I guess he believes that the same way some believe the Red Sea was splitted in two by Moses and Jesus actually existed, died, resurrected and flew back to his Dad. In fact, the idea we will actually colonize America has its root from the same religious beliefs we inherited the world and must conquer it. At least from the protestant's view of the world. The man is created to engineer the world. It is just an extension of religion.

Wow.... why don't you believe that? Just because its not going to be as easy as you'd like ?

Value needs to be extracted somewhere and if you're not the extractor then chances are you're the chump. The responsibility of not being exploited is mine, and if I drank the koolaid I know who the chump who did the drinking was. Maybe next time I'll learn that my l33t risk analysis skills needs a bit of tweaking, or even better, give up on the self-gaslighting.

Nonsense. We will mine asteroids and colonise space.

and it will be forever great.

Four out of five elderly people given CPR end up dying within days. Many of them with prolonged and intense suffering due to CPR prolonging the inevitable.

We certainly need more thought about end-of-life care, living wills, and do-not-resuscitate orders. But CPR is not the only intervention affected by that.

And in some cases CPR is given when it's not warranted, breaking ribs, collapsing lungs or otherwise causing serious and sometimes fatal damage.

Sometimes, yes, but more rarely than you might think.

If I keel over, please don't resuscitate unless there is at least a 50% chance of long-term success, and less than a 50% chance of causing long-term damage.

Dude, unless you're already in the hospital, whoever sees you go down or trips over your unconscious body does not have your medical history, nor can they predict your course of treatment.

As another noted on the Red Site:

"We'll know everything* about you and we'll be snitching (including your BitLocker key) whenever and/or to anyone we think is in our interest to. Starting Aug 15"[1]

In particular, this is more than a little disturbing.

"But Microsoftâ(TM)s updated privacy policy is not only bad news for privacy. Your free speech rights can also be violated on an ad hoc basis as the company warns:

In particular, âoeWe will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary toâ, for example, âoeprotect their customersâ or âoeenforce the terms governing
the use of the servicesâ."

As with all things Microsoft, use at your own risk. Only now, the risks to you personally are higher than ever before.

[1]https://soylentnews.org/breakingnews/comments.pl?sid=8667&cid=215390#commentwrap

Email and posts are forever. The faster you grow up on the internets the faster you'll grow up. Actions have consequences and it is by suffering from those that we become more human and less of that thing a 18 year old is. It will be a massive disservice to both the individual and society if we don't have that.

Rarely do they invent new law and policy to do something when an existing law covers it. Why declare you don't own the air when they can just as easily say you do? As you note, it's not like you can do anything about it, and if you claim a $0.10 toll per craft, the government can claim it's an easement just like the power lines above and below my property right now. Calling my ownership core to sky, with easements on both is quicker, easier, and consistent with all current laws. So why invent a new legal status for airspace?

So, what weight bird would need to approximate a drone? 2x? 10x?

So the definition of "drone" is "Amazon delivery drone". Aside from being meaninglessly recursive, it's also a definition I expect the FAA to ignore.

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.