Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Case Backwards (Score 1) 377

What then is the appropriate care to bring down an unmanned unattended object hovering over your property out of arms reach?

There is none. The proper legal remedy is to follow it "home" and sue the owner. You have no right to damage someone else's property, just because you feel like it, even if it's on your property. This is solidified in the case law around owned objects left on your property, such as someone illegally parking on your lawn. You aren't allowed to slash all 4 tires to ensure it's immobile until you can call a tow truck to haul it away.

Perhaps throwing small rocks at the drone, or turning a hose on it would be appropriate. Something to indicate it's unwanted, but causes little to no direct damage (though may cause a crash, which would cause more damage). Similar to a boot on a car, which causes no direct damage, but could damage the car if it's driven off, and could cause minor unintended damage, such as scratches on the wheels.

Comment Re:Case Backwards (Score 1) 377

Enable HA failed.Update object 44 failed, stale object state.

A drone can't trespass. A person can, a device can't. If you come home and find someone else parked their car in your yard, you can't yell "trespass" and shoot it. A drone would be treated like an unattended vehicle. You must use appropriate care, or you are liable.

Comment Re:Drones might have weapons. (Score 1) 377

Drone haters pre-date drones. "drone" isn't even a very good word for it. RC airplanes have been around for many years. I remember waking up to them on weekend mornings, flying from the school near me (two soccer fields in an "L" shape, space for maneuvers, but in the middle of a residential area.

Today, many smaller drones are insect-quiet battery powered units, but "in the day" all the "drones" were fuel powered. and noisy. I can't say gasoline, or IC, because there were gasoline jet drones, and ones that ran on non-gasoline fuels.

The drone operators deserved the hate they attracted. Then the next generation suffered from it. But it wasn't unearned.

Comment Re:Next Phase (Score 1) 377

I was gifted a cheap quadcopter for christmas. It was so quiet that I could sneak it up on people and land it on their head. The air movement gave it away before the sound did. The $1500 monsters are louder, but not so loud that they'd disturb someone inside a house if someone outside was playing with one.

Comment Re:Next Phase (Score 1) 377

"those things" aren't loud. "that thing" may have been. A battery-powered quadcopter shouldn't be any louder than a large insect.

The loud ones are fuel-powered, and they are not designed for stealth. When he's peeking in the window, it's not to see stuff, but to show off his new toy. Had he wanted to spy on you, he'd have gotten one of the quiet ones.

Comment Re:Silly complaints (Score 1) 83

If you sold exclusive rights, you already paid a lot of opportunity cost. When Spotify ignores you, you asked them to.

The problem is that if you sell exclusive rights to some of your works but make the rest available to Spotify, Spotify will demote even the ones you told it to make available.

Comment This app is incompatible with all of your devices (Score 1) 83

An app on Google Play Store will be excluded from search results unless it's available both A. in your country and B. on your device. When I view the document at that URL while logged into a Google account to which a Galaxy Tab A 8.0" (2016) and a Nexus 7 (2012) are registered, I see the following:

This app is incompatible with all of your devices.

[Incompatible] No carrier Samsung SM-T350
[Incompatible] No carrier Asus Nexus 7

I expected the document to include a list of suggested devices to purchase on which to run this app, but it did not.

Comment Re:free choice (Score -1) 269

Yeah, they're perfectly free to go back to dire poverty and hunger if they want.

- correct, the key word in your sentence being *back*. Back is where they would have to go in order to get away from these 'horrible companies' that are giving them something they never had before - a choice of not going back, from where they came.

I guess they are making their own choices every day regardless of what you think they should do.

No one is holding a gun to their heads to force them to feed their kids and have basic shelter.

- precisely, nobody is forcing them to eat and to feed their kids. They are choosing to do so by working for the companies that are offering them these jobs. They can go *back* of-course, back from whence they came.

Comment Re: Just stop this nonsense (Score 1) 148

The again, this is the USA we are talking about here, where you need to go to the Department of Motor Vehicles to get an ID card.

Err...where else would you have people go?

They already are set up and have the equipment for drivers' licenses at the DMV, makes sense to do all IDs of this form there, no?

Slashdot Top Deals

Take an astronaut to launch.

Working...