HobbyKing have some fine products but when it comes to racing FPV quadcopters, they're not the best source of things like frames. They're still behind the eight-ball in that area.

These videos show you how to build one of these craft and where to get the bits:
Low-cost racing mini-quadcopter build

"I imagine I could really hurt someone if I crashed my 250 into their face"

And every year people are injured and killed when playing or when as a spectator at dozens of different sports. Life without adrenaline is sleep!

The props used on these small racing craft are flexible plastic (carbon props actually generate less thrust, as I've proven in testing).

I've hit myself a couple of times and the injuries didn't even require a band-aid.

Absolutely correct. We always have a few spare pairs of goggles and/or an LCD monitor for spectators to use and that's what makes the difference.

Spectators can become a passenger on any of the craft in a race, simply by changing the receiver channel on their goggles or screen. Whenever people try out the goggles or screens they're blown away and have nothing but a long list of superlatives streaming from their mouths.

Imagine streaming this stuff live over the Net from each of the craft being raced and allowing viewers (from anywhere in the world) to switch back and forth between craft. That's one thing F1 racing doesn't offer and yet F1 is a very popular spectator sport with far fewer crashes and much less adrenaline on the part of spectators.

Even a slight mid-air collision tends to knock both quads to the ground with significant damage.

BS. The 250-sized mini racing quads are tough -- EXTREMELY tough. They're designed to withstand enormous punishment and a mid-air collision is unlikely to produce any more than a broken prop or two -- I know, I race every weekend and the only bits I have to replace are propellers, despite a large number of crashes.

Not only that... but when I read stories in the media of a tyranical state executing those who they allege have committed crimes against their culture or religion I usually think ISIS and some guy with a sword, gun or flamethrower -- yet once again, this time, it is the good old US of A who plans to engage in such an act of barbarism.

How sad it is that the USA stoops to such hypocrisy while on the one hand condemning ISIS, Al Qaeda etc, yet on the other, engaging in exactly the same acts of cruelty and disregard for human life that they do.

ISIS and Al Qaeda kill innocent people by way of suicide bombings, executions etc. The USA kills innocent people (and call it collateral damage) by way of drone strikes on people they merely "suspect" of being "insurgents" and engage in executions of those who they find guilty of breaching their legal and moral standards.

Those who deserve to lead do so by example -- not by saying "do as we say, not as we do". Sadly, the USA doesn't have the testicular fortitude to do so and prefers instead to preach from the bible of hypocrisy.

Tragic.

My sympathies to all US citizens -- your government and your judiciary is making you look bad.

Far better to lock this guy up for the rest of his natural life so that you can retain the "moral high ground" -- whilst also ensuring that he does suffer for his crime, for a lot longer than a few minutes on a table or in a chair.

Yep, "it idles" woohoo!

Not only that but the parts I saw being modeled and printed were low-stress components such as the stand (wow!) and the exhaust tube.

Were the compressor and turbine wheels printed? Those are the crucial parts and the ones exposed to maximum stress.

A great proof of concept but they tell us that this was made using materials "not available to the hobby industry" so why does it perform so poorly, especially since they claim to have enhanced the design.

I smell marketing department hype here ;-)

Yeah, I watermark my videos but on several occasions these script-kiddies have copied my *entire* channel -- every single video!

In that case I can't see any upside to what they're doing ;-!

And in those cases I had filed over 24 copyright strikes against each channel -- and all that YouTube did was remove each video as I flagged it -- but the channels were still operating -- until several weeks later -- after I had *laboriously* filed even more complaints about the remaining videos. That's a hell of a lot of work so I ask again... what happened to the 3-strikes policy in such cases?

What's a "3rd party block"???

That's what Google *claim* but, as I mentioned in a previous post, there are some channels against which I've filed up to a *dozen* copyright complaints against and they're still there -- still carrying content for which they do not have copyright (ie: stuff from other channels they've downloaded and then re-uploaded without permission.

They seem *VERY* selective about when they actually enforce their copyright strikes in my experience.

Here's another of the script-generated channels that are being created by downloading and re-uploading other people's popular YouTube videos

Mavi Kocaeli

Now you *KNOW* that this channel has been generated by a download/re-upload script and people will file copyright complaints but chances are that it will still be there in a month's time and by then the videos will have been monetized and earning the script-user a small but useful amount of cash -- money that should have been going into the pockets of the original creators/uploaders.

And here's another one that is already monetizing other people's re-uploaded videos: Kasandra Sahr.

Where's the "three strikes" policy now?

And why hasn't YouTube automatically flagged new channels that upload large numbers of videos within a few hours -- because most people don't do that -- only scripts do that.

And how are they going to collect this GST from overseas companies?

There's no way to ensure that every mom and pop online business selling digital media/games over the Net into Australia will comply with a "request" from the Aussie government (because they have no legal power to force them) to collect GST on their behalf for free.

Will they be asking credit card companies to automatically levy the GST on overseas purchases? If they do then they're opening a pandora's box that they really ought to keep closed.

I could see Bitcoin getting a new lease of life for Aussies :-)

As a regular YouTube uploader and "Channel Partner", I often find my videos have been copied and re-uploaded (with monetization) by "pirates".

There are now obviously scripts out there that can be run to automatically create a new channel which consists of nothing but re-uploads of other people's popular videos.

On countless occasions I have laboriously filled out YT's copyright complaint form, listing a dozen or more instances where a single channel has pilfered my hard work. I always get the standard response "the offending content has been removed" -- but the channels are often still operating. What happened to the "three strikes" for copyright infringement?

And just as importantly... since *my* videos were clearly being leveraged by someone else to generate revenue... what happens to that money?

I bet Google still charges the advertiser but no doubt they won't be paying the pirate -- so do they just pocket this money without the need to pay a share to the genuine copyright holder? It would seem so.

This probably explains why they have made NO EFFORT at all to circumvent these script-created channels that contain nothing but other people's content re-uploaded in clear violation of YouTube's Terms of Service.

What an earner for Google -- no wonder they don't bother enforcing their "three strikes" policy on channels for which they effectively get to keep *ALL* the ad revenues and no wonder they don't flag (for inspection) new channels which suddenly appear and upload several hundred videos within 24 hours.

Do no evil? Yeah... right!

But if you listen to the FAA... drones *could* kill people and therefore we must fine their operators huge sums (Raphael Pirker for example) and we must enact new regulations that says they can't be used by terrorist organisations such as Amazon.com or DHL without expensive and difficult to get permissions. What do you mean that's a different type of drone? You mean the ones that kill can be used by the US government with impunity against the evil and the innocent alike -- while the ones that don't kill are increasingly restricted and constrained by regulation?

Good work America! (NOT).

That's what I always thought but here in New Zealand, avoiding tax is also illegal. Any mechanism designed solely to reduce one's legal tax liability is considered to be unlawful avoidance of tax and punishable as such.

Don't you love the way that governments put the collection of taxes above all else -- giving the IRS and their equivalent more power than any other arm of the state.