Tacos, pirates, and government circumvention

southsiderosie

I recently came across a kind of silly article about attempts to create a taco delivery service using unmanned mini-helicopter drones (I posted about it here). Basically the mini helicopters could collect data sent by smartphone and then use the GPS function to hone in on the hungry customer.

However, in that thread, a far more intriguing article (with a video) was posted on the use of the same mini-drones to create what are essentially 'pirate swarms': a flying data cloud that could assemble and disperse quickly, and would be beyond the reach of government (i.e. copyright and other data regulators). This would facilitate file-sharing without oversight:

Their starting point for project “Electronic Countermeasures” was to create something akin to an ‘aerial Napster’ or ‘airborne Pirate Bay’, but it became much more than that.

“Part nomadic infrastructure and part robotic swarm, we have rebuilt and programmed the drones to broadcast their own local Wi-Fi network as a form of aerial Napster. They swarm into formation, broadcasting their pirate network, and then disperse, escaping detection, only to reform elsewhere,” says the group describing their creation.

In short the system allows the public to share data with the help of flying drones. Much like the Pirate Box, but one that flies autonomously over the city.

“The public can upload files, photos and share data with one another as the drones float above the significant public spaces of the city. The swarm becomes a pirate broadcast network, a mobile infrastructure that passers-by can interact with,” the creators explain...

...Besides the artistic value, the drones can also have other use cases than being a “pirate hub.” For example, they can serve as peer-to-peer communications support for protesters and activists in regions where Internet access is censored.

Either way, whether it’s Hollywood or a dictator, there will always be groups that have a reason to shoot the machines down. But let’s be honest, who would dare to destroy such a beautiful piece of art?

While this technology is in its infancy, it raises really interesting issues around creating truly 'free' space for information exchange. Can this kid of technology truly circumvent government (the taco robot guys have already noted issues with the Federal Aviation Authority). On the flip side, given the data-collection capacity demonstrated by the taco delivery robots, it seems that this kind of technology can also strengthen the power of government to engage in even closer surveillance of its own citizens (or those of other countries).

Are we just slouching towards Skynet? I am not the least bit technically inclined, so I don't know what to think, but the possibilities seem both interesting and terrifying (and in the case of taco delivery, delicious).

MadsL

it seems that this kind of technology can also strengthen the power of government to engage in even closer surveillance of its own citizens (or those of other countries).

US Police use these with mounted radar to identify, photograph and issue speeding fines (or so they say if you are tin-foil hat minded).

As to circumventing Govt, who controls the air space?

Kinski

The GPS is operated by the US government, and they're quite capable of stopping private citizens from using it if they want, so no technology dependent on it can "circumvent government" (leaving aside the fact that these things could simply be shot down). Sounds like The Pirate Bay have dreamed up a fairly quixotic project.

As for surveillance, I don't see what it is that these things do that anyone could imagine is more sophisticated than the technologies govts like the US have at their disposal already.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

djpbarry

southsiderosie wrote: »

Can this kid of technology truly circumvent government (the taco robot guys have already noted issues with the Federal Aviation Authority).

As has already been pointed out, the Global Positioning System (which the entire planet is becoming worryingly over-reliant on) is maintained by the US government, so any technology is, in theory, easily subverted by a government.

southsiderosie wrote: »

Are we just slouching towards Skynet?

You mean in terms of artificial intelligence? Nah, I don’t think we need worry about that just yet.

djpbarry

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I don’t know about you, but when I’m in a plane, I take comfort in the fact that the airspace around me is heavily regulated.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Valmont

djpbarry wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You imply that without the government there would be no air traffic control -- do you really think people and businesses are that stupid?

Permabear wrote:

If small helicopters can deliver tacos and facilitate file-sharing, they can also be used by the paparazzi to spy on celebrities (attach a camera instead of a taco) or even by militants to commit acts of terrorism (attach a bomb instead of a taco). Nevertheless, it won't be long before regulators start to clamp down.

I'm sure they would be ok with tax bills sent via chopper; although on second thoughts I think the postal unions would stop that move.

Valmont

djpbarry wrote: »

As has already been pointed out, the Global Positioning System (which the entire planet is becoming worryingly over-reliant on) is maintained by the US government, so any technology is, in theory, easily subverted by a government.

I recall an economist article about the Chinese equivalent being launched soon?

djpbarry

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You're getting predictable dude .

Air traffic control was initially instigated by individual airports in the US, but it very quickly became clear that as volumes of air traffic increased, these airports lacked the resources to implement an effective system. Federal oversight was also called for in order to force individual operators to adhere to universal regulations in the interests of safety.

Compare this to the relatively unregulated electrical distribution system in the US, which is now, due to lack of oversight in the past, a complete mess and is being stretched to breaking point - reliability of supply is farcical:

http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/policy/us-electrical-grid-gets-less-reliable

djpbarry

Valmont wrote: »

You imply that without the government there would be no air traffic control -- do you really think people and businesses are that stupid?

Nope, I'm sure some form of air traffic control would exist (as alluded to above), but I suspect standards would be a lot more variable from region to region.

ednwireland

Valmont wrote: »

I recall an economist article about the Chinese equivalent being launched soon?

first satellite of the EU equivalent launched - galileo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_%28satellite_navigation%29

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

djpbarry

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Actually, we got the Air Commerce Act of 1926, at the behest of the aviation industry. And I'm not defending the FAA, I'm just of the opinion that leaving things for the market to regulate doesn't always work.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Well, first of all, Nav Canada is subject to Canadian government regulations, and secondly, there are at least two state-owned enterprises mentioned on that list of award winners (ISAVIA and the IAA).

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

...versus purely profit-motivated airspace regulation.

Hm, tough call... :pac:

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Dr Galen

southsiderosie wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

First thought into my head

djpbarry wrote: »

You mean in terms of artificial intelligence? Nah, I don’t think we need worry about that just yet.

That's exactly what Skynet wants you think tbf. Right now, your microwave is plotting ways to kill you mate. Be careful next time you have to use it.

Permabear wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

As for you......

Where do you come up with this stuff? On pretty much every topic I expect to see a PB post, like above, with the requisite links to something or another supporting your POV.

It's almost like you've been created, solely to post on message boards......like some sort of...........robot :eek:

Anyway

I don't think a discussion around the rights and wrongs of Privatising Air Traffic Control was what the OP was after here. Maybe another thread perhaps? If people want me split it out, just let me know and I will

Cheers

DrG

djpbarry

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

But I’m not arguing that everything should be left up to governments. I’m saying that leaving everything to regulate itself does not strike me as a particularly good idea – having common guidelines enshrined in law seems a prudent.

Kinski

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

They're still sending F-16s into combat, a jet which first took to the skies way back in 1974, and they expect to continue using them for another 13 years. Despite that, it ain't the guys in the cockpits who should feel unsafe. "Old" doesn't always mean "crap"! (I know nothing about ERAM though, so it may well has been superseded by better systems.)

Cork boy 55

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Someone attempted to use a model aeroplane with explosives in it recently in DC

This is the face of the Massachusetts man accused of plotting to attack the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol by using remote-controlled aircraft filled with C-4 explosives.

Musician Rezwan Ferdaus, 26, was also charged with attempting to provide support and resources to al Qaeda in order to carry out attacks on U.S. soldiers stationed overseas, U.S. attorney's office in Boston said.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2043017/FBI-foils-Rezwan-Ferdauss-plot-attack-Pentagon-toy-plane-packed-explosives.html#ixzz1qLTA4pHG