Membership approval - Safety concerns

My membership request was approved in minutes. I am concerned about the kind of people that this group is letting in. How is membership request verified? How are member activities monitored?

UAVs are very useful AND very powerful. A main factor that is stopping miscreants from using them, is the algorithmic know-how to control and navigate them. I sincerely hope this group has safety measures in place to ensure that such knowledge is not easily disseminated to the world.

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • This is a very pertinent question. It is deeply philosophical, and must be faced by any society that tries to protect
    itself from those who are lawless or have an intention to destroy.

    I think that there is a lot of naivete in American culture (I am an American), that is not well thought out.

    A number of other questions need to be considered along with this specific one of the spreading of knowledge
    about "UAV" technology. Here are some of them:

    1. Should science departments in universitiesbe restricted?
    2. Should any technology that could be useful to terrorists be restricted?
    3. Should (American) government weapons programs be restricted?
    4. Should any simple convenience device be restricted, if it could potentially be abused (ex. cell phones to
    detonate car bombs)?
    5. Should anyone who acts habitually and lawlessly in one area of life (such as breaking the speed limits while
    driving) be allowed anywhere near sensitive technology information?

    Some information can effectively be restricted, and ought to be restricted. America has strict restrictions on its
    weapons programs, and ought to. Some creative technical innovations probably should be restricted, because they
    would be so easy to abuse. Other technology probably should not be implemented without strict moral controls
    built into its operation (such as weaponized robots).

    Every human society has the right to restrict technology, whose abuse it could not control or endure. This is doing
    what is best for the common good. This philosophical position is not popular with many moderns, but it is well
    supported by wise thinkers through the centuries. This online community is an abstract society, and has
    responsibilities as well. Having knowledge means having responsibilities.
  • You can easily go on amazon and buy books which tell you how to do almost all of this stuff. Should we screen people from buying those books?
  • I am sorry if I touched a nerve. I didn't mean to upset anyone. Robotics and its implications have been bothering me for sometime. I came across this site, while searching along these lines in google. Whatever I have said is not total nonsense. These are points to ponder. As days pass by, UAV research will get clearer.
  • Moderator
    Um you don't need to be a member here to view anyway.

    HP if you gain any knowledge from this site will you be part of the problem or part of the solution??

    This place is full of cutting edge people that are sharing and growing experience world wide.

    I look forward to some more positive contributions from yourself.

    How you plan to screen close to 10,000 members for their suitability I just don't know.
  • One point on topic - this site is readable, in its entirety, without any membership whatsoever. So even if there were a three day waiting period and background checking, anyone could still read up on all the goodness (and... disseminate it).
  • 3D Robotics
    Perhaps you are a little unclear about what open source means. The only verification that we do is to ensure that you're not a spammer. We don't check to see if you're a "miscreant". How could we?

    There are no "safety measures in place to ensure that such knowledge is not easily disseminated to the world". Indeed, just the opposite--we're all about dissemination. Again, see definition of open source.

    Our commitment is to openness and transparency. Bad guys already have access to this technology. What we do is to push all of the discussion and development into the open. That way wise minds, regulatory and otherwise, can see what's possible and act accordingly. That's their job, not ours. Just like with all other open source projects, from Linux to the Genome Project, we believe the benefits of open collaboration outweigh the risks.
This reply was deleted.

Activity

Neville Rodrigues liked Neville Rodrigues's profile
Jun 30
Santiago Perez liked Santiago Perez's profile
Jun 21
More…