“Lookee there, Burt…that’s an Inspire drone. That thing must cost about 20,000 dollars.”
“Dang, Rex, let’s go get it.”
“Why, how we gonna do that, Burt?”
“Dang, Rex, don’t you know anything? Using this cool new program they made, I can just point my phone at it like this…and presto! There’s the location of the guy flying it. We’ll just go there and wait ’til he lands.”
It may sound like a bad dream or a bad movie plot. But it is real. Modern wifi capabilities allow non-fliers to track not only your drone’s location…but your own location. It’s as easy as pie.
Now, I can imagine how thieves might use this feature to steal drones…how much easier could it get for them? I can imagine anti-drone reactionaries and Luddites using this feature to come and harass drone pilots. What I can’t imagine is anyone using this feature for positive results.
Would they use my broadcast location to come compliment me on my flying abilities? Hardly. Maybe they would use the location to prevent a crime in progress. Unlikely. By the time the snooper (or cop) gets there, the crooks will most likely be gone and if not…do you think crooks will willingly give up their plans (or drones) just because someone located them and came there to say ‘stop’? Not a chance.
Fact is, I can imagine few positive benefits to such a location broadcast, and a plethora of negative consequences. Call me a storm-crow, but that’s how I see it.
For one thing, I can maybe see someone tracking my drone. Tracking me…well, that is another issue entirely. That is what we call ‘mass surveillance’. It is illegal. In my own personal case, it is called individual surveillance, and that is both illegal and immoral. Putting my life and safety at risk in such a manner is just not okay. Now, I can see identifying my drone, if I am doing something illegal with it. I can see filming it for evidence. I can even see obtaining a registration number, through which legitimate authorities (such as the police or FBI) can then locate me. That makes sense.
But giving my location to just anyone? That is not only illegal and not cool, it is just plain crazy.
Now, I get that DJI is based in Communist China, where they aren’t so touchy about monitoring the populace. We’ve all seen the facial recognition videos from there. We’ve all heard about how Uighurs are facially mapped (as anyone who gets a drivers license there is) and tracked. I’m not trying to tell them how to run their country. I am trying to tell them how not to run mine, though.
In their social environment, it maybe makes sense (or at least is not considered reprehensible) to do such things. But here in the Land of the Free….that just ain’t cutting it. I fully support a digital license plate for UAS…commercial UAS. I even understand why the government might want to remotely identify and track recreational, civilian drones. But I will never understand why anyone needs to (or is entitled to) my location when I am flying a drone.
That does not increase safety (just the opposite, in fact). It does not increase accountability, or prevent accidents. All it does is allow authorities to (after the fact) come and get the ‘bad guys’.
The FAA goes on and on about how the proposed Remote ID and Tracking rules would increase NAS (National Air Space) safety. Hey, it doesn’t take an Einstein to know that nothing about tracking increases safety. Safety is preventative, not reactive. And no matter how sophisticated remote tracking might be, it will not prevent accidents. That influence (and those resultant efforts) would be better aimed at aircraft collision-detection and avoidance technologies, if safety was the primary goal.
Frankly, in the kind of society we live in today, with numerous documented instances of police brutality and misuse of power, maybe it is not a bad idea to have relatively free drones flying around, unidentified. Misuses of power occur most often in secret, in a vacuum of oversight. Allowing drones the chance to observe and record official police and military actions may not be as bad a thing as everyone claims it is.
Now, I know I am not making any friends in the law enforcement community by taking this kind of stance. Still, I think that there is little reason to track drones with a maximum flight time of less than a half hour, and maximum payload capability of less than a kilogram (in most cases). They aren’t going to be the ones we need to watch out for, the ones we need to track. The ones who might need tracking and identification are manned aircraft, with much longer flight times (and ranges), and exponentially larger payloads.
Yet the FAA is silent on this. They require ADS-B (a type of Remote ID and tracking for manned aircraft) only in heavily congested areas and around airports and similar sensitive areas. That makes perfect sense. If they would use the same criteria for drones, I wouldn’t have any problem with that. Yet the FAA and their cohorts in the commercial/intelligence world want to implement remote ID and Tracking (they always leave out the tracking part) in all areas, rural and urban, dense or sparse population. Yes, they want this feature for areas with no delivery services and little or no flight paths. Yet they dare not try to implement such a plan for manned aviation.
I say what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Be fair. If we are going to track all UAS, then track all aircraft. If we are going to broadcast Personally Identifiable Information (PII) for UAS pilots, then do it for all pilots. Laws that exclude some or target only portions of the population are not just laws.
Remote ID techniques and applications may be good or bad, efficient or inefficient, but they should be FAIR…equally imposed and equally burdensome (or easy) for all involved.
When I started flying drones, I didn’t want to become an activist. I didn’t want to fly in places where people might be bothered. I certainly didn’t want to fly in places or manners that would interfere with manned aircraft (or any other aircraft), law enforcement, or national security.
I love my country, and would do nothing to harm it. I respect society and my fellow citizens, and would do nothing to harm them or infringe on their rights, security, or privacy. And I expect the same consideration to be given to me.
Heck, I just wanted to fly my drone, maybe record some epic motorcycle rides or snowboarding descents. I definitely didn’t want to get embroiled in a controversy, or in NPRMs and responses. I wanted to spend my time in flying, not writing about it, or complaining about ill-begotten rules and unfair regulations.
I don’t care if Amazon makes another fortune delivering nonsense to consumers. I don’t begrudge the DHS of their desire to see and control almost everything that happens in this country. I just want to fly.
Which is exactly what these rules intend (either directly, or through effect) to stop. I want to fly free (or relatively free, as free as I can while flying ‘safe’). I want everyone else to be able to do so as well. I do NOT want people imposing their will or more regulations on me. I most certainly do not want random citizens given my location when I am flying. To some vigilantes, this is an invitation. To crooks, it is an opportunity. To authorities, it is a blank check on my civil rights.
None of that is cool. Surely, we have better decision-making ability and technology than that. Surely we can devise better methods that are just as effective and less intrusive. We have the technology.
So let’s use it. Thoughtfully. Efficiently. With respect and consideration for the rights of others.
If as much effort went into developing a UAS-based airborne collision and avoidance technology as has gone into developing a remote ID and tracking capability, we would have taken a step towards safety, instead of a step towards totalitarianism. For avoidance of crashes is safety – proactive and efficient. Identifying offenders is not helpful in regards to safety, and is merely reactive. That just doesn’t make sense.
So if you are going to make rules that would broadcast my location to thieves, vigilantes, anti-drone Luddites and troublemakers, then I can hardly be expected to ‘get with the program’ and support that type of nonsense.
But if you are going to implement (and propose) efficient, safety-based solutions that treat all users of the NAS equally, then how could I not get behind such a program?
It’s simple common sense. Which seems to be less simple and less common as time goes by.
But back to the stealing part. Not only can thieves use my location to steal my drone, they can use my PII information to hack my credit card information, and maybe find my home address and other information I do not share with the public. There is no telling what goes through the minds of thieves, but this ‘opportunity’ has surely got those minds spinning with plots and plans.
All thieves do not wear masks and look like thieves. Corporations which charge me to track my drone and I, who might sell this information to other marketing firms, are just as criminal as a guy with a gun and larceny in his heart. Plans which place a cost burden on citizens while opening the door to huge profits for multinational corporations is thievery on a grand scale.
So let’s stop this thievery. Let’s hope the FAA gets some of the decision-making ability they espouse for airmen. Let’s unite and tell them what we think before it is too late.
A Brave New Drone World 