Yes, we may have of reached Peak Surgeons. Clearly they weren't talking about the doctors. What they meant was that the raw materials to create sustainable robots, should be hand gathered by indigenous peoples, using only organic ores from mines found in nature.

So what's to stop you from editing that file right now so that if and when you need it, it's ready?

I sit corrected. The article I used as a reference only told how to activate it on a working system, not how to make it active by default, and I misread. If you want it active at boot, you need to add the line kernel.sysrq = 1 to /etc/sysctl.conf.

This instance was illegal. I'm an RC modeler, a licensed helicopter pilot, and a drone builder. This drone was flying illegally by all existing laws.

Microsoft Windows nearly single-handedly created the antivirus industry by neglecting security (and still does to this day).

Microsoft, yes Windows no. I can remember using McAffee anti-virus on MS-DOS long before I started using Windows.

Could be the Mott transition. Could be filaments. Could be a different PCM method than what's been done before, although like you I have my doubts considering the durability claims. In any case, any of those resistive methods would by some definitions fit under "memristor".

Jazzharper,

But he wasn't shooting at a person, hence not using deadly force. He was protecting his family from n imminent threat, which a drone most certainly is. Drone blades have killed people. No different than pushing a falling tree out of the way. I think the charges will be dropped.

If you expect to need it, create the file /proc/sys/kernel/sysrq with the contents set to 1. This makes the key combo active by default, and survives rebooting. Of course, you need to test it while the system's in good shape because different mobos respond to different combinations. (I had one, once that needed Left-Ctrl, Right-Alt and SysRQ to work, and only that combo worked.)

This. No fooling.

Except, they guy said he shot it while it was hovering IN his back yard. Not high overhead, not even high. "IN" his back yard.

Actually no, no it's not. Toy model aircraft aren't subject to any such law, FAA-wise. Yet, at least. If anything, we're talking about good old fashioned reckless endangerment, which has nothing to do with model aircraft in particular, but could be a charge in such a case (just like it would be if they were throwing lawn darts over the fence, or hit somebody in the head with a stray baseball).

The FAA has guidance about such matters. But flying a toy around like that has absolutely zero FAA restrictions in and of itself, with regard to people on the ground. It's likely to be a different story when such a machine is used commercially, but again, zero relevance in this case.

But you have an expectation of safety. A lawnmower flying over your head deserves to be taken down, as it definitely constitutes a serious, and illegal, safety hazard. I predict, barring some kind of ordinance against firing weapons within some particular boundary, that this homeowner prevails -- against the city and the droning harasser.

Except there is ample precedent for that NOT being the case. Has nothing to do with neighbors flying toy copters around, or someone flying a Cessna at 500'.

If a drone is hovering "in" your suburban back yard, then shooting it with a shotgun is wildly inappropriate, because you're shooting at an angle barely above the horizontal. We also have no idea if the guy's toy copter was hovering "over" his yard, or just near it. It's much more difficult than most people think to gauge a small quadcopter's actual position over objects on the ground. I've yet to meet anyone who hasn't personally operated a given machine for many, many hours who was ever correct about that sort of thing.

Nonsense. I've been hit in the face by #8 birdshot used by a gunner over 200 yards away. If I didn't have field glasses on, I'd have lost an eye.

We'd have to see a lot more detail about where the copter actually was, the angle at which Dad shot it, etc. My observation, as someone who flies drones of several sizes and who has also shot many things out of the air using a variety of shotguns and loads, is that there's essentially no safe way to do what this idiot did.

Separately from that: the FAA is quite clear that shooting at ANY aircraft is a crime. Big time.

People getting married at 16 did so under the guidance of closely kept family - something that's far less common these days. When the culture was more agrarian and infant death rates were much higher, you started hatching out babies as early as possible while everyone involved is young and resilient. We now have a much, much lower rate of multi-generational households (when that was common, that 16 year old husband was very unlikely to be the one calling the shots about the family business, farm, finances, etc). We're also expecting young people today to be tuned into a LOT more information and complexity than their counterparts from a century ago.