The current and proposed restrictions on drones seem insane to me. To see why, do the reversal test.[1]<p>Imagine if single-prop planes didn't exist, and drones were already used for productive purposes. Courier drones deliver packages in minutes. Construction drones monitor work sites and inspect structures for safety. Police drones scout and warn people near any crimes in progress. Ambulance drones alert drivers and secure intersections so emergency vehicles can respond faster. Some even deliver life-saving equipment or medicines. People have personal drones to follow them on bike rides or runs, carrying supplies and lighting the way at night. Etcetera.<p>Now imagine someone wanting to restrict these drones so that a few people can use cloth-winged planes that run on leaded gasoline. It would be a joke, right?<p>Except, it's not. It's the world we live in.<p>1. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversal_test" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversal_test</a><p>Edit: I'm talking about general aviation, not civil aviation. Airliners and drones operate at very different altitudes. Except near airports, there's ≈0 risk of a collision.<p>Many find my example too skewed in favor of drones, but I think I've been rather conservative. Due to restrictions, there are many applications that haven't been explored. In all likelihood, the "killer app" for drones has yet to be invented.