You are confusing "own" with "control". He is right, you are wrong. The standard land deal in the US has mineral rights and air rights. You own core of the earth to space. But, like the power lines under your property that you don't control, you don't get to dictate the rules for commercial flights over your property.

Unlikely. I'd expect that 99.9% of helicopters "brought down" by a drone will be from boom strike (or other "pilot error") from the pilot's reaction to seeing one, not the impact itself. How would a dron differ significantly from a bird strike? A larger bird would be similar in weight to a drone, and with similar speeds. Does every hawk strike kill the helicopter?

Define "drone". Now, read your first definition, and tell me if it includes amateur RC aircraft. How about unguided model rockets?

You aren't acting like a pilot. Define the class before defining the rules around it.

I've yet to see a definition of "drone" that didn't include model rocketry or RC model airplanes. Like RC, the military drones are primarily flown by humans remotely using RF to control them. So most definitions that catch one catch both.

Perhaps you should define "drone" before launching into problems with "drones", as that includes model rockets, and the RC models.

Gut feeling says that you guys go to china.

Worldwide, Google+ is far from a failure. In fact, it has more users than Twitter.
I think a lot of Slashdot readers' comments are biased by an amerocentric point of view.

Not nearly as much as the haters assert.

If you are moving directly away, a solar sail would be more efficient.

Really? What nation are you from because America has NOT benefitted from any trade deals, outside of NAFTA, while the other nations manipulate their money and put on backdoor tariffs.

Not likely. Other nations such as china have implemented 'consumption tax', for all goods, which is then forgiven on locally produced goods.

Was this not invented by a limey that got upset at the west for not looking at it, so took it to china? Or was that something else?

That many nations are already working towards this. It is far far cheaper to build automated weapons than to turn humans into effective fighting machines. In addition, small nations will see this as opportunity to compete against west, china, or Russia. Heck, Syria used chem weapons on their citizens and then they and russia cut a deal with the west to remove all chem weapons. However, once ISIS took over several locations, Syria admitted that they and Russia were lying and ISIS now has chem weaps.

Think about what I wrote. Currently, unsubsidized solar is expensive to put in. So, the builder has a choice of lowering HVAC energy demands and installing less solar, OR simply installing a lot more panels. Builders will find it cheaper to install more insulation, use aerogel windows for places like basement, bathrooms, maybe bedrooms, etc. Likewise, they will switch over to using geo-thermal HVAC, esp if house is well insulated. In time, aerogel windows and geo-thermal HVAC will become so cheap that older homes will switch.

We need to drop the subsidies and simply say that all buildings less than 6 stories are to have enough on-site AE to equal the energy used for the HVAC (and require AC as well). In addition, the local utility must buy any daily extra at the maximum price that it costs them to buy electricity from elsewhere.

If she gets that passed, then not only will it put a stop to energy growth, but it will pretty much encourage cheaper buildings, and storage mechanism.

And that works fine for me. (using keeppass)