And I should just like to point out that a generic Chinese toy helicopter trailing 30' of fishing line is a lot cheaper than a very expensive Draganflyer drone.
Published by AdamKokesh on April 1, 2013 Drones May Soon Deliver Your Newspaper In The French Province Of Auvergne - SFGate Drones are about to go postal in Auvergne, a province in south central France. In collaboration with drone-maker Parrot, local postal service La Poste Group will deliver mail via quadricopter drones as early as May of this year, the group recently announced on its blog. The group is already testing the "Parrot Air Drone Postal" service in Auvergne with a team of 20 postal workers and 20 drones. The postal workers can control the drones by an iPod Touch, iPhone, and Android devices using Parrot's smartphone app. Continued at www.sfgate.com/default/article/Drones-May-Soon-Deliver-Your-Newspaper-In-The-4398068.php
Eye in the Sky: Protests against drone use hit New York Washington's overseas drone strikes and their surveillance use at home has long attracted the attention of activists. Groups across the U.S. political spectrum say the strikes breach American law and hurt the country's international standing. Now a month-long anti-drone campaign has kicked off, with a protest in Manhattan RT's Marina Portnaya reports.
Drones will save us, drones will destroy us: citizens sound off at FAA meeting | The Verge By Carl Franzen When it comes to allowing drones to fly over US soil, Americans are of two minds: embrace domestic drones for such uses as crop dusting, high wire inspection, search and rescue, and border security, or run screaming and seek shelter from the surveillance state in the sky. Those dueling views were on display yesterday during a "public engagement session" hosted online by the US Federal Aviation Administration to gather input from citizens on the coming swarm. The two-hour long livestreamed conference call was open to any member of the US public to participate, providing citizens another opportunity to comment on the agency's newly proposed privacy policy on drones. But it quickly devolved into a massive venting session for and against the FAA's proposed drone privacy policy, and drones themselves. Many callers complained they couldn't even find the draft privacy policy document online. For the record, the policy is located right here, although it is not readily apparent how to find this link from the FAA's main page. Perhaps the confusion is the agency's use of the moniker "unmanned aerial systems (UAS)," its preferred term for drones, also the one favored by drone industry lobbyists. Continued with open comments at www.theverge.com/2013/4/4/4180620/faa-drone-privacy-policy-under-fire-in-call-for-public-comment
I think they are vampires really? http://vampirewebsite.net/ http://www.livescience.com/24374-vampires-real-history.html http://news.nationalgeographic.co.u...rbia-supernatural-garlic-fangs-science-weird/ http://eldhinisland.tripod.com/id13.html DRONES ~ Drones are servants (generally human, but other races have been known to be drones) who protect the vampire during their sleep time. Drones are a bit more powerful than normal humans, but still subject to many of the human vulnerabilities. They are almost like slaves to the vampire.
The legislation needs to be very specific about what drones can be employed for. What shreds of the fourth amendment that are left are soon to be gone.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/02/animal_liberation_australia_drones/ They'll drone you when you're trying to be so good They'll drone you just like they said they would They'll drone you when you're trying to go home They'll drone you when you're there all alone But I would not feel so all alone Everybody must get droned
So, some people were killed : US Says 4 Americans Killed by Drones in Counterterror Strikes http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/eric-holder-americans-killed-drones/story?id=19236300#.UZ7zl9h8uSo Link and a snippet: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/u...eech-on-drone-policy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 Obama’s Speech on Drone Policy /snip/ MR. OBAMA: I’m about to address it, ma’am, but you’ve got to let me speak. I’m about to address it. AUDIENCE MEMBER: You’re our Commander-In-Chief – MR. OBAMA: Let me address it. AUDIENCE MEMBER: — you an close Guantanamo Bay. MR. OBAMA: Why don’t you let me address it, ma’am. AUDIENCE MEMBER: There’s still prisoners – MR. OBAMA: Why don’t you sit down and I will tell you exactly what I’m going to do. AUDIENCE MEMBER: That includes 57 Yemenis. MR. OBAMA: Thank you, ma’am. Thank you. (Applause.) Ma’am, thank you. You should let me finish my sentence. Today, I once again call on Congress to lift the restrictions on detainee transfers from GTMO. (Applause.) I have asked the Department of Defense to designate a site in the United States where we can hold military commissions. I’m appointing a new senior envoy at the State Department and Defense Department whose sole responsibility will be to achieve the transfer of detainees to third countries. I am lifting the moratorium on detainee transfers to Yemen so we can review them on a case-by-case basis. To the greatest extent possible, we will transfer detainees who have been cleared to go to other countries. AUDIENCE MEMBER: — prisoners already. Release them today. MR. OBAMA: Where appropriate, we will bring terrorists to justice in our courts and our military justice system. And we will insist that judicial review be available for every detainee. AUDIENCE MEMBER: It needs to be – THE PRESIDENT: Now, ma’am, let me finish. Let me finish, ma’am. Part of free speech is you being able to speak, but also, you listening and me being able to speak. (Applause.) Now, even after we take these steps one issue will remain — just how to deal with those GTMO detainees who we know have participated in dangerous plots or attacks but who cannot be prosecuted, for example, because the evidence against them has been compromised or is inadmissible in a court of law. But once we commit to a process of closing GTMO, I am confident that this legacy problem can be resolved, consistent with our commitment to the rule of law. I know the politics are hard. But history will cast a harsh judgment on this aspect of our fight against terrorism and those of us who fail to end it. Imagine a future — 10 years from now or 20 years from now — when the United States of America is still holding people who have been charged with no crime on a piece of land that is not part of our country. Look at the current situation, where we are force-feeding detainees who are being held on a hunger strike. I’m willing to cut the young lady who interrupted me some slack because it’s worth being passionate about. Is this who we are? Is that something our Founders foresaw? Is that the America we want to leave our children? Our sense of justice is stronger than that
Customs & Border Protection Considered Weaponizing Drones | Electronic Frontier Foundation By Jennifer Lynch A Customs & Border Protection (CPB) report, released in response to EFF’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the agency, shows CBP has considered adding weapons to its domestic Predator drones. The report, titled “Concept of Operations for CBP’s Predator B Unmanned Aircraft System” and submitted to Congress on June 29, 2010 shows that, not only is the agency planning to sharply increase the number of Predator drones it flies and the amount of surveillance it conducts by 2016 (detailed further in a separate blog post tomorrow), but it has considered equipping its Predators with “non-lethal weapons designed to immobilize” targets of interest. Continued at www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/07/customs-border-protection-considered-weaponizing-drones
This was sold to us as "unarmed surveillance only" but we all know where this is going. Drones can be used by citizenry too, I'm not against drone tech but we should stop kidding ourselves about where this is going. BTW "Immobilize" people in rough terrain in the desert = die die die 120* this week. What is the border patrol helicopter ETA?
Desperate Canadians wetbacks will be immobilized here My point is "immobilizing" in the wilderness is lethal force.
Spencer Ackerman @attackerman 8m Wave of future: multiple drones/types of drones from one controller. Lockheed: www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2013/july/UAS_7213.html Dreamhammer: www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/06/drone-app-store/
You have to be fucking kidding me. Getting applause for that is disgraceful let alone an embarrassment.
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 3m In the New York Times: "The Drone That Killed My Grandson" and how the US Government refuses to answer for what it did. www.nytimes.com/2013/07/18/opinion/the-drone-that-killed-my-grandson.html
FAA warns Colorado town that shooting down drones could lead to prosecution — RT USA On the heels of a Colorado town's announcement that it was floating the idea of legalized drone hunting, the Federal Aviation Administration has warned that the practice could result in prosecution and fines. The small town of Deer Trail, Colorado is currently weighing an ordinance that would grant residents permits to shoot down unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones, and even encourage the practice by awarding a $100 bounty to anyone presenting identifiable pieces of a drone that has been shot out of the sky. Deer Trail resident Phillip Steel, who introduced the ordinance for debate - while admitting the move would be largely symbolic - voiced distrust towards the quickly proliferating technology already shared by many others, in particular privacy advocates who recoil at the thought of flying cameras hovering over American communities. “Basically, I do not believe in the idea of a surveillance society, and I believe we are heading that way," says Steel. "We do not want drones in town. They fly in town, they get shot down," he added. In response, the FAA has released a statement that seeks to answer many of the questions raised by such a city ordinance, whether symbolic or otherwise. A drone “hit by gunfire could crash, causing damage to persons or property on the ground, or it could collide with other objects in the air,” the statement said. “Shooting at an unmanned aircraft could result in criminal or civil liability, just as would firing at a manned airplane,” adds the FAA. Steel said in an interview that he already has 28 signatures on his petition — roughly 10 per cent of the town’s registered voters. Colorado law requires local officials to formally consider the proposal at a meeting in August, reports the AP. Town officials would then have the option of adopting the ordinance or putting it on the ballot in an election this fall, he said. Steel has already dismissed the FAA’s warning, saying that “the FAA doesn’t have the power to make a law.” The FAA does have regulatory authority over all civil aviation, and Congress has given the agency until 2015 to develop additional regulations governing the use of drones over US territory. The FAA already estimates that thousands of drones will be in use over the country for a range of purposes, including search and rescue operations and agriculture activities. Kim Oldfield, the Deer Trail town clerk, told 7News that the so-called drone hunt is not likely to take the form of local vigilantism. "I can see it as a benefit, monetarily speaking, because of the novelty of the ordinance," says Oldfield. "Possibly hunting drones in a skeet, fun-filled festival. We’re the home of the world’s first rodeo, so we could home of the world’s first drone hunt. If they were to read it for the title alone and not for the novelty and what it really is, it sounds scary, and it sounds super vigilante and frightening," adds Oldfield. Though Deer Trail’s potential ordinance has made headlines for its unique take on drones, other communities and states have also begun to take steps to regulate drone use, in particular for the purposes of domestic surveillance. According to the ACLU, legislation that would regulate drone use has been proposed in 42 states and enacted in six, and is still being floated in some 27. In some states including Georgia, Illinois, Montana, Oklahoma and Massachusetts, proposed legislation would ban the weaponization of drones. Other states such as Hawaii, Maine and Washington, in response to interest by police departments to use drones to help in their investigations would require reporting from law enforcement agencies on their drone usage. California and a handful of other states want law enforcement to justify the need for drones before they are ever acquired. Continued at http://rt.com/usa/faa-warns-against-shooting-drones-345/
Hina Shamsi on Obama's drone wars: America's targeted killing policy – video interview | The Guardian The director of the American Civil Liberties Union's national security project talks about why the Obama administration's drone assassinations are not just illegal in many cases, but are becoming increasingly risky for the US itself. www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2013/jul/22/hina-shamsi-obamas-drone-wars-video-interview
A presentation at DefCon- drone helicopter, Pineapple wifi interceptor, fly over neighborhood, get all wifi traffic. 'Perch and stare tech coming soon.
unfortunately, i am afraid that our "wise" congress"people" view the drones program not as a military program, but as a jobs program. Its spreading to our allies too. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...er-carrier-draws-chinese-warning-to-asia.html Back when i was in the navy, i remember the propaganda news paper reporting that big carriers were obsolete and that we will stop building them after this generation of carriers were done. They claimed that it was because the big ships are too expensive to operate, but I felt it was because of the effectiveness of drones. Part of the effectiveness is the CLAIMED reduction of collateral damage. the pentagon claims that drones kill fewer people then if we sent troops, special forces, cruise missiles, or air strikes. They have "numbers" (which are not shared with the public) to support this. Whats even more insidious, is they used the Bradly manning helo video as evidence for why we need more drone strikes, claiming that drones allow for more covert assessment and would not have fired on those people in that instance. No, drones are here to stay. What we must do, is force them to be used in an ethical way. Good luck with that.
It can intercept, but it needs to be able to decrypt the WPA2 traffic, or have an exploit to get around it.
No. Consider how WEP was cracked by exploiting weaknesses in the handshake protocol. Even today with a stack of recorded WEP data you would be unable to decrypt, so without that handshake-breaking the answer is no.
Here's some video that was shot using a cinedrone: Here's a source for cinedrones, for about two grand less camera: www.indiegogo.com/projects/cinedrone
All drones aren't bad. They have many more uses other than just spying. We need to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water. Tell the government they cannot use them to spy on us, but be mindful of the potential for other uses for the technology.
http://drudgegae.iavian.net/r?hop=h...e-Google-Glass-using-just-head-movements.html has anyone here got their hands on google glass yet?
LOL! The good cimematic cameras cost $40k! https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/imperial-probe-droids.45809/#post-1915735
