3D Robotics

Time Magazine cover (with invited piece by me)

3689500502?profile=original

 

The cover story, by Lev Grossman, is here and discusses DIY Drones. The editors of Time also invited me to write a companion piece in the issue, which is below (they wrote the headline, not me!)

Why We Shouldn’t Fear Personal Drones

By Chris Anderson

Drones, like most robots, are designed for jobs that are “dull, dirty or dangerous.” We know what that means in a military context — everything from endless “loitering” over combat zones to remote-controlled warfare with the pilots safely in a trailer in Nevada — but soon civilian drones will be flying commonly overhead here at home. What will they be doing?

 

The usual assumption is that it will be police surveillance and general snooping. Interestingly, that’s just what people feared when the computer, which had also been introduced as a military technology, started to be used commercially in the 1960s. The worry then was that computers would be used primarily to spy on us, as an arm of Big Brother. Only decades later, once we all had one, did we figure out that they were better at work and entertainment, communicating with each other and generally being welcome additions to our lives. That’s because we could control them and tailor their use to our own needs, which we did amazingly well.

 

This change is already underway with drones. Personal versions are small, cheap and easy to use. They cost as little as $300 and are GPS-guided fully-autonomous flying robots (my company, 3D Robotics, is one of many making them). They fly themselves, from takeoff to landing, and can even follow the terrain for miles. There are already more in the hands of amateurs than the military, and some of the uses may surprise you. Civilian drones don’t just do the “dull, dirty and dangerous” jobs better; they can also make the expensive ones cheaper. In a world of Google maps, the advantage of aerial views of the world are clear, but satellites and manned aircraft are expensive and the pictures they take are often too far away or too infrequent to be useful. Drones can get better views, more often. And those shots can be of exactly what you want to see — an anytime, anywhere eye in the sky, controlled by you, not The Man.

 

Take sports videos. If you’re a windsurfer and want a great YouTube video of your exploits, you’re not going to get that from the shore, and hiring a manned helicopter and camera crew to follow you offshore isn’t cheap. But if you’ve got a “FollowMe” box on your belt, you can just press a button and a quadcopter drone with a camera can take off from the shore, position itself 30 feet up and 30 feet away from you and automatically follow you as you skim the waves, camera trained on you the whole way (when its battery gets low, it can return to the shore and land itself). Fast forward a year or so, and that same FollowMe box will become a FollowMe sticker, which you can put on soccer ball. Now that copter can follow the action of your kid’s soccer game, bringing NFL-quality aerial video to PeeWee sports.

 

One father has already set his personal drone to follow his kid to the school bus stop. Another team configured a drone to be a personal “periscope”; it flies above your head, giving you a video view from ten feet up. Yet another programmed a drone to fly in front of a runner, like a mock rabbit to a greyhound, encouraging them to pick up the pace.

 

Commercially, the potential is even greater. Farmers are already using drones to monitor their crops; a weekly overhead picture of a field can give them the information they need to use less chemicals and water on the plants, saving money and the environment. Scientists use drones for wildlife conservation, mapping the nests of endangered species without disturbing them. And energy companies use drones to monitor electric pylons and gas pipelines.

 

What was once military technology can now be used by children and I’m sure a generation growing up with drones — my kids launch them in the park on weekends — will find better uses than I could ever think of. What we, the technologists, know is that they will soon be cheap and easy enough to be commonplace; what we don’t know is what application will emerge as result. Tomorrow you may think nothing of driving by a farm swarming with robot cropdusters. Or see film sets with hovering cameras. Or skiers followed by personal videodroids. Or, more likely, something I can’t imagine at all that’s better than any of those. That’s what happens when you add “personal” to a technology. It evolves into something new, often more powerful in the hands of regular people than it ever was in the hands of the few.



 

 

 

 

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

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

Join diydrones

Comments

  • Guys: everyone agrees that this industry/hobby/field has a _huge_ image problem. And I like the discussion here about the need to rectify that.

    But many of you are really missing the forest for the trees. If you use the word 'drone', you are allowing forces to dominate the narrative that are invested in the sensational failure of this field. You will not change the meaning of the word 'drone' by posting nice stories about plucking puppies out of trees. There is no possibility of rehabilitating the word 'drone'; it is absolutely toxic and at its base is an unflattering word. The forces that you're fighting against in the 'drone' narrative include the US military, multibillion-dollar defense contractors and media conglomerates, and 99.9% of the world's population who aren't in any way invested in the success of UAVs.

    Hobbyists have a lot of blame to bear for this--many many people have spent the better part of the last decade trying to get a cheap ego shot by associating their hobby with the larger transformation of the US military. This is bogus, and the devices we fly have nothing but the most superficial aspects in common with military 'drones'. There was a time not too long ago that 'drone' and R/C were never conflated, but that time has gone--and this is thanks largely to a fairly self-serving group that wanted the cheap hype and attention.

    But I would also be remiss if I failed to point out something else: this site is part of the problem. "DIY" "Drones" is just buzzy silliness--and it even has a god damn Predator drone in its background! Really, I'm amazed that people don't comment more on how hype-filled and marketing-driven DIYD/3DR is. There's a lot of talk about "visionary" and "forward thinking", but a palpable lack of critical scrutiny on these points. And over and over again Mr. Anderson seems to demonstrate that he is willing to attach his name to most anything that puts his financial interests/marketing vehicles out there in the public sphere. This cover story is a disservice to the field, and you all know it: 10x as many people will see that cover on Time and internalize its instant visual message than will read the article it refers to; perhaps 100x fewer than this meager sum will ever read Mr. Anderson's comments. So why do it? Why play their game at all? Why not demonstrate some leadership instead of some cheap marketing points? An opportunity existed to say, "This field will be so positive for society that you [Time] are wrong to paint it with such a wide brush." But of course, our visionary leadership didn't/wouldn't do that.

    Anyway, if you want to save this hobby (and it needs saving) -- the cleaning starts at home. But aside from a lot of concerned voices, I have serious doubts that anyone with the money or megaphone has the wherewithal to do it. And failing that, we're pretty much all marching to our own destruction.

  • I think many who read this magazine are going to think our drones are identical to the one on the cover.
  • It's important to remember that the 'anonymous killing' part is already happening everyday. We have all the unexplored positive uses to look forward to.

    Paul Braun pointed out on another thread:  [Look at the risk of genetic engineering --it makes the threats from drones look quite tame in comparison -- and we're not putting that genie back in the bottle.]

  • Comment by Dave G yesterday

    Hi Chris,

    I hope you're right, that drone technology will be used for benign purposes. But I fear that you're wrong.

    Just today, the day you posted the article, this was put up as well on DIY:http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/interesting-drone-ad-on-alibaba

    Think about the implications. A gun is a tool for putting holes in things at a distance - it doesn't know good from evil. Yet look at how it's used. How long do you think it will be before some crazy (yet relatively smart) person straps an explosive device to an autonomous drone and programs it to fly into a crowd of people and trigger it's payload? The builder could remain anonymous while hurting a lot of people - even better (from a warped perspective) than using a fully automatic weapon!
    It's a general problem, and drones aren't to blame. It's technology putting too much power in the hands of the individual. As an extreme case, I bet that somewhere, some mad-scientist is cooking up some sort of terrible highly contagious form of a plague in his basement. If not that, probably in China or at least North Korea, they're thinking up some wild plan to wipe out entire continents (be it the North America or Australia), thinking oceans can limit contagion.
    Unfortunately, due to the new approachability of drone technology, being the first consumer-approachable dangerous technology, my guess is that it will bear the brunt of the issues.

    It's sad that just as we are on the edge of being able to start using a (somewhat) complete understanding of the universe to create a better world, we will very probably end up turning that knowledge to hurting ourselves, and end up in a worse place. Somehow I think this all is inevitable and will become an inflection point in our evolution.


    Think about the implications. A gun is a tool for putting holes in things at a distance - it doesn't know good from evil. Yet look at how it's used. How long do you think it will be before some crazy (yet relatively smart) person straps an explosive device to an autonomous Car/Horse/Pigeon and programs/trains/drives into a crowd of people and trigger it's payload? The builder/trainer/driver could remain anonymous while hurting a lot of people - even better (from a warped perspective) than using a fully automatic weapon!

    It's a general problem, and Cars/Horses/Pigeons aren't to blame. It's technology putting too much power in the hands of the individual. As an extreme case, I bet that somewhere, some mad-scientist is cooking up some sort of terrible highly contagious form of a plague in his basement. If not that, probably in China or at least North Korea, they're thinking up some wild plan to wipe out entire continents (be it the North America or Australia), thinking oceans can limit contagion.
    .
    .
    .
    Unfortunately, due to the new approachability of [Insert what anything that moves here] technology, being the first consumer-approachable dangerous technology, my guess is that it will bear the brunt of the issues.
    .
    .
    .
    Folks. Just because our government(s) have made it a practice to rule by a constant barrage of fear mongering, does not mean we have to succumb to it. 


  • Comment by Mark Lanning yesterday

    Hopefully we can also reduce the safety risk as well since drones right now are flying weed wackers... and a 5-10 lbs object falling at -9.8m^2 could be a serious problem.  .

    That's so "ten minutes ago".

    3692609131?profile=original

     

  • TCIII,

    I think Mark was addressing Thomas Butler's comment : )

    Paul B,

    I really like that idea of expanding what tele-presence can mean. As a tool for fostering empathy; such a nice thought. After all, most of us flying FPV are not trying to inspect a industrial facility, we just want to put our head in the clouds.

    Check out this video-

    CYBORG FOUNDATION | Rafel Duran Torrent from Focus Forward Films on Vimeo.

  • @Joshua Ott - I also love the quote you referenced.  My focus on this technology is exactly how it expands the reach of your body and senses.  I'm interested in how FPV and flight allows people with special needs (autism in particular) to take on another person's perspective.  That is what truly makes us human isn't it?  I have been thinking a lot about this issue.  My son has autism and he has a hard time understanding anything that isn't black & white.  He struggles with empathy and perspective taking.  That impacts his ability to make friends, find a spouse and I think, truly experience the world in which we live. I'm trying to give him a concrete way to see the world he knows so well (playground, school, local park, etc.) through another person's perspective. 

     

    I would love an opportunity to have a conference/gathering that focuses on the social, supportive, civil applications of this technology such as what I mentioned above.  So many opportunities!

  • Admin

    @Mark,

    Just the opposite Mark. I was making a comment on what the typical American response will be to the Government use of drones in the US. Most Americans associate drones with the military Predators and Reapers and will misconstrue their use here in the US by the Government. I am sure that there will be citizens shooting in the air at hobby drones because they will view them with suspicion and as a spying tool for the Government.

    Where I live in Florida the R/C hobby is heavily regulated as to where we can fly in relation to the general population. We also have to be AMA members and our flying club has to post a $4million liability bond beside that which is provided by the AMA. So the Government already is limiting the R/C hobby let alone hobby drones.

    No I am not running and hiding. I am just laughing at the fact that most Americans are so over reactive that no amount of patient explanation of how benign and useful drones can be will be able to pacify the paranoid ones. My paranoid neighbors are already viewing my ArduRover with suspicion because it has a, omg, GoPro camera on the front! They know that I work in Aerospace and probably think that I am developing some kind of robot spy vehicle for the Government! LOL!

    Regards,

    TCIII

  • We may want to shoot for some good news stories out there.  I don't know if anyone out there has the infrared capability on their systems, but you could offer your services to help find a missing person out in the woods.  I understand that FAA requires police to have 2 officers with pilot accreditation (passed the written exam) to fly the system plus with the recession, agencies may not have the budgets for commercial UAVs.  Volunteering may become popular like the Civil Air Patrol plus they may compensate you for your time.  Just try to put a positive spin on the use of them.

  • Thomas you response just makes me upset.  Hiding from people that think differently from yourself does NOTHING but allow the other people to determine the narriative and set the tone.  I am glad that Chris wrote what he wrote as it provides a narriative that isn't doom and distruction but hope that drones will provide tools to which make a different in many people's lives, like so many other technolgies have.

    Seems like you just want to run and hide and let other people explain what our hobby is all about.. people that would much rather sell  a  narriative that Drones are killing machines than as useful tools.

This reply was deleted.