A few days ago, I already wrote an article about our "Apple of the drone manufacturers", DJI and it's new no-fly zones. Now it's time to have a little more detailed look at their idea.
What DJI did was introduce no-fly zones of 8km (5 miles) around "major airports". I already noted, that their list includes "major" airports, such as Kuusamo, Finland (population 16177), Kittilä, Finland (population 6315) and even the closed and not even usable as emergency landing site due to used car lots on the runway, Raadi airfield at Tartu, Estonia.
Here is now a look at Finland and the impact of those no-fly zones (I couldn't resist to include Tartu, Estonia too). Finland is just an example for the consequences . In essence, especially in smaller towns with regional or local airfields which have only minimal movement and very often are used by local RC-clubs at the weekends, not only the (legal) use of the airfield is impossible but due to the unreasonable large zone, basically, operation in the whole town isn't possible.
Read the full article: http://stefan.gofferje.net/uav/195-a-closer-look-at-dji-s-new-no-fly-zones
Update:
I have removed the total block of Apple devices from my website for now after Chris told me that about 1/4 of all DIYD users actually are on Apple. I did remove it to prevent backfire and unrest at DIYD, not because I think, it's wrong!
Here is a video from DJI explaining the system in detail:
Comments
Guy,
thanks you for a very objective counter-argument! I have worked with Macs too and I know that Macs are not only a legitimate but even the best choice in a number of fields, mostly in the creative sector. My main dislike, admittedly, comes from IOS devices. Much of what Bill and Nigel said about e.g. Android is true, with one major difference... Manufacturer's of Android devices (most of them, at least) have learned and give the user root rights or even the possibility to install alternative OSs. And I have never heard of Google or any phone manufacturer trying to drag a hacker in front of a criminal court for DMCA violations because of a jailbreak solution (in the times before user had the option to choose). True is also that Google is (almost) as picky in their app store as Apple but then again, almost is almost and in Android you can always allow "installing from alternative sources" or even use another app store. The user has the choice.
Besides - IIRC, it wasn't always that one could install other OSs on Macs. Didn't they use to have some cryptographic device which prevented booting alternative OSs?
@Nigel:
I think, your argument is flawed. On the one hand you imply that buying DJI (or Apple for that matter) is an informed, conscious, deliberate decision. On the other hand you say, People don't understand. So how can somebody who doesn't understand make an informed decision? The truth is that the majority of DJI (and Apple buyers don't buy the devices for it's technical capabilities but simply because of it's design and/or because it's "hip". DJI (and Apple) are not mere products - they are a lifestyle.
As for Apple, I didn't say a word about Apple on DIYD until some Apple-cult followers started a shitstorm here because they couldn't access my website. If somebody attacks me, I defend myself, especially if somebody wants to attack my right of free speech or my right to do with my property (website) as I please. With - by the way - "Apple-cult" not at all being a rant or even my own invention, but what the press says: http://theweek.com/article/index/229766/5-signs-that-apple-is-a-cult
You might also find this articles about neuroscientific research about Apple (and other megacorps) interesting:
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/05/19/apple.religion/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13416598
What happened here proves their point and me right in my conviction that Apple (together with other megacorps as Bill pointed out earlier) is one of the biggest threats to freedom of our modern world. Think about it - a less determined and strong character person would never dare saying anything against Apple in public, having to fear such a shitstorm, even demanding the removal of the user account from this website - just because I dislike Apple and for that reason don't allow Apple devices on my private website. So the Apple cult is already interfering with freedom of speech and expression.
When it comes to DJI - what you call rant, I call having a founded opinion and standing up for it.
And yes - I don't believe at all the DJI spent any serious thought on either the development or the implementation of this "feature". I already explained that, but in short - the whole system is neither thought through, nor researched properly, nor implemented properly. Keywords: Small backwater airports, closed airports, etc. (for details please read my article again). Besides, at least in Finland, some airports which are much bigger than the ones in the list are NOT on the list, such as Helsinki-Malmi or Jyväskylä.
To me this has more the appearance of some sales guy having an idea, running to the developer and telling the developer to have it ready by the end of the week.
With regards to privacy, you can't even trust home appliances any more. German IT new service heise Online has recently reported about several issues in smart TVs from LG, Samsung and Philips, which sent e.g, data about your viewing habits to Google analytics and/or tc stations. Another TV allows full access to connected USB storage through an open Wlan... And much more...
But - as I wrote - privacy is not my main point about Apple. Their control-freakism is.
@bill:
Me deleting comments wasn't meant as censorship to suppress opinion but simply because I wanted to keep the discussion on topic. I wasn't aware of the "special" attitude towards this on DIYD.
I also didn't make the people click through to my site to convey my anti-apple message. It was primarily because of technical aspects - I can't do this map-popup-in-a-lightbox at DIYD. If you check pther blog posts of mine, such as the IR photos with Boscam, you see that I c&p them 1:1.
As for other corporations, you are right about privacy. In essence, you can hardly use any cloud service or commercial product nowadays. But I dislike Apple especially because they want total control over their users. "Apple knows best what's good for you"... They decide what OS and software you can use. They even tried to drag jailbreak developers to criminal court for "circumventing copyright measures" although jailbreak is not about using pirated software, it's about simple things like having control, I.e. root rights, on a device that is YOUR property. The worst thing is the Apple fan community who refuse to see the problems even if you prove them indisputably right in front of them, but believe every word from Apple's marketing. Just as an example, the "Antennagate" and other (tons of) hardware and software issues with the iphone 4. I know personally Apple users who told me "nono, it's no fault of Apple, it must be user mistake" even after I showed them 3 different mainstream press articles about it. THAT was when I started the decision process on locking Apple defices out. Besides, I'm not alone with that. At least in Europe, there's a growing number of websites restricting access for or blocking selected or all Apple devices.
Hosting... Good point there. I already host my mailserver myself on my premises for years and if there wasn't some mailing list operators which STILL don't support TLS, I would enforce it incoming (I know, it'd be against RFC...). And of course, my "important" website is also hosted at home with https.
@Euan,
If we get around to implementing this in AC/AP you can be sure there will be an enable/disable parameter.
Since my original post was censored i.e deleted, and since the comment remains in the orginal post I consider this comment on-topic.
If you you want to warn users about cooparate monitoring, you should not exclude also Windows, Ubuntu and Android devices in that warning as well. For example see http://askubuntu.com/questions/191897/will-all-dash-input-in-12-10-..., http://digiday.com/platforms/google-tracking/ and http://bgr.com/2013/10/31/windows-8-1-smart-search-advertising/ as examples of how privacy is being compromised.
You even agree (now that I can view your site) http://stefan.gofferje.net/news-blogs/security i.e. Skype using your confidential information, and "Bye bye Google - no more data from me"
The reason I am reposting this is due to censorship last time I made a comment. I don't think I am being disrespectful just frustrated (posts deleted, denied access to linked information). You make good points, but restricting content and denying people from accessing information is not the way to inform, it just "bully" tactics.
If you want these types of comments to remain off the comments section, don't use your posts as a sounding board. or click throughs to your site to drive an alternative agenda.
(Personally, I hate the amount of tracking that happens these days, I don't use google for personal email my hosting is in Norway due to clear privacy rules)
Thanks for the detailed info Stefan. It is inevitable there is going to be some real problems.
I hope that if the Devs here have the same crazy idea, they give us the parameter option to switch it off...
I support this type of functionality as long as it can be turned off. Doing so you eliminate the problem of inexperienced pilots not knowing any better, and the experienced pilot is forced to make a conscious choice with regard to airspace safety.
Many major R/C events (and smaller weekly ones) are held at small local airports. It would be kinda ironic if the next generation of R/C equipment was unable to attend.
@Randy:
The only solution I would consider reasonable AT ALL would be a system where the user can define own no-fly zones and CHOOSE to select additional zones from a database or server on a per-zone basis.
Anything else would be unacceptable and additionally potentially put developers / 3DR at incredible liability risk, e.g. as Gary pointed out.
You are also right, that the administration would be very difficult, if not impossible. As I stated as one of my major DJI-criticisms, e.g. many small airports have opening hours other than 24/7 and are even used by RC clubs outside fullsize opening hours. If you go a bit further - look at restricted airspace outside airports... Lots of them are seasonal, temporary or only in effect if announced in a NOTAM, e.g. military training areas/shooting ranges or some nature reservations.
So, if the Ardupilot project was to maintain such a database, they would have to:
I doubt, this would be possible to maintain at an acceptable standard by a volunteer community. If you (or the majority of the developers) seriously consider something like this, you should consider approaching one of the major aviation data suppliers, such as Jeppesen, and ask if they would be interested in some kind of cooperation. They actually do this kind of work, do have respective databases, but normally charge sh*tloads of money for subscriptions.
Regardless of whether you agree with having the FC restrict flight in certain areas I think it's very likely that it will become a requirement by law given the world we live in now. So anyone selling products that fly need to keep a close eye on this. I said ages ago we could solve a lot of the negativity about our hobby by having the FC in the Phantom limit the flight ceiling. Shortly after that DJI announced the restriction of their FC to fly over Tiananmen Square. Now this. The writing is on the wall.
At least with Open Source we will be able to modify anything that doesn't suit our use. :-)
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next