TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Drones should be banned from private use, says Google's Eric Schmidt

17 点作者 flamingbuffalo超过 11 年前

29 条评论

everettForth超过 11 年前
&quot;How would you feel if your neighbour went over and bought a commercial observation drone that they can launch from their back yard. It just flies over your house all day. How would you feel about it?&quot;<p>Pretty much the same way I feel about Google Streetview? Or Google Glass?
评论 #6863319 未加载
评论 #6863146 未加载
评论 #6863311 未加载
评论 #6863449 未加载
评论 #6863599 未加载
评论 #6863272 未加载
ISL超过 11 年前
The natural cycle continues. Young disruptors grow older and move for regulation and control.<p>If drones are outlawed, only outlaws will have drones.<p>What may be needed isn&#x27;t laws and regulations, but a common understanding of what is and isn&#x27;t acceptable for drones. There&#x27;s not a lot of room on our planet; it&#x27;s important for us to develop societal norms for where we want and don&#x27;t want technology.<p>It&#x27;s jarring to find popped helium balloons in the wilderness. I&#x27;d be sad and unhappy to see and hear drones flitting about our treasured mountains, and even in our city skies. We&#x27;re tool-builders, but we must be careful with our tools.
评论 #6863706 未加载
评论 #6863494 未加载
评论 #6863783 未加载
promptcritical超过 11 年前
&gt; Schmidt set out the trajectory of robotic warfare and considered whether it would be confined solely to national governments. &quot;It&#x27;s probable that robotics becomes a significant component of nation state warfare,&quot; he said.<p>This after Google makes a huge investment in robotics companies. Their future potential competitors in this space are in peoples&#x27; garages right now. This is Google pulling the ladder up after them.
baddox超过 11 年前
&gt; &quot;You&#x27;re having a dispute with your neighbour,&quot; he hypothesised. &quot;How would you feel if your neighbour went over and bought a commercial observation drone that they can launch from their back yard. It just flies over your house all day. How would you feel about it?&quot;<p>Or, your neighbor spies on you with a telescope. Or he just breaks into your house and assaults you. I don&#x27;t get the point. I fly multirotors responsibly for my own enjoyment, so screw you if you want to stop me.
diydsp超过 11 年前
Why does anyone care what Google&#x27;s Eric Schmidt thinks about drones?<p>On this subject, he has no particular knowledge or experience that anyone else doesn&#x27;t have.<p>On this subject, his opinion is completely unremarkable and worth just about as much the opinion of an artist who draws graphics for a Cheerios box.<p>When people whine about &quot;powerful white males&quot; having too much say in the media, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY MEAN. There is NO REASON we should be listening to Eric Schmidt&#x27;s opinion on something he clearly knows next to nothing about. There is no reason to fill newspapers and web pages with his utterly unremarkable words about drones.<p>If he were to talk about, say, search engines or advertising, then yes, it&#x27;s useful. That&#x27;s what he does for a living. But w&#x2F;r&#x2F;t to drones, he&#x27;s just as dumb and fearful as 50% or more of the world out there.<p>Moving further into his ideas, they are about as thoughtful and deep as a goldfish bowl. His analogy about an angry neighbor is laugh-out-loudable. An angry neighbor can do all matter of things today with all manner of tools following the dispute he mentions. Should we ban all of them, too?<p>For example, &gt; &quot;It&#x27;s got to be regulated. [...] &quot;<p>Drones ARE regulated.<p><a href="http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/uas/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.faa.gov&#x2F;about&#x2F;initiatives&#x2F;uas&#x2F;</a><p><a href="http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/uas/uas_faq/index.cfm?print=go" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.faa.gov&#x2F;about&#x2F;initiatives&#x2F;uas&#x2F;uas_faq&#x2F;index.cfm?p...</a>
6d0debc071超过 11 年前
&quot;How would you feel if your neighbour went over and bought a commercial observation drone that they can launch from their back yard. It just flies over your house all day. How would you feel about it?&quot;<p>Roughly the same as I&#x27;d feel about them buying a telescope and pointing it in my bedroom window; really creeped out, film it and call the cops on them.<p>Really. We&#x27;re meant to take this seriously now? Almost any technology can be abused. I can think of several ways to kill or seriously harm my neighbour with the contents of my cleaning cupboard if I&#x27;d the mind to - far worse than just being a creepy pest to them. Are we supposed to go down the EVERYTHING IS TERRIBLE! BAN EVERYTHING. route? The saving grace of society isn&#x27;t that these things are difficult, it&#x27;s that most people don&#x27;t think as predators very often.<p>Who knows maybe your neighbour actually has a soul.
eitland超过 11 年前
&quot;How would you feel if your neighbour went over and bought a commercial observation drone that they can launch from their back yard. It just flies over your house all day. How would you feel about it?&quot;<p>Same arguments can be used against handheld camcorders, smartphones etc.
评论 #6863092 未加载
评论 #6863198 未加载
评论 #6863090 未加载
aniro超过 11 年前
&quot;I&#x27;m not going to pass judgment on whether armies should exist, but I would prefer to not spread and democratise the ability to fight war to every single human being.&quot;<p>What an interesting choice of words.<p>He might want to read the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution (just as a good place to start).
评论 #6863403 未加载
TrevorJ超过 11 年前
There&#x27;s an infinite amount of devices and technology out there that could be misused already, but there&#x27;s a legal framework in place to help mitigate that potential.<p>I don&#x27;t see drones being fundamentally different in any way that would make them impossible to regulate. The FCC is a great example: it&#x27;s stupidly simple to interfere with radio signals but it&#x27;s not a big problem because enforcement is taken seriously.
elnate超过 11 年前
Not all drones are for killing. Currently I&#x27;m in a team working on quadcopter drones to help with surf life saving&#x2F;beach patrol.<p>Sounds like he&#x27;s trying to prevent the democratisation of an upcoming technology.
ollysb超过 11 年前
A licence similar to a driving license seems like the way to go. It seems perfectly reasonable to require some training before being allowed a drone (for safety reasons). Each drone should have the electronic equivalent of a license plate for identification and if an owner is found to be using their drone in an illegal manner (laws to be determined...) then their license should be revoked.<p>There are incredible opportunities for doing cool things with drones, but a framework for managing their use seems perfectly reasonable to me.
baddox超过 11 年前
&gt; Eric Schmidt...warned of the potential of new technology to &quot;democratise the ability to fight war&quot;<p>Umm, isn&#x27;t that supposedly a good thing? There&#x27;s a reason that most modern governments are composed of elected representatives to make military decisions.
评论 #6863356 未加载
patrickg_zill超过 11 年前
Google has inverted from &quot;don&#x27;t be evil&quot; to &quot;let&#x27;s be evil&quot;. Why should governments have rights that the people don&#x27;t?
ics超过 11 年前
I can only dream that one day neighborhood disputes will be resolved through miniature dogfights over the yard. Stream video from the &quot;cockpit&quot; for friends or coordinated teamwork. Toss in a dead man&#x27;s switch hooked up to an EMP cannon. Safe? Nope. The epitome of fucking awesome childhood fantasies? Absolutely.<p>When the tech (and materials, refab costs, etc) get low enough, suburbia is going to get a whole lot more interesting...
excellence24超过 11 年前
Wow, Eric Schmidt is blinded by his desire to maintain power. His greatest fear is losing his power... He says private drones should be banned and mentions nothing about the commercial use of drones by companies, especially his own company. And then he uses a small isolated example of drones being used for evil as to why they should be banned...terrorists? come on! Nothing is mentioned about drones being used for search and rescue, global natural resource tracking, travel, or even space exploration! This is clearly an attempt by a frightened individual to maintain control.<p>What we should start considering and making plans for is pooling our resources together in order to setup a system of public, open-sourced drones whose data is freely available to everyone, with an official, central repository backed up and stored at the NSA (after we open-source that and get a public API working).<p>Google&#x27;s street view cars would no longer be needed. We could have a real-time digital duplicate of reality running using the NSA&#x27;s resources. Anybody can plug in and &#x27;teleport&#x27; anywhere in the world. Any crime that would happen would be recorded live, and emergency broadcast systems can be implemented.<p>Unfortunately, no person or company could profit from this publicly available data. Any monetized analysis tool would be duplicated and hosted publicly for free via the NSA web services. All open source and anyone can view and improve the code and master pulls can be voted on by the community.<p>This is great for location and mapping data, but what about taking it a step further and maybe we could use these drones as a sort of &#x27;opt-in&#x27; activity tracker. We&#x27;ve heard of the military using gait detection from drones to track &#x27;terrorists&#x27;. Well, how many people can one drone track at a time? Also, can it measure heart-rate, steps taken, breathes per minute, O2 levels, etc... There goes fitbit and fuelband...<p>This is just getting started, there&#x27;s still traveling and shipping that can be freed and open-sourced...
etanazir超过 11 年前
Its one thing to make it illegal to use drones to harm other people; and another thing to say that only Google, Amazon, and the U.S. Government can own drones.
评论 #6863257 未加载
chestnut-tree超过 11 年前
<i>&quot;Schmidt said Google was &quot;super-sensitive&quot; on privacy...&quot;</i><p>This is hard to believe. Let&#x27;s recall that during the US investigation into the wi-fi data that Google captured, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) said Google had &quot;deliberately impeded and delayed&quot; the investigation for months. Earlier this year, the UK Information Commissioner&#x27;s Office ordered Google to delete captured wi-fi data or face criminal proceedings. Google had earier pledged to delete the data but actually failed to do so. Are these the actions of a company that takes privacy seriously?<p>Then there is Google&#x27;s online reach which is simply phenomenal. Now they have an entire operating system (ChromeOS) which could potentially track everything you do online. You can&#x27;t even print to your desktop printer without being signed in to your Google account. We don&#x27;t really know what Google tracks or captures because their vaguely-worded privacy policies don&#x27;t tell us.<p>The most depressing aspect of all this? Most people simply don&#x27;t care (including many in the tech community).
jameshart超过 11 年前
power of language: &quot;commercial observation drone&quot; vs. &quot;remote controlled plane with a go-pro atttached&quot;.
batmansbelt超过 11 年前
They should restrict corporate ownership of these things. Give individuals a break for once.
Shivetya超过 11 年前
somehow I doubt terrorists would give a damn about a law restricting their use or ownership.
bitops超过 11 年前
From reading this article and the comments, I imagine that the future of drones in the US may be much the same as what we&#x27;re seeing with gun control: many people will see value in private drone ownership and will be okay with regulations around them. Some people will feel that any restrictions are government encroachment and will resist it.<p>Most likely the vast majority of drones and drone owners will use them responsibly (yes I am being hopelessly optimistic here) and a few will abuse them. Periodically we will see horror stories about misuse of drones (e.g. Newtown) but short of a whole city being wiped out very aggressive restrictions will not exist.
bdcravens超过 11 年前
Would this include Google&#x27;s driverless car?<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Google_driverless_car</a>
defen超过 11 年前
I have to imagine there is a middle-ground between disallowing private use of drones altogether, and private citizens launching Hellfire missiles at each other&#x27;s cars.
swalsh超过 11 年前
I think drones have to much potential value to just flat out ban them. That said, we do need to think about security, and privacy very soon.<p>Hobby drones are (relatively cheap), if the software keeps getting better, it might soon be possible for a rich person to virtually own an army. That&#x27;s a lot of power for a small group or even a single individual to wield.
hkarthik超过 11 年前
So is it time for private drone owners to form a lobbying interest to protect their rights? Maybe find an aging actor with a booming voice to use as a political spokesperson?
oakwhiz超过 11 年前
So... only approved corporations can operate approved drones? Sounds like a great way to completely monopolize the concept of having flying robots perform useful work.
drcube超过 11 年前
Drones are unmanned planes. They&#x27;re not time machines or matter annihilators or teleporters. What makes these devices so scary to certain people?
pontifier超过 11 年前
Perhaps we should ban webcams and poles because they could be used to spy on neighbors too. This is one of the weakest arguments I&#x27;ve ever read.
fsniper超过 11 年前
So, Google is thinking your safety more than you can think for yourself. How is this different than Google taking responsibility of Governments?