FAA: Small Drones Must Be Registered By February (bloomberg.com) 533
An anonymous reader writes: The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration has finally unveiled its new drone registration rules. Starting on 21 December, all newly-purchased drones between 250 grams (.55 lbs) and 25 kg (~55 lbs) must be registered before their first flight. Owners of drones purchased before that time must register by 19 February 2016. The FAA will charge $5 to register the drones, though the first month of registrations will be free. "Make no mistake: unmanned aircraft enthusiast are aviators, and with that title comes a great deal of responsibility," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. "Registration gives us an opportunity to work with these users to operate their unmanned aircraft safely. I'm excited to welcome these new aviators into the culture of safety and responsibility that defines American innovation." There is also an age requirement: kids under the age of 13 will not be allowed to register a drone by themselves.
In related news, Bard college has compiled a report on drone safety with respect to encounters with manned aircraft.
oh boy!! more government!! (Score:3, Insightful)
they are taking more money from us, so we will be safer!
their solution to everything. disgusting.
Re:Model Airplanes/Rockets (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Model Airplanes/Rockets (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, but those old remote-control airplanes couldn't leave your sight, so people only used them in wide-open fields. It was easy to tell who the operators of an R/C airplane were. Now they have remote cameras and can travel for many miles.
Re: (Score:2)
It was easy to tell who the operators of an R/C airplane were. Now they have remote cameras and can travel for many miles.
Indeed, you can control the dominant kit drone FCs through any serial link, no matter how you pipe it. Bluetooth, WiFi, cellular module, xbee... Just found this Flyver [github.com] thing for building apps to control FCs from an Android phone onboard, it really is a nice way to get a low-power ARM with a high-resolution camera, and a GUI for configuration right on the device. You just need a phone with USB-OTG so that you can connect a flight controller. And with flight times commonly over ten minutes and speeds over 30
Re: (Score:2)
I find it ironic that the cameras and better radio guidance were things the R/C airplane and helicopter crowd wanted for years, but when it finally becomes a fairly cheap thing to have... 'Drones' have become a thing and people did stupid things with them and now R/C airplanes get caught up in those issues.
It feels so strange that today someone can't just go pick up a R/C plane as a kid, return home, and fly it on 10 acres of country land like I did as a kid. The worst thing that could happen back then was
Re: (Score:3)
Well, as someone else here said earlier today, you can thank all the assholes for ruining it. That's what happens when things are democratized (in this case, because it became inexpensive): you get all the masses, and the masses are generally moronic assholes. Things seemed better in the past because things like this were expensive hobbies, so only people with a lot of money, or people with a very strong interest willing to dedicate their more-limited financial resources to it, would get involved. That
Re:Model Airplanes/Rockets (Score:4, Interesting)
Just because there is a new toy that is out, that happens to have the name of a controversial military device it becomes a major threat.
First, before I get mauled, I'm not entirely crazy about this new proposal. Under a particular altitude and as a hobby I think we should leave unregulated, that said... The drone market is filling up. Drones have way more people in it than the model rocket and RC Airplane markets and I would dare say combined. Drones are also a lot more industrious than say the model rocket or RC plane. Drones are being used for photography, to move goods, be the ultra creeper you've always wanted to be, traffic reports, and so on which are all way more than what the model rocket and RC plane market have ever done.
So considering that the drone market has been able to do all of that and the others are a no go, yeah I can see why the FAA feels there is a need to regulated it. Now that's not to say the others can't do that, it just to say that they haven't, if and when they do, then I'm pretty sure they'll start regulating that as well. But let's be very clear that this comment isn't a voice of support or disdain at the regulation. It's that you can't very easily compare model rockets, RC planes, and what have you with the drone market simply because they are vastly different markets. People have found drones to be really useful and have started creating a lot of points where they intersect with everyday life. The same can't be said for those other markets.
For those who like rigorous formulae on why anyone does anything, I would say (and simply my opinion) that the FAA acts when a particular class of aircraft is used in X number of applications that has Y number of general public using those applications and there are Z number of opportunities to purchase that class of aircraft. (I know really rough formula there, I don't espouse to know what goes on inside the FAA's head) However this rough formula would say that as any of those values X, Y, or Z increases, the likelihood that there will be regulation increases proportionally. Drones are "X" used in numerous applications, "Y" are criss crossing the general public a lot, "Z" you can buy them pretty much everywhere. I'm pretty sure the same could have been said about bi-planes in the early days of aviation.
Again, I'm speculating here as to the logic because it would be wrong for us just to assume, "Hey I'm government and I just want to regulate anything and everything I can possibly." If that was truly the case one would think we'd have a modern Stamp Act. However, considering that we are talking about a public entity, we could forgo the speculation and render my entire comment useless and just simply write them an email [faa.gov] asking, "Hey what particular factors does your agency feel led to the regulation of drones and not something like RC airplanes or model rockets?" Again, this just my two cents, I don't condone or condemn this new regulation, just speaking purely out of the these things you talked about model rockets and RC planes != drone market and for better reasons than it's named after the thing we use to murder (don't get me started on that) people around the world with.
Re:Model Airplanes/Rockets (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree with you but I would point out that the FAA has long kept it's finger on model rocketry and radio controlled aircraft. They have been happy to do it with low key regulation and the concept that if they can self regulate and Keep Out Of Trouble, then the long logbook of the law won't bother them. It's a philosophy that has worked with amateur radio for years.
But the sheer number of drones and the various and disparate people crashing them into every object above coffee table height has pushed them to do something.
And something, so far, has been pretty reasonable.
It's a compromise. Nobody is happy.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
RC planes didn't sell 200 units per day from a single retailer (B&H Photo, NY, selling 200+ Phantoms / day). RC pilots tended not to buzz the Macy's Day parade nor drop down on stadiums full of people nor fly around in controlled airspace. The shear magnitude of this phenomenon is staggering. And that is before Christmas.
This is just another Eternal September, albeit with a physical object. There are going to be so many yo-yos out there buzzing up and down that somebody is going to get into serious
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, pasting a number on the shell of a drone isn't going to stop stupid anymore than requiring license plates and driver's licenses has stopped road stupid.
Of course, rules/laws are not just about preventing bad behavior (etc), they're also about providing a framework for responsibility and accountability for those that don't follow the rules. Sure an unregistered drone may be difficult to track back to its owner, but if/when it is, that owner will be in even more trouble.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Model Airplanes/Rockets (Score:5, Informative)
It's hardly freaking ruined. Spend $5, get registered, nothing else changes. Except they know who you are if you fly like a retard.
And if you aren't registered and fly like a retard, they now have legal recourse.
I'm all for the government minding their own business... But RC Helicopters are hardly ruined by a $5 tax.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Note, that is $5 every three years. The FAA is making a list without any benefit to the people on the list. Thanks.
Re:Model Airplanes/Rockets (Score:5, Interesting)
Note, that is $5 every three years. The FAA is making a list without any benefit to the people on the list. Thanks.
The point of the list isn't to benefit the people on the list, the point of the list is to benefit everyone else against the people on the list.
I'm a licensed amateur radio operator. I have a very basic tech/no-code license, and as such I am limited to a very specific set of frequencies and power levels. This is to protect everyone else from me, while giving me some guidelines so that I may actually pursue the hobby, so that your TV and radio and cordless phone and cell phone and WIFI don't stop working because I'm pursuing my hobby.
Licensing of drones works in a similar fashion- it gives the hobby some room to operate but works to curtail abuses and abusers. I expect rules to be developed for where people can fly and what can be flown in what kinds of locations and conditions. I expect rules on altitude, the crossing of private property, the use of cameras regarding private property, etc. Given that I legally own the airspace over my house to a certain extent, operators will have to learn what they are and are not allowed to do, in the same way that I don't transmit on frequencies that break your electronics.
Re: (Score:3)
I warned you about this years ago when "drone" operators started acting like idiots because the price barrier made idiots able to be drone operators. I even gave you a few suggestions as to how to help avoid this. I even offered to help and I am not a drone operator. I offered to help because I hate draconian regulation harming hobbyists.
But no... I was modded down and you told me that you'd do what you want. This is just the beginning. The offer to help still sort of stands but I'm fast approaching a point
Re:Model Airplanes/Rockets (Score:4, Informative)
You don't require a driver's license to drive on your own property, or private property with permission of the owner. This FAA license is required for absolutely all drones that are flown outdoors, whether they are only ever used on private property or not.
Re: (Score:3)
No, you do not
You are wrong about it not being written anywhere.... as I quoted above:
Re: (Score:3)
Which reminds me of a point.... that kites would technically be considered drones by this act, since kites can fairly easily be maneuvered remotely from the ground by tugging on the string or strings in different directions.
Re:Model Airplanes/Rockets (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm all for the government minding their own business...
Just noting that minding your/mine/our business *is* their business. If everyone was honest, fair and responsible (etc) and minded their own business we wouldn't need government to legislate and arbitrate things.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
> But RC Helicopters are hardly ruined by a $5 tax.
RC helicopters and RC fixed-wing aircraft have no registration requirement. Only "drones" are subject to this requirement.
The Academy of Model Aeronautics and its sincere and earnest outreach efforts (the majority of which is its cultivation and support of local RC model aeronautics clubs, and the remainder of which is its liaison between the FCC and the model airplane clubs) has done a *really* good job of cultivating a culture of safe, sane, and respon
Re: (Score:3)
This, a thousand times this.
There are great, AMA-sponsored clubs almost everywhere, and they usually have a nice, well-equipped location for flying, and sometimes cool events like indoor (gym) dogfights and all kinds of fun stuff. For instance, the drone racing nationals:
http://dronenationals.com/ [dronenationals.com]
Fun stuff. The switch from local hobby shop purchaser being the norm, to Amazon "4.3 stars out of 5.0, I should buy this" purchaser is what's leading to all this crap, IMO.
Re: (Score:3)
Or, do just like I will, not register and fly anyway.
No one is going to register, this is a publicity play on the way to an outright ban, when no one registers, they'll use that as an excuse.
Re: (Score:3)
In fact, the vast majority of it takes place in what is often referred to as "Class G" airspace, which until now has remained unregulated, for a very good reason: the FAA does not have authority under the Constitution or, for that matter, under the laws that established it as part of the Commerce Department in 1926.
Flying drones as a hobby is not a matter of Interstate Commerce, nor does it (legally) take place
Re:Model Airplanes/Rockets (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
No, for flying an unregistered drone. Difference is HUGE.
Re:Model Airplanes/Rockets (Score:5, Interesting)
How about we only require remote controlled aircraft large enough to carry a weapon to be registered...
The problem is not "weapons" but collisions. If a drone collides with a manned aircraft, it doesn't matter if it is carrying a weapon or not. Of course, a 250 gm drone is not going to fly high enough or be big enough to be a problem. This law is fine in principle, but is a big overreach in going after toys.
Re:oh boy!! more government!! (Score:5, Informative)
Weight (Score:3)
Hmm, my quadcopter is 0.41lbs so I guess I'm good. Although I occasionally attach my GoPro to it which puts it at 0.61lbs.
Re:Weight (Score:5, Funny)
Turn the engine on. Its weight will miraculously decrease.
Re: (Score:2)
Well as long as the regulation specifies the weight as manufactured, and not when carrying cargo, you should be good.
Re: (Score:2)
The regulations refer to maximum take-off weight.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well if that's the case, then cargo is irrelevant. Maximum take-off weight is the same no matter how much cargo you add (going over the limit of course is dangerous and not allowed). It's exactly like GVWR in cars: the maximum vehicle weight with full fluids and maximum cargo.
Re: (Score:2)
What they actually mean is the maximum weight at takeoff, not the maximum potential weight at takeoff, which would be calculated by the drone plus however much lift it can generate on top of that, perhaps as measured by a fish scale... for multirotors, anyway. For planes, it would be a lot trickier to determine. Luckily, they're not trying; it's based on the weight of what you're actually flying. If you build a complete drone weighing 230g with battery but you plan to carry a 100g payload, you need to regis
Whew! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
(gasping for air) funny dude, very funny
Re: (Score:2)
Unregistered bad guy with drone can be stopped by registered good guy with drone.
Re: (Score:3)
Unregistered bad guy with drone can be stopped by registered good guy with drone.
According to the FBI, that doesn't even work with guns. As described in A Study of Active Shooter Incidents in the United States Between 2000 and 2013 [fbi.gov], reported at New FBI Report Casts Doubt on NRA's 'Good Guy Stops Bad Guy' Nonsense [huffingtonpost.com] and other places including The Daily Show, Jordan Klepper: Good Guy with a Gun Pt. 2 [cc.com] ...
Of active shooting incidents just released by the FBI which analyzed 160 "active shootings" resulting in injuries to 1,043 victims, including 486 deaths, between 2000 and 2013. Here's how
Re: (Score:2)
We have lots of laws like restraining orders based on the assumption that people intent on murder won't dare commit a much lesser offense...
On the other hand, those laws allow someone to be charged with a lessor crime (hopefully) before committing something worse and/or to be *also* charged with a lessor crime... I imagine that's the, or a, practical purpose.
I predict... (Score:3, Interesting)
That said, "Civilian drones weighing more than 250 grams (0.55 pounds) must be registered and identified with markings so that authorities have a better chance of finding the owner in the event of an illegal flight or crash"... Riiight, because someone planning to illegally use their drone will certainly make sure to properly register it first?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you clearly assume all people who do wrong are criminal masterminds, and not a couple pot smoking burnouts on a journey to enrich their depressing lives by doing stupid things.
Re: (Score:2)
I predict the rise of a huge market for 249g drones in the very near future.
The battery I use for my drones weighs 230g. My fixed wing weighs 1126g (sans battery) and my quad (a rather ordinary-weight 450) weighs 698g. And that's all without FPV. The FPV rig weighs another 78g. If you want to have a meaningfully-sized drone that weighs less than 250g, you're going to have to spend spend spend on the exotic materials.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most toy-class drones seem to only fly for 10-20 minutes, with 12-15 minutes fairly standard. That's right about where my quad is, too, but I could spend considerably more on the battery. I've only got 2650mAh and for just a few tens of grams more I could get up over 5Ah... but it would have been three times the money for just twice the runtime and I'm going to have to have a commercial purpose for that. Instead I got two packs, so I can run my fixed and my quad at the same time, or run one twice. And I hav
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In addition there are a bunch of idiots that don't know that doing certain obvious things are illegal.
More often than not it's, "Hey there's a fire across town - let's use my drone to take a picture of it!" Rather than 'hm. lets buy a drone and illegally use it to annoy the firefighters.
A bad way to regulate (Score:3, Insightful)
The Bloomberg article mentions that the $5 fee is actually a government mandate in the law that the FAA is using to claim authority over RC aircraft, but to anyone looking at it, it looks like the RC aircraft equivalent of red light cameras: a government cash-grab that does little to nothing to actually improve safety. I'm having trouble seeing how having tagged drones is going to do anything but allow the government to collect more money in fines, both for unauthorized drone use and for drone use without a license.
Re: (Score:2)
The same with cars! Fuck-em. Anyone who cares to drive an illegal car can just fake the legitimacy, so we may as well trash the highway safety commission along with it. It's a waste of taxpayer dollars if you ask me.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that you get your money back if you register in the first thirty days. And it's $5 per person for three years. You're gonna get pretty close to the heat death of the universe before you get enough money to even pay back the web site development costs.
Re: (Score:2)
While I'm sure the government can easily spend millions how much money do you need to make a 2 page web site with a 3rd/4th page being some CC processors web site for payment? One static form with the required info and validation, off the the CC proc for CC and confirmation and back to a here is your cert stuff data into a DB.
Wait, what? $56 million Dollar Website for what? (Score:5, Insightful)
From the rules (http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=19856):
The FAA estimates that in calendar year 2014, 200,000 small unmanned aircraft were operated in the NAS in model aircraft operations. During this period, the FAA received 238 reports of potentially unsafe UAS operations.
In order to implement the new streamlined, web-based system described in this IFR, the FAA will incur costs to develop, implement, and maintain the system. Small UAS operators will require time to register and mark their aircraft, and that time has a cost. The total of government and registrant resource cost for small unmanned aircraft registration and marking under this new system is $56 million ($46 million present value at 7 percent) through 2020.
Re:Wait, what? $56 million Dollar Website for what (Score:5, Insightful)
Regulation! (Score:2)
Whiners, LISTEN UP: (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Who is really to blame, here? The retards who were irresponsible with their toys, that's who, so go bang on them!
2. What the actual FUCK do you expect the FAA and the government to do? Nothing? Doing nothing means the problem continues. Or do you expect cops to waste their time trying to chase down little flying toys? That's like trying to herd ferrets.. who got into a case of Rockstar; it ain't happenin'. The only other viable alternative I can see, would be to ban non-government drones entirely from the U.S., which no doubt would make all of you froth at the mouth even worse. Therefore: GET OVER IT.
Re: (Score:3)
2. What the actual FUCK do you expect the FAA and the government to do? Nothing?
Yes
Doing nothing means the problem continues. Or do you expect cops to waste their time trying to chase down little flying toys?
What problem? And the cops will still have to track down the owner of the toy used for the crime anyway. Maybe a list of registered drones helps, maybe not (which is likely the case for mass produced, non-serialized toys).
Re: (Score:2)
Who is really to blame, here?
The government.
What the actual FUCK do you expect the FAA and the government to do?
Enforce existing laws that target criminals instead of enacting new ones that target innocent people.
WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU THINK OUR REACTION WOULD BE?
Re: (Score:3)
To be fair would say it would have been better if under a certain height on private property without a camera did not need to be registered for private use.
So the FAA's official position (as of a statement made in 2010, at least) is that the navigable public airspace starts at 500' AGL, barring airports and so forth. Aircraft below that height are, in general, considered to be trespassing against the owner of the property below if they are in that space without permission. There is also a 1946 Supreme Court ruling (United States vs. Causby [airportnoiselaw.org]) establishing that landowners control the airspace above their property to an altitude of not less than 83 feet. It would
Because we suck at driving/flying (Score:3)
Some people seem to have trouble navigating a vehicle safely in two dimensions. Add a third and this is what happens. A steady string of events and incidents from people who just can't act with some responsibility (see earlier comments on why RC aircraft community typically doesn't have this problem)
It's why I never ask when my flying car will show up. As a population we suck enough at driving on the ground as it is.
Don't comply (Score:2)
If everyone that owns and flies model UAS were to issue a collective middle finger to these asshats, the whole thing would go away overnight.
I like my drones (Score:2)
I like my drones, and I don't want to take the chance of some overzealous cop "accidentally" mangling them in the process of illegally confiscating them.
What is a "drone"? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, if you RTFA this is registration for remotely controlled aircraft. You don't have to register your rocket unless it weighs over 250g and has a control system in it. You do still have to let someone know if you're going to launch a rocket which may interfere with air traffic.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait a sec..."remotely controlled" and "has a control system in it" are 2 totally different things. Which is it?
I assume it's the latter, since if only "remote control" requires requires registration, then programmable or autonomous drones will become the next big thing in the consumer drone space.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait a sec..."remotely controlled" and "has a control system in it" are 2 totally different things. Which is it?
"A UAS is the unmanned aircraft (UA) and all of the associated support equipment, control station, data links, telemetry, communications and navigation equipment, etc., necessary to operate the unmanned aircraft.
The UA is the flying portion of the system, flown by a pilot via a ground control system, or autonomously through use of an on-board computer, communication links and any additional equipment that is necessary for the UA to operate safely. The FAA issues an experimental airworthiness certificate for
Re: (Score:2)
A rocket with a control system is by definition a 'missile' and is treated the same as a full auto gun. 10 years federal.
Re: (Score:2)
A rocket with a control system is by definition a 'missile' and is treated the same as a full auto gun. 10 years federal.
Is that true even if the control system can only engage once the rocket cuts off? It's a shame, if so.
Re: (Score:2)
Those rocket motors are filled with black powder, the regular sulfer, saltpeter, and charcoal kind. It is generally not considered an explosive for legal purposes. Because if it was I'm sure the NRA would have a fit.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No, the model rocket and traditional radio controlled aircraft activities were largely self regulating. With the understanding that if they didn't do it themselves, the FAA would be happy to ban them. And, prior to this, it worked. Now, no so much.
BTW, you DO have to register certain model rockets with the FAA as well as getting specific clearance for flights for the larger rockets. The ones that go thousands of feet in the air. The little ones only go several hundreds of feet.
So there.
Muni govt trying to ban drones (Score:2)
Albany county in NY is trying to ban drone use by non-law enforcement
http://app.albanycounty.com/le... [albanycounty.com]
Say thanks to the "it's my right" crowd (Score:2)
Remember it? "I can fly where I want, there is no law that tells me I cannot fly above your ground. Or near an airport. IT IS MY RIGHT!"
Now we have a law. And registration. And more and more restrictions. Why? Because people can't use a tiny bit of common sense. Contrary to popular (right wing) belief, governments don't relish in getting into your way of "freedom". Governments are lazy, why the fuck should they be any different than the people voting them in? Politicians don't come from Mars, they come from
Re: (Score:3)
I'm inclined to think that you're being too harsh on the drone operators and too nice to the government. Don't you think the abuses people have committed with their UAVs is mostly due to negligence and/or stupidity. I highly doubt that people are deliberately flying their equipment anywhere and everywhere to make a political statement about their "rights". Same with people who own guns. The gun rights activists aren't the ones committing crimes and using firearms irresponsibly.
"Politicians ... are the s
Stupid. (Score:3)
What about my 18 pound Remote control airplane that goes about 50 mile an hour? I'm far faster and far more deadly than any "drone" which is uneducated speak for quadcopter.
These new rules were written by morons in response to knee jerking.
Re: (Score:2)
What about my 18 pound Remote control airplane that goes about 50 mile an hour? I'm far faster and far more deadly than any "drone" which is uneducated speak for quadcopter.
Yes, it's an unmanned aircraft, and you're going to have to register it even if it has absolutely no control intelligence whatsoever. It's not really registering the craft, though; if it's under 55 pounds, it's registering YOU. They're going to give you one number, and you're going to put it on all your UAs. This is actually not drone registration, this is actually unmanned aircraft registration, and that includes both remote control and autonomous aircraft, as well as everything in between.
If it's over 55
Register drones? How about cars? (Score:2)
I am still struggling to understand, what argument is there for mandatory license-plates on personal vehicles, that would not also apply to people having to carry identification. And not just any identification, but visible at all times from different sides whenever in public or where the public has legal right to access.
What's the bug deal? (Score:2)
I have a UAV, it's a fun toy and gives me some different perspectives as a landscape photographer. I seriously don't see the issue in registering it - it costs $5 (or $0 if I'm quick) and I only have to provide my name and address, which any vaguely determined cop could already get from my credit card records if they really wanted.
Given that some people do seem to have trouble using them sensibly, mandating a record (despite the fact that no, it won't catch everyone) seems reasonable. I mean having cars be
Re: (Score:3)
The potential for misuse seems pretty small to me.
The hell there isn't potential for misuse. Registering drones means now the gubermint has a list of names and addresses. First they will come and demand my drones. Then they will do it with guns! Hell they are even trying to say i can't have guns on my drones - how stupid is that?
This is going to be as well adhered to as the FCC (Score:4, Insightful)
licensing requirements for CB radios were back in the 1970s.
And just like the FCC, the FAA isn't going to have the resources to go after every kid with an RC quadcopter.
What if you are not a US citizen? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
and privacy
I predict huge numbers of unregistered drones
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The amount of organization and discipline that has been exercised by RC aircraft enthusiasts is sorely lacking among the users of cheap drones. This is the simple result of Americans using the amount of consideration and common sense that they are known for.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You really think $5 per drone is going to be profitable for a federal government agency? I doubt it even covers their costs for employing people to do the paperwork.
Re: (Score:2)
More seats to fill is more patronage to give out, more power to wield and more votes and money to collect.
Re: (Score:2)
Heck, they even give you your money back if you register in the first thirty days. Not going to chisel down the national debt that way.
Re: Oh, Five Dollars? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Databases and developers are free now?
Actually, yes. PostgreSQL is free. (So are a few others like MySQL/MariaDB, but PostgreSQL is much better.)
Of course, in-house devs to use Postgres are not free, nor all the other government workers needed (managers, administrators, etc.). But if any of this money is going to pay for DB licenses, that's a waste of taxpayer dollars and should be downright criminal. This is a job that Postgres can easily handle.
Re: (Score:2)
Not so long ago, the news was full of fear-based "reporting" on all the evils of the internet.
Yeah that didn't go away [theverge.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Or you can create crazy by insinuating that said action is being taken by terrorists.
Hu-hum st
Re:BwaaaaHahahah (Score:5, Interesting)
Just buy a drone, register it under your enemy's name...and then fly it into an airport.
They are screwed at that point.....
At that point, they appear on all sorts of governmental lists, no fly...no buy weapons...etc.
And those are virtually impossible to get yourself off of....
Re: (Score:2)
Re:BwaaaaHahahah (Score:4, Funny)
It will be interesting to see how well they validate registrations.
I'm sure it will go over just fine. How hard could it be for the government to setup a functioning website?
Re: (Score:2)
The 5 bucks you gave them on a CC?
Re:BwaaaaHahahah (Score:4, Insightful)
...using a credit card you bought with cash under your target's name at some convenience store?
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a good way to screw someone over...
Just buy a drone, register it under your enemy's name...and then fly it into an airport.
At that point, they appear on all sorts of governmental lists, no fly...no buy weapons...etc.
And those are virtually impossible to get yourself off of....
Hopefully someone will register one on behalf of U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey there's gotta be some way for us hams to use those bands since our HOAs won't let us use them at home. :)
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't think you were required to have AMA to "fly in public", which is pretty broad. I thought that was just highly encouraged by the community for insurance, the same reason flying fields require it. Maybe a local city law for flying at public parks?