• m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    139
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Would be nice if there were some actual alternatives about the same price range and not using proprietary softwares…

    • dinckel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      5 months ago

      Unfortunately anything open will cost extra, just because of the nature of it. Not to mention the colossal scale of how much product DJI ship, to cut costs somewhere

    • potatopotato@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 months ago

      Literally all of the alternatives are open and much more capable for it. You can go buy a pixhawk and basically any frame and have something much more powerful for much less money, you just have to be willing to bolt two or three parts together.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    107
    ·
    5 months ago

    Again like the tiktok ban: Rather than passing real privacy laws we’re passing racism laws and pretending this helps privacy and security.

  • potatopotato@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m adjacent to the industry. This is dumb but I understand the reasoning. We’re getting left behind in the electronics world. Nobody is creating hardware startups because every few months there’s a viral blog post with a “hardware is hard” title on HN and none of the VC assholes want to fund anything but web based surveillance capitalism ad tech because it’s a surefire way to make money. Even if you do get funded and you’re US based you’re absolutely doing all your manufacturing in China if you’re remotely consumer facing (b2big-b has different rules). That means Chinese companies get all the benefits of all the labor from your highly trained engineers when they get the design files. If you try to build anything at volume in the US you have strikingly few options for boards and parts. Everything is whole number multiples of fucking PCBway and half the time it’s lower quality unless you’re paying aero-defense prices which is the only business anyone wants.

    • sudo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      ·
      5 months ago

      We let almost all manufacturing jobs go overseas just to cut labor costs and now we’re suffering the consequences and our government completely incapable of doing what’s necessary to bring that manufacturing capability back to the US. At this point basic Keynesians economic policy is tantamount to heresy for anyone but the far left. Its like we’ve adopted the economic policies we forced on third world nations, and found ourselves with a third world economy.

      Being able to produce cheap drones as good as DJIs is far more important for national security than whatever espionage risk they pose. Cheap, easy to use, drones like the dji phantom are omnipresent in current wars. Banning them prevents us from learning via competition or basic reverse engineering.

      • potatopotato@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        5 months ago

        Its like we’ve adopted the economic policies we forced on third world nations, and found ourselves with a third world economy

        Foucault’s boomerang at work, just like US counter insurgency tactics now being employed by US police.

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      5 months ago

      People shit on China all the goddamn time here but they’ve done a prolific job becoming the tech and manufacturing leader in a handful of decades.

      Blame it on tech espionage if you want but there’s a reason the US is deadset on targeting Chinese imports, and it’s hardly for any of the security reasons they might be tempted to claim it to be. The US is about to be left behind and it’s noones fault but our own.

      • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Tech espionage is a pretty big problem though, not something anyone should hand-wave away as irrelevant.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Maybe in a particular light, but I’m personally of the opinion that intellectual property and patent law is antithetical to good social policy… so idk. Ideally we’d all benefit from the knowledge and ingenuity of all mankind but in a capitalist economic world-view there’s no place for egalitarianism so…

          If they can take the same tech and make it better/produce it cheaper then I think that’s great, go nuts.

          But that’s obviously just me.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      But why do we need to build stuff here? If it’s cheaper elsewhere, let them build it and we’ll do the higher paying work.

      I guess there are national security concerns, but that sounds like we just need to make more friends and fewer enemies, as well as have redundancy in our supply chain (i.e. invest in other inexpensive labor markets, like LATAM, Africa, and India). The issue isn’t that the US isn’t making it, it’s that China is making most of it. Diversify and the problem mostly goes away.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        China has a bunch of the world by the balls thanks to the world using Chinese manufacturing for everything from chips to medication. That alone is a national security problem. Sure, it maintains some stability due to economic ties, but the flip side is that we can only exert so much pressure on China before it will bite us in the ass, and we’re fucked if all-out war started and we got cut off.

          • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Honestly. This is why fair trade cert or taa compliant or just know trusted country is ok with me when I buy things.

            I just don’t want to be complict in known slavery. I don’t want to support oppressive regimes. Etc, etc, etc.

      • bastion@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 months ago

        Without a foundation, you have no foundation.

        Effectively, China has been acquiring a monopoly on manufacturing, which is an absolute necessity for modern life. We have been acquiring the higher-paid, but less numerous and less critical industries.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Sure, but it doesn’t need to happen here. If we get into a WW3 situation, we need to be able to protect our supply lines, and that can happen with friendly countries. We’re unlikely to get into a situation where our navy is outmatched, so I don’t think it’s totally urgent to bring production back here.

          That said, we do have a lot of critical manufacturing capacity. Intel has chip fabs, we produce lots of oil, we build cars, etc. We import a lot more than we used to, but we could probably make it through a major war with only domestic production, provided it doesn’t drag on too long until we can reestablish supply lines.

          I’ll only get worried when China catches up in tech. That’s certainly happening faster than I’d like, but I don’t think China is ready to compete head to head on tech just yet. If they’re at parity, that’s when we need to worry about domestic production. Ideally we can improve diplomatic ties by then.

      • potatopotato@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Not wrong, but the issue is complex. Drones are very obviously one of the bullets in any upcoming conflict. It’s not really about spying and phoning home, it’s that it would be insane to try to tell China “hey, don’t invade other countries mkay?” And then say “oh also we need ammo to stop you but we don’t have the ability to make brass cases or gunpowder anymore, can you send us some”.

        Now, while we “can”, to some extent, manufacture components and complete systems, the thing about a war is that it’s basically a wizard duel but with money hoses. You can’t win if the Chinese are producing slaughter bots for $500 ea and the US equivalent is $100,000 (literally). Congress is praying that this will light a fire under US and more friendly foreign manufacturing supply chains to invest more because they might have a chance of breaking into a lucrative market. That said, it probably just paves the way for a two tiered market where China makes their slaughter bots for $500 and the US makes them for $50,000 but all the civil use cases get caught in the cross fire for the short to mid term…so everyone still loses, just harder.

        • pop@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          5 months ago

          hey, don’t invade other countries mkay?

          Considering recent history, you’d better say that to US more, don’t you think? or is it that your country is free to invade other countries but others doing the same is where you start considering human rights?

          Talk about hypocrisy. fuckin hell, read a history book.

  • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    This is honestly ridiculous. The security concerns are unwarranted. Any surveillance that these drones could accomplish if hacked can just be bought off of any GIS website.

    “But military bases” go fly a drone by one and see what happens. This already isn’t a surveillance concern.

    This is going to set the hobbyist and professional drone market back a decade.

    • slickgoat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      5 months ago

      Only in the US. The rest of the world buys them. It still is a major market lose, but China still makes Huawei phones.

      • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        Good point. Unfortunate that US consumers keep getting screwed by these bans

    • PopShark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      I have a DJI drone and I agree. I would know if it’s collecting weird telemetry I have a DNS filter which would spot it all. It doesn’t. Just normal shit.

      • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        I have pulled mine apart too. I have an old one from before the tracking law and I didn’t find anything nefarious. The one I have from after the tracking law went into effect is transmitting its location and ID but I didn’t find much else even on a network intercept.

        Maybe there is some way to open a stream to China buried deep in the firmware, but I don’t see what use China would have for that. They have other methods of surveillance

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not hobbyist. There is high chance hobbyists drone makers will benefit from it.

      • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I can assure you that we won’t. There has not been a time in the history of this country that lower competition has resulted in improved products or prices.

        There is zero US based competition in the hobbyist and consumer spaces unless you DIY. US companies mostly do products for emergency services, large commerical operations like spraying pesticides, or military. There are a handful of brands making smaller drones, but they’re all a decade behind DJI in features and quality control, or they cost $20,000.

        I’d be fine with a ban if there was a legitimate security concern, but there isn’t, this is just part of the trade war and it only stands to harm US consumers and small businesses. The entire aerial photography industry is going to collapse and one’s only option will be large companies with hex rotor drones and Red cameras.

        • uis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          unless you DIY.

          I was thinking about DIY.

          but there isn’t, this is just part of the trade war

          True.

          • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            Oh if you’re thinking diy then yeah this won’t affect DIY at all. DIYs are all Frankensteins anyway

        • uis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Maybe they will learn drone making at least from off-the-shelf parts. Making own drone gives greater freedom than buying prebuilt.

  • Jocker@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is a loser’s game US is playing. Historically it used to innovate above the rest, now “we ban them, because their tech better”

      • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Capitalists hate competition.

        Competition for the labor market on the other hand? Hell yeah fucking let’s use slaves in a prison or other country!

  • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    5 months ago

    On one hand, the CCP fucking sucks. On the other hand, the US alternatives to some of these banned / tariffed Chinese products also really suck - especially when it comes to bang for your buck. ugh.

    • kakes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      5 months ago

      On the other hand, with more money going to the US alternatives, there’s more potential for a US company to step into that niche once it’s open.

      Not that it’ll necessarily happen obviously, but it does make it a bit easier at least.

      Also, I feel like I should add the disclaimer of “I’m not American.” I wish I could show my country next to my username or something lol.

      • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        40
        ·
        5 months ago

        Problem is that, especially with the automakers, is that a lack of competition becomes an excuse to not invest in innovation. For example, General Motors is throwing billions into stock buy-backs, when they probably should be throwing that into EVs.

        • henfredemars@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 months ago

          Competition doesn’t really exist anymore. Instead, via regulatory capture, the big players simply change the rules to exclude competition.

        • kakes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yeah, that’s the stuff that makes this difficult. I can talk all day about what “makes sense”, but you throw one corporate executive into the mix and everything falls apart.

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        5 months ago

        That only works if you have competition. We don’t really have free markets. The consolidation is so extreme that auto makers for example really don’t care if consumers want a high value budget EV. Why should they? They can make you collectively buy something else when you need a car to get to work.

      • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        I wish I could show my country next to my username or something lol.

        You could use a vanity username with a flag emoji in it, if you really wanted to.

        • kakes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Not sure if I’m able to change my username (and too lazy to check right now), but that’s honestly not a bad plan.

          • catloaf@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            5 months ago

            You can’t change the username, but you can change the display name.

      • k_rol@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        You could register to your local Lemmy server, if there is one.

      • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        I have yet to see that happen. If anything they’ll just raise their prices because they no longer have any competitors.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah they aren’t going to invest in their product. They don’t have any reason to now. They’re now the best product you can buy and they raised the price to reflect that.

    • Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 months ago

      That’s because, on one hand, the United States fucking suck. And on the other hand, if America produces anything well, you probably can’t afford it.

      • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        Honestly, if there was american branded stuff I would prefer it to made in China stuff. I want to stimulate our own economy not China. For example: computer stuff, small microprocessor stuff like arduinos, circuitry components, rubiks cubes, audio stuff. All of those are dominantly Chinese, if I want to find good American stuff I can’t. Someone needs to take the fucking risk and do it.

  • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    5 months ago

    Yeah, it’s real nice and all to say you want to combat chinese business interests threatening to swallow american ones whole, but then I can’t buy a house, and my rent is going up because these same business interests are buying houses in every major city by the thousands.

    Then, they either renovate them, or let them sit vacant. The renovated ones get rented out at exorbant rates. And since they own such a significant number of these homes, the rents EVERYWHERE rise dramatically. And then you see all these vacant houses. Never rented. Never sold. They become drug havens for the cities homeless. But it doesn’t lower property values, because it’s all artificially high.

    So now you’re paying higher city taxes, and living near a house that has regular gunshots out onto the streets. The cops won’t address it, because they know how dangerous those houses are. But you still have to rent an apartment near one.

    But it’s ok guys. The government is banning tiktok, and drones.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      “We can’t work on problem because something unrelated is worse and broken”, then? We can only talk about that when discussing any problem?

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        No, in this case it’s the same problem.

        We’re talking about banning DJI because the Chinese government subsidizes manufacturing useful things, whereas the US’ approach to corporate policy is to ban anything that prevents a billionaire from getting richer, and now the US is mad that China mysteriously got a better drone industry.

        Either the US should reform itself until it prioritizes building useful shit cheaply instead of enriching finance industry assholes or it should shut. the. fuck. up.

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’m viewing it more as “We have problem, and other related problem. We’re only going to do surface level solutions to be able to say at least we tried when elections come up”.

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          “We have a hole in the side of the ship, but I, your elected leader, have liberally sprayed a can of flex seal on the hole.”

    • BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      Those are all legitimate concerns, but I’m not sure the effort required to fix real estate prices, crime, and income equality is comparable to the amount of effort required to ban a social media site and some drones from a country that might not have our best interests in mind.

      I’m trying to be optimistic about the ban, I’d love to see the drone industry take off in the us and I’d love to see what we could accomplish. It’s not a huge industry and I honestly can’t name a single US drone manufacturer, but I really hope that won’t be the case in a year or two.

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don’t know about the other states/cities, but in my city it would be real simple. Just ban companies from buying real estate. Maybe an individual can own 6 houses. I’m not saying that people can’t own and rent out houses. I’m saying ban it so that company can’t buy entire neighborhoods, and then monopolize the prices.

        • ripcord@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          How would that work for, say, apartment complexes? Allow co-ops (which are typically corporations)?

          • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I’m specifically talking about houses. Although you do raise a good point that companies shouldn’t be allowed to own out of market apartment buildings. Meaning if your company is based in Chicago (for example) you can only buy apartment buildings in your area. And there should probably also be a limit on what percentage of your market you should be allowed to own. But either way they couldn’t also own buildings in NYC, L.A, Miami, ect.

            • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              That’s the problem, you’re only talking about houses (and probably in an expensive part of the country). Apartments are a simple solution to that in expensive places. Also there are lots of houses under $300K , just not where you’re looking.

              I had a better idea that would allow people to buy their own homes that they are currently renting:

              1. Every home gets appraised to determine what it would sell for. This is done by the county and is used for property taxes too.
              2. Every renter is allowed to buy a percentage of their primary residence from the owner. The owner has no choice in this. It’s a requirement for being able to rent a property.
              3. Renters can pay as little as $100 extra per month and the county puts their percentage ownership on the deed. If the home is sold, the renter can’t be kicked out involuntarily. If they do leave, they get the percentage of home value they own.

              Pros:

              • This would avoid the issue of high interest rates hurting primary homeownership.
              • This would blunt the impact of corporate landlords having a monopoly where they refuse to sell. They are forced to sell at a fair price.
              • This would create a simple decision between owning their home and spending money on luxuries or eating out.

              Cons:

              • This would hurt small landlords who would have their property bought out from under them. This is actually a good thing because the benefits of rising property values are now shared.
              • The implementation is hard. This is actually a good thing because bad landlords would sell property they didn’t want to manage, lowering prices for renters who want to buy.
              • It would cost the county money to hire appraisers. But this could be paid for by increased property taxes due to better appraisals.
              • Property taxes would go up for landlords. But this would be good, as it encourages them to sell the property. This appraisal process and increased property taxes wouldn’t affect people who just lived in their home without charging rent.
              • morriscox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago
                1. If the house is sold and the renter doesn’t have to leave then how is the new owner going to deal with that? In either case how would eviction work?
  • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    5 months ago

    Did something happen or is this just, “Waaaahhh, China baaaaddd!”? It sounds like they actually had better reason to ban TikTok.

    • BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      5 months ago

      The general idea is that it’s a potential cybersecurity concern, it’s along the same lines as the Huawei ban from a few years back. Not entirely without merit, there have been vulnerabilities found in DJI hardware/software that could be used maliciously and some of them were fairly serious. I don’t think anyone has ever found any proof those vulnerabilities were intentional, but I also think that would be super difficult to prove one way or the other.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Similar reason to why they banned Dahua and Hikvision cameras from US government facilities. No intentional backdoor have been found in those either, just some security vulnerabilities that have been patched. They’re still very widely used, and you should always have security cameras on a separate VLAN with no internet access, regardless of which country they’re manufactured in.

  • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    5 months ago

    😂

    Freedumb!

    Require licensing, registration, live gps tracking, and geofencing with a proprietary app because Freedumb people ruled that’s what the free market needs.

    They then rule, nah. Actually just ban em all.

    And now even if you bought them, buy them elsewhere, or just try to use them on a US device you won’t be able to. Selling them is illegal both from a company and on third party resale if it passes. Even police departments that are using them as spies and have the DJI alerting system installed all over town to track and log everybody in the sky, will need to get rid of it. But I doubt they will, of course it will be exempted for the pigs in blue.

    If you can’t beat em, or even match their capabilities, ban em or implement 100%+ tarrifs. New American motto of the “free” market.

    • nnullzz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ukraine isn’t really using DJIs as much (if any at all) as they are custom built FPV drones.

      • Tire@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 months ago

        FPV drones are being used as kamikaze weapons. DJI drones are being used as spotters because they can hold position easily and zoom from far away.