• ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    164
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    You cant legally (edit: in the USA, at least) shoot at drones even if they are tresspassing.

    Well, technically they wouldn’t even be tresspassing since FAA owns all airspace, they’d be inside FAA airspace.

    Shooting down a drone is treated the same as shooting down a manned aircraft, a felony. (not that they would actually enforce it, but its technically on the books)

    Signal jammers are also illegal (again, not that someone would enforce it, but its on the books)

    What would likely happens is:

    If a rich person shoot down a non-rich person’s drone, the drone operator gets punished for “reckless drone flight” slap a huge fine if first offence, potentially jail time for future offences. The illegal act of shooting down a drone would not be enforced.

    If a rich person flew a drone to harass a non-rich person, and the non-rich person shoots it down, boom, felony conviction for the person shooting down the drone, zero punishment for the drone operator.

    This is how drone issues would be resolved

    • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      4 months ago

      Seems these systems don’t need to shoot. It has interceptor drones. These can fly into the spy drone, so the rich guy can just claim it was a mid-air collision and offer to pay back the owner if they just identify themselves.

    • atrielienz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      The thing is though, if a drone is spying on you the police have to do something about it. And if they can’t or won’t then you document everything and when they show up saying you did something, you tell them “so you found the guy who’s been stalking me via drone?” /S for obvious reasons, but these laws are going to have to change sooner rather than later because there’s a lot going on that technically isn’t legal with drones but can’t be prosecuted by the legal system because of this law.

      Add that to the military airspace drones keep violating (not under FAA jurisdiction) and eventually this is going to be a problem that the government can’t ignore.

      • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Then laws don’t apply and you get kidnapped and put into Squid Game.

        /jk lolol but like as far as I know, there’s no national laws that cover airspace over internatinal waters, and international laws generally prohibit countries from controlling air space over internstional waters, so it’d just be a civil dispute between 2 civillians and the person who has their property damaged probably have to sue in the assailant’s home country to have any chance of getting a payout.

    • silence7@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      They do occasionally enforce the signal jamming laws. Do it with any regularity in a way that messes up police radio, and they will work to catch you.

  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    that quarter-billion dollar-plus superyachts, and the VIPs who own and cruise in them, may be vulnerable.

    Then don’t cruise in them but instead sit in a bunker like you deserve or alternatively, don’t be a rich shoddy.

      • plz1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        4 months ago

        “Privacy for me, not for thee” means I, as a non-billionaire, get my privacy back before I give one iota about some billionaire not being able to hide a mistress on his super yacht.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        4 months ago

        And the billionaires like Zuckerberg that make a lot of money trying to track you everywhere you go on the internet or with your cellphone factor into that statement where?

          • aesthelete@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            When anyone else has an actual right to privacy I’ll give a shit about Zuckerberg’s – who btw has done more to destroy privacy rights than perhaps any other human being in history – “right to privacy”.

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

              I know who he his 🙄 It doen’t change the fact that equalling all rich people to bad people is counterproductive. And human rights apply to all humans, except if what you mean by the lack of privacy ls that he should go to prision, to which I agree

              • aesthelete@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Except the right to privacy isn’t an enshrined human right at all and this particular asshole would lobby government to make sure that any effort to make it one would fall flat.

  • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I mean the rich yacht owners have a reason to be afraid.

    Its not difficult to build a drone with an explosive payload used to sink ships. And attacking rich people with violence is so hot right now

  • JackFrostNCola@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 months ago

    Is this a “drones are coming to harm us” thing or a “paparazzi drones are taking pictures/videos where we thought we were out of sight” thing?

    • SirQuackTheDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s partly “in case we’re deciding to be idiots and go to active war zones” stuff, but I see those rich fucks using military level weapons against civilian drones because they can afford to act above the law.

  • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    4 months ago

    So you know that guy who tracks elon Musk’s jet? Do we have an equivalent for billionaire’s yachts?

  • philpo@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 months ago

    I wait for one of these systems to interfere with a legal drone operation or better some other radio/radar systems. Some countries will ignore it,but other very very much will not. And that will be a very happy day for me.

    • overload@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      That was really interesting.

      I’ve got to admit that I felt that elation/rush that they felt when finishing off that guy on the field.

      Horrible that the Russian is probably just a normal guy, but they are the invading force attacking a sovereign nation.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    What about under water drones where the payload floats to your hull instead if dropping from the sky?

    Gotta get serious about yacht safety if you wanna do all those wonderful pornhub things in international waters.