions on where we can fly drones. One rule for them and another for the rest of us.
Wonder if you will get a delivery if you live near a airport or a helipad.
Yes, but they have to resort to their special trebuchet-equipped drones that loiter outside the exclusion zone and ballistically complete the last few hundred meters of the delivery.
Interested in this too. The current casa drone rules are really restrictive. I don't know how they're going to get around them.
I know the drone won't card me and pretend I'm not there when I'm at home
I'm actually genuinely curious how that scenario really would play out with a drone. What do they do?
There is no reason to assume that the drone will not have some system of determining if the property is occupied or not.
I guess that the 'card' will be electronic-e mail or text.I reckon most people would pre-approve leaving it in the backyard or something in advance, but what if it did need a signature? Would it somehow ring the doorbell or knock? haha. Oh maybe it could call your phone with an automated voice or something. and then you sign something while it hovers in front of your door and then it takes off? lol
@rhino015: I'd favour a Bluetooth link to the recipient's mobile that you acknowledge by accepting a link.
@[Deactivated]: hmm yeah good idea. Tho I'd probably do most of it just over the internet via an app, but get it to tell users to turn bluetooth on and the app scans for the drone's bluetooth in range. Not sure if you can do that on iOS though, it might just be locked down by Apple to being able to transmit over a bluetooth connection but not query which devices are in range from within an app. So in that case they may have to pair to the drone over bluetooth manually for it to know you're there. Then once it's paired, that is considered proof that you're there, and the signing stuff is done via the app over the internet.
I can see a remake of the classic game "Paperboy" for the new generation called "Delivery Drone" - deliver your packages while avoiding gun shots, cats and old geezers in their y-fronts throwing their newspapers at you
Drones will not be delivering packages any time soon in built up areas. The satellite signals that GPS systems utilise are easily obstructed by buildings and the like. So if you live in a metropolitan area, you have nothing to worry about.
it looks like a bunch of old people complaining.
I don't think you're being fair. There are a certainly a bunch of quite significant concerns about autonomous aerial deliveries.
You're only going to need one injured kid or pet and this technology would be shut down.
Likewise concerns about residents "reasonable expectation" of privacy, photography over private land and "high-pitched" buzzing noise are all likely to inflame neighbourhood tensions.From your article:
"Amazon was reportedly planning to use drones to collect information about households to support targeted advertising."
Hmm… I'm not sure if I would consent to that.
I see the risk of someone being injured as very low. Even the $1000 drones don't just crash out of the sky, they land themselves gracefully. You'd have to have someone shoot it out of the sky or something. And it's plastic so it's not going to kill someone. I'm sure Aus Post delviery vans have run over pets and crashed into people.
These local people say they don't store photos of houses or collect information like that. So those concerns are all lame to me.
Oh and the noise. It isn't like you'd hear the takeoff and landing stages from 20 houses away. It's just not that loud. You'd hear a couple houses range from you, and how many deliveries per day would a group of 3 households likely have? Bugger all. I live on a thoroughfare through kambah, it's a 60 zone, there are buses, motorbikes, cars, even burnouts occasionally, and it's not a big deal. I only ever notice it if I'm outside by myself and not doign anything at all. So to me this demonstrates that it quite likely is old people complaining who have nothing else going on, because otherwise you wouldn't even notice.
I agree the risk is low but if a kid sticks their hand into a prop they're probably going to end up with a broken finger (or worse). A lot of these drones use CFRP which is a strong material.
Who's liable for injuries? Who's there to stop them? Who can provide medical help?So those concerns are all lame to me.
Drone operators carry a duty of care and this discussion is with having.
Medicare would foot the bill for medical treatment for a broken finger. You'd drop the kid at the hospital yourself as the parent, and you'd have the option of suing them. Similar to if an Aus Post van ran over your foot, I'm guessing. Only difference is there'd be someone there to apologise if they did notice and stop.
Id be interested to know how many decibels they are at certain distances (10m, 20m, 30m, 50m etc).
You choose live in a very noisy street and then say drone noise is not an issue for you, but the vast majority of people live in pretty quiet streets and having noisy drones crisscrossing the sky doesn't sound so appealing. It really comes down to how loud they really are.
Well my house backs onto that 60 zone, the street I live on is a quiet cul-de-sac. I think this would be a fairly common scenario. Otherwise you'd have to walk kilometers to the nearest bus stop.
I'd also be interested in getting some figures. A lawnmower could be 85db easily, a car can be 91db, or a harley is legally allowed to be over 100db. That's not including illegally loud vehicles, which there are plenty of. I believe the consumer DJI ones may be around 60 at most according to google. Of course the commerical bigger ones would be more. I doubt the sound carries that far compared to those bassy kinds of noises though. Keep in mind also, that the db scale is not linear, so 70 is twice as loud as 60. 80 is twice as loud as 70.
And the frequency of the combination of all of these things in almost any typical house would be a lot higher than having a drone within the same distance of your house. Especially because they travel as the crow flies, so instead of being like cars where they have to drive along the road past every house on the street along the way, they'd merely fly over the top of a far fewer amount of houses on the way.
Taking off and landing would be the loudest part, but you wouldn't hear it from that many houses away at all.
And unlike buses, you'd only expect 1 delivery to your house and maybe another to your neighbour at most within a few house radius per day that you could hear.
@rhino015: I think you are being far too generous, for a start flying over house is a million time worse than cars driving past the front of the house but you make it out to be a benefit - houses are designed to take in consideration of the street noise - such as bedrooms at the back of the house and the house set back, and houses where street noise is a problem often have thicker glass of other noise deadening to remove the problem - none of that is possible if the drone is flying over your house.
Further drones are a high pitch noise which is way, way worse than the low rumble of normal street noise but you reason it is less offensive, most people would totally disagree.
Drones are cool, getting anything delivered within an hour would be cool, but the actual benefits are pretty minor over normal deliveries and more noise is not better. You say its not as bad as street noise, which I totally disagree, but also this is in addition to street noise, it is not replacing street noise, it is adding more noise. We should be reducing noise not adding to it.
@dave999: The same amount of vehicles may still be traveling pass a given location. The only difference is that they won't stop there.
Stop holding progress back with your b*tiching!
No wonder most of australia is still a backwater bush
I'm sure they said something similar when they were mining asbestos, adding lead to petrol, using CFCs for fridges, importing cane toads, etc. Sometimes progress needs to be tempered with logic. There are good things about Drones but there is a lot still to be sorted out before they become the delivery device of choice.
Yo hold up lets just cancel the study and production of everything "its scary!"
Lets all go live in caves and hang out by the fire its safer.If everyone thought like this we wouldnt even have electricity lmao
If you thought everything we have now just magically appeared safe and perfect for humans
Things obviously get tested and ironed out to make sure its safe and works right before it goes to mass use. You try and you learn from errors bur you cant learn shit if you dont even give it a go lol
X Development LLC isn't trialling Wing in Australia to deliver food and drinks. Their Wing project along with other AI projects may have military applications. X have already crossed paths with DARPA with their award winning UGV. It's likely that DARPA would be interested in successful UAV trial.
Using caution is not being a Luddite but using terms like lmao is just juvenile. Do the trials and tests but accept there will be good and bad. I wasn’t saying don’t do it just be cautious and realise the bad may out weigh the good and be prepared to drop it if that is the case. In all those examples I gave they let it all go on even when they had the negative information.
@try2bhelpful: No one said anything about not being cautious. If you think an ozbargain post is being proactive and cautious you have another thing coming.
We already have drones that cary payloads that could wipe your street out but dont see anyone having a sook about that but people here a little concerned about the eneloop package might get hacked.
And i'll say lmao how i like didn't know you were the judge and jury of what is juvenile and not
We already have drones that cary payloads that could wipe your street
Not according to the ABC.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-20/could-the-australian-…@jno: Being cautious about things like drones is sensible until they are proven safe - given they could fall out of the sky on someone and injure them.
If you think LMAO is the height of repartee then you need to get out more, chum.
@try2bhelpful: Yeah sure i'll take your advice on language and live a more fulfulling life from now on thank you sooo muchhhh
Bad examples. Nobody was complaining during any of those examples happening initially. Everyone was completely fine with all of those things, until they later discovered problems with them. Initally they weren't criticised at all. This is more like the invention of the car, although those criticisms were more sensible. Cars were and still are dangerous. But still it's worth the risk due to the reward, compared to alternatives. In this case, the risk is far far less, and yes the reward is less also, but on balance the comparison is more the same.
Yes but probably also when introducing the replacements for asbestos (which is a natural fibre after all), CFCs, etc.
Or when introducing vaccines, seatbelts, etc.
It cuts both ways. This has been trialled for 8 months without incident. At some point, valid caution turns into Ludditry.
There are plenty of "natural products" you don't want anywhere near your body. The secret is to work out which ones are harmful and which ones are beneficial before you release them, en masse, to the community. Then pull them back if they are found to be harmful.
The usage of drones is balancing benefit vs disadvantage. The issue is around what rules need to be developed for their general use. There are plenty of bad things that can happen with their use, as well as good. A drone, falling from the sky, could kill someone so it is not unreasonable to determine harm minimisation procedures - after all there are road rules for car usage, why not flight rules for drone usage? Until these rules have been developed then their usage would remain as a "trial". 8 months "without incident" is absolutely nothing, given the limited usage they have had to date. Besides, I would suggest this is 8 months without an incident being reported; rather than without incident.
I do not have an issue with exploring the usage of drones and, if the benefit outweighs the harm, then they should be used. All I ask is they be properly regulated to reduce the potential for harm - especially as they may fly over people's homes. I don't think waiting for the first fatality before regulating is a good idea.
Using UAV to deliver objects won't be restricted to coffee and burritos. They may at some point in the future be used to carry out illegal surveillance, carry explosives, firearms, drugs and other contrabands.
The cartels are already doing now.
https://www.google.com/search?q=drone+carry+drugs&client=fir…https://dronedj.com/2018/08/05/venezuelas-president-nicolas-…
So you believe that banning legitimate uses will also stop illegal uses of drones? I propose that the difference would be minimal in terms of affecting illegal use of them, but banning it obviously removes all possible legitimate benefit from drone deliveries.
Not an outright ban, but a senate oversight over foreign entities conducting UAV trials on Australian soil. X is an American entity. Why aren't they operating trials on US soil?
Australians would be up in arms if X were a Russian or Chinese entity trialling UAV here.
@whooah1979: I'd let them do the small deliveries in Canberra for now, and address any improper use on a case by case basis as it arises. I'd probably be more concerned about the government using them en masse than I am about these guys in Canberra delivering burritos and medicine.
It's at the stage where if something untoward is proven to have happened, then laws can and will be quickly changed due to public pressure. I don't feel that it's at a crossroads now where we are stuck with either completely unrestricted drone usage for any purpose or zero(or ultra limited) drone usage. So for this reason, I wouldn't worry at this stage.
Someone else pointed out that governments may then regulate to make consumer use of drones ultra restricted so that it doesn't interfere with these commercial ones, and I think that's something to actually be concerned about if drones are your hobby, but otherwise I don't see any clear and present issue with any of this.
These UAV are virtually undetectable when flying at low attitudes. They've a payload of 1500g and may travel 40km one-way. This would be the perfect mule for transporting drugs from one side of the city to the other side.
@whooah1979: Undetectable, unless you're old and live in Bonython, where your droney senses tingle and you can hear it coming from 1km away. lol
Anything that stops me having to use Australia Post, Couriers Please or Fastway Couriers.
Fastway never delivers to anyone in my postcode, just drops the packages off at a local petrol station. The amusing thing is that I, among many others, live along the main road and Fastway drive past our houses to get to the drop off point. Amazon Australia send me overnight packages, that can take a week to deliver and apparently (I have asked them) they have no way of changing the courier, when you put in your order. So far every package from Amazon has been misdirected to the wrong postcode. I would actually be happy if they used Australia Post, at least then you get a note in the mail box when a package arrives.
for the first time ever i got a delivery from them,
I was on my way out and the guy blocked my driveway……….. was an interesting conversation
This will absolutely KILL country town retailers
Wing just lodged a Development Application for a permanent base in north Canberra: https://mygungahlin.com.au/business/development-application-…
i wonder if they are programmed to drop the parcels in the driveway just like the human drones
I can see kids with upgraded nerfs wanting free loot boxes.
- 1
- 2
@HighAndDry: Assuming that's streamed back at highest possible Visual quality @ 720p30(so say even if you try to zoom in as a pixel perfect person to inspect each individual pixel for compression artifacts or degradation of any sorts, it wouldn't have any - at least any that can be visually seen…but mathematically it won't be lossless quality of course…so it's like streaming back a 320K(which is highest compatible for all devices, can go higher but some won't play) MP3 file vs. a FLAC file of the same audio), could still take up quite a bit of bandwidth, unless they're taking the stream as low as possible quality yet still be able to distinguish item drop and person collecting the goods…which would kinda look like a 144p30 video feed from youtube then….
Oh wait, 4G can do up to 37.5MB/s, right? Well that sounds expensive streaming back at max transfer speed…….. My 4G cost $1 per 40MB sent or and received…. and it's also capped at half that speed as well: 18.75MB/s….
5G is like double that 37.5MB/s speed right?