Thread

1. TGower · 1790091717 · focus · HN ↗

   The article doesn't mention the safety angle at all. It's reasonable to argue that even though the Ukraine conflict has popularized drones as weapons, given that we haven't had a major incident yet this temporary flight restriction was premature, but not mentioning it at all makes the bias pretty clear.

   The TFR (which made it illegal to fly a drone within a bubble 1000 feet high and 3000 feet radius of a mobile asset) has been replaced by a NOTAM that basically says flying near them in a way that poses a credible safety or security threat means they can sieze or destroy your drone. I'd say this is the better resolution, and to me represents a "genuine change of heart" by the FAA, finding a way to serve the safety purpose of the TFR without overstepping.

   1. nemomarx · 1790093135 · focus · HN ↗

      There's a safety angle any time a citizen is recording them - they could secretly have guns, right?

      That doesn't justify banning recordings imo.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.