Good job dji, NFZ

[Lon Denard]

Other people in this thread have offered them as examples. And I agree with you on limiting cars.

Then maybe you shouldn't quote me when making your accusations and aspersions.

 

[BigDuke6ixx]

Then maybe you shouldn't quote me when making your accusations and aspersions.

It's a fallacious to suggest that because cars aren't limited that drones shouldn't be either. The more sensible option is to limit both but public opinion isn't demanding action over cars like it is over drones.

 

[Lon Denard]

It's a fallacious to suggest that because cars aren't limited that drones shouldn't be either. The more sensible option is to limit both but public opinion isn't demanding action over cars like it is over drones.

Okay, converting your favorite noun into an adjective doesn't summarily convert your argument into an intelligent one. I never presented the argument as stated by you. It was proposed that it was necessary for the company in question to self regulate to remain in business. I presented a very obvious example of an industry, whose product has killed millions btw, that has almost never self regulated. The auto industry has had to be dragged into nigh on every safety feature kicking and screaming! Since you brought up cigarettes, the tobacco industry has also had to be forcibly regulated by the govt despite clear evidence that their product almost universally kills it's user.

I'm not stating that the drone industry shouldn't self regulate because other companies haven't, I'm just pointing out the "fallacy" of the notion that DJI's current level of draconian self regulation is necessary for them to stay in business. I personally feel that they should provide the option to enable NFZ's for people like you and the OP. Allowing the rest of us to be responsible for our own actions.

 

[BigDuke6ixx]

Okay, converting your favorite noun into an adjective doesn't summarily convert your argument into an intelligent one. I never presented the argument as stated by you. It was proposed that it was necessary for the company in question to self regulate to remain in business. I presented a very obvious example of an industry, whose product has killed millions btw, that has almost never self regulated. The auto industry has had to be dragged into nigh on every safety feature kicking and screaming! Since you brought up cigarettes, the tobacco industry has also had to be forcibly regulated by the govt despite clear evidence that their product almost universally kills it's user.

I'm not stating that the drone industry shouldn't self regulate because other companies haven't, I'm just pointing out the "fallacy" of the notion that DJI's current level of draconian self regulation is necessary for them to stay in business. I personally feel that they should provide the option to enable NFZ's for people like you and the OP. Allowing the rest of us to be responsible for our own actions.

Don't like the way they do business? Then don't do business with them. It's all about public opinion in this age of viral news and you are on the wrong side of it. 'Draconian' you're having a laugh.

 

[Lon Denard]

Don't like the way they do business? Then don't do business with them. It's all about public opinion in this age of viral news and you are on the wrong side of it. 'Draconian' you're having a laugh.

And we've come back to the ever popular, "if you don't like it, too bad, don't use it" style of debate. Fortunately, things can be changed with dialogue and voting with your wallets. Besides, I don't believe that the Mavic was launched with these restrictions in place. Quite frankly, everyone that had purchased a DJI product before these restrictions were implemented has a decent case for demanding a full refund. You can not change a major aspect of a product after you've sold it. I'm actually surprised that not only are so many of you laying down for this but are actually in agreement with it. Then you try and silence anyone that opposes it. Weird!

 

[BigDuke6ixx]

And we've come back to the ever popular, "if you don't like it, too bad, don't use it" style of debate. Fortunately, things can be changed with dialogue and voting with your wallets. Besides, I don't believe that the Mavic was launched with these restrictions in place. Write frankly, everyone that had purchased a DJI product before these restrictions were implemented has a decent case for demanding a full refund. You can not change a major aspect of a product after you've sold it. I'm actually surprised that not only are so many of you laying down for this but are actually in agreement with it. Then you try and silence anyone that opposes it. Weird!

Yeah, vote with your wallet in future and demand refund or now. I bought my Mavic a week ago and knew what I was getting, a line of sight, flying camera.

 

[Lon Denard]

Yeah, vote with your wallet in future and demand refund or now. I bought my Mavic a week ago and knew what I was getting, a line of sight, flying camera.

Great! I guess my main question for you is why you want to stifle debate on this subject in the first place? What do you care if we all have a discussion on this subject? To paraphrase your motto, "if you don't like what we're talking about don't participate in the thread". Hahaha!

 

[BigDuke6ixx]

Great! I guess my main question for you is why you want to stifle debate on this subject in the first place? What do you care if we all have a discussion on this subject? To paraphrase your motto, "if you don't like what we're talking about don't participate in the thread". Hahaha!

I'm not stifling debate, I'm just not agreeing with you on your central, fallacious point.

 

[Lon Denard]

I'm not stifling debate, I'm just not agreeing with you on your central, fallacious point.

Ugh, I give up! There is obviously a language barrier here. Hahaha! You have repeatedly said that our discussion is a waste of time and if we don't like it buy/fly something else. That's not intelligent debate, that's "shut up you're wasting your breath, you're wrong for even talking about it, I'm right" style of argument. Let's see your facts and figures as to why it's "necessary" for DJI to restrict its products to this extent to stay in business. Instead of "if you don't like it, buy something else".

 

[BigDuke6ixx]

Ugh, I give up! There is obviously a language barrier here. Hahaha! You have repeatedly said that our discussion is a waste of time and if we don't like it buy/fly something else. That's not intelligent debate, that's "shut up you're wasting your breath, you're wrong for even talking about it, I'm right" style of argument. Let's see your facts and figures as to why it's "necessary" for DJI to restrict its products to this extent to stay in business. Instead of "if you don't like it, buy something else".

They want their products to be used responsibly and to that end they have restricted them. Why do you think they have done this? You debate it all you like, you will add nothing new and influence no one that matters, so yeah, you are wasting your time preaching to the converted.

 

[kyle76joslin]

I look at it this way, DJI enforcing NFZs works for me. I recently purchased the Mavic Pro knowing full well what to expect. With anything that has to be operated such as drones...safety first. Id rather have DJI implement NFZs because lets face it...anyone with a C.C can get one of these, but not everyone is responsible or understands the responsibility of airspace.

 

[Rick]

The vast majority of amateur drone owners act responsibly. The manufacturer has to do what it can to protect itself from the small minority of operators that flout the rules. The authorities that be may not have the resources to enforce these rules so rather than persue cases that will be difficult or impossible to prosecute then changes in legislation may be their only option. If a manufacturer like DJI has recognised that changes to the firmware of their products will remove some (not all) of the more opportunistic breaches of safety, then showing willingness to work with the authorities has to be commended. And this on a global scale, with all the complications that a world wide market entails.
There will always be an element that will fly illegally, but I believe the measures that DJI have employed will reduce the incidences of such breaches. I would go further; it can't be impossible to track an individual drone through its serial number to identify severe breaches and supply such data to the regulators if asked in pursuit of major infringements. A drone's firmware can be hacked, but who is doing this? The majority will be making such changes to bypass the inbuilt safeguards made to stop illegal use of the drone.
It can be argued that the serial number won't identify the operator at a given time, but it will put off a lot of people that would otherwise be tempted to fly illegally but for their actions being recorded and identified.

 

[wayy510]

I'm not stifling debate, I'm just not agreeing with you on your central, fallacious point.

Bro, find a new word, maybe like sycophant. Do you work for DJI or something? Do they give you free stuff to tow the line for them on message boards? Damage control? If you say no, then that sounds like a fallacy.

You don't think it wrong for a Chinese company to bait a switch their consumers after purchase to comply with non existent law?

The car point is a perfect example you can't admit. You would not tolerate the manufacturer of your vehicle to limit your speed and distance after purchase and you know it.

I know you get your drones for free for being a DJI cheerleader (probably even have Pom poms) but the rest of us work hard for the money we gave DJI.

Some of us are even partially educated and responsible adults that are capable of deciding what we do with our drones.

DJI is the fallacy.

 

[wayy510]

The vast majority of amateur drone owners act responsibly. The manufacturer has to do what it can to protect itself from the small minority of operators that flout the rules. The authorities that be may not have the resources to enforce these rules so rather than persue cases that will be difficult or impossible to prosecute then changes in legislation may be their only option. If a manufacturer like DJI has recognised that changes to the firmware of their products will remove some (not all) of the more opportunistic breaches of safety, then showing willingness to work with the authorities has to be commended. And this on a global scale, with all the complications that a world wide market entails.
There will always be an element that will fly illegally, but I believe the measures that DJI have employed will reduce the incidences of such breaches. I would go further; it can't be impossible to track an individual drone through its serial number to identify severe breaches and supply such data to the regulators if asked in pursuit of major infringements. A drone's firmware can be hacked, but who is doing this? The majority will be making such changes to bypass the inbuilt safeguards made to stop illegal use of the drone.
It can be argued that the serial number won't identify the operator at a given time, but it will put off a lot of people that would otherwise be tempted to fly illegally but for their actions being recorded and identified.

Good luck. Ask Apple how well their strategy aginst jailbreaking has worked for them.

The more DJI squeezes, the more they'll lose. Remember, there was no "hacked" DJI software/hardware before they tried to play the drone police role.

I for one can't wait for DJI to try more of their Draconian "self imposed restrictions" as it will bring swifter action of others who will work around DJI ********.

I'll always applaud for more freedoms. I don't need a lying and shady Chinese corporation to tell me when and where I can fly in my own country. I put no one in danger and know how to be responsible.

You advocate people be identified for "flying illegally". Tell me, what laws are you citing that constitutes illegal flying? What law has the U.S. Congress passed that constitutes illegal flying?

Let's ban alcohol and cars because tens of thousands die due to alcoholism and DUI.

Let's ban the cigarette you have hanging out of your mouth because tens of thousands die every year due to their complications.

Let's ban guns because thousands die from them every year.

When's the last time a 2lb drone killed one person?

 

[Rick]

Good luck. Ask Apple how well their strategy aginst jailbreaking has worked for them.

The more DJI squeezes, the more they'll lose. Remember, there was no "hacked" DJI software/hardware before they tried to play the drone police role.

I for one can't wait for DJI to try more of their Draconian "self imposed restrictions" as it will bring swifter action of others who will work around DJI ********.

I'll always applaud for more freedoms. I don't need a lying and shady Chinese corporation to tell me when and where I can fly in my own country. I put no one in danger and know how to be responsible.

You advocate people be identified for "flying illegally". Tell me, what laws are you citing that constitutes illegal flying? What law has the U.S. Congress passed that constitutes illegal flying?

Let's ban alcohol and cars because tens of thousands die due to alcoholism and DUI.

Let's ban the cigarette you have hanging out of your mouth because tens of thousands die every year due to their complications.

Let's ban guns because thousands die from them every year.

When's the last time a 2lb drone killed one person?

Oh dear.

 

[dirkclod]

Guys let's tone this down abit and be civil to each other.
Thanks.

 

[Lon Denard]

Bro, find a new word, maybe like sycophant. Do you work for DJI or something? Do they give you free stuff to tow the line for them on message boards? Damage control? If you say no, then that sounds like a fallacy.

You don't think it wrong for a Chinese company to bait a switch their consumers after purchase to comply with non existent law?

The car point is a perfect example you can't admit. You would not tolerate the manufacturer of your vehicle to limit your speed and distance after purchase and you know it.

I know you get your drones for free for being a DJI cheerleader (probably even have Pom poms) but the rest of us work hard for the money we gave DJI.

Some of us are even partially educated and responsible adults that are capable of deciding what we do with our drones.

DJI is the fallacy.

I was starting to think I was all alone here, thanks.

 

[Lon Denard]

Good luck. Ask Apple how well their strategy aginst jailbreaking has worked for them.

The more DJI squeezes, the more they'll lose. Remember, there was no "hacked" DJI software/hardware before they tried to play the drone police role.

I for one can't wait for DJI to try more of their Draconian "self imposed restrictions" as it will bring swifter action of others who will work around DJI ********.

I'll always applaud for more freedoms. I don't need a lying and shady Chinese corporation to tell me when and where I can fly in my own country. I put no one in danger and know how to be responsible.

You advocate people be identified for "flying illegally". Tell me, what laws are you citing that constitutes illegal flying? What law has the U.S. Congress passed that constitutes illegal flying?

Let's ban alcohol and cars because tens of thousands die due to alcoholism and DUI.

Let's ban the cigarette you have hanging out of your mouth because tens of thousands die every year due to their complications.

Let's ban guns because thousands die from them every year.

When's the last time a 2lb drone killed one person?

Exactly! These guys would have put the tea back on the ships in Boston Harbor!

I'm all for DJI warning me when I'm in a suspect area. I'm even cool with NFZs being an option you can enable or disable. Heck, they could have an online course that you have to go through to have your NFZs removed since the apparent concern is we unenlightened and unwashed apes with credit cards flying our drones "irresponsibly". We take a class through the app and voila' no more NFZs because now we've been learned! I don't know but there are other options.

 

[Lon Denard]

The vast majority of amateur drone owners act responsibly. The manufacturer has to do what it can to protect itself from the small minority of operators that flout the rules. The authorities that be may not have the resources to enforce these rules so rather than persue cases that will be difficult or impossible to prosecute then changes in legislation may be their only option. If a manufacturer like DJI has recognised that changes to the firmware of their products will remove some (not all) of the more opportunistic breaches of safety, then showing willingness to work with the authorities has to be commended. And this on a global scale, with all the complications that a world wide market entails.
There will always be an element that will fly illegally, but I believe the measures that DJI have employed will reduce the incidences of such breaches. I would go further; it can't be impossible to track an individual drone through its serial number to identify severe breaches and supply such data to the regulators if asked in pursuit of major infringements. A drone's firmware can be hacked, but who is doing this? The majority will be making such changes to bypass the inbuilt safeguards made to stop illegal use of the drone.
It can be argued that the serial number won't identify the operator at a given time, but it will put off a lot of people that would otherwise be tempted to fly illegally but for their actions being recorded and identified.

You would seriously be okay with a Communist Chinese company tracking your every move and reporting it the the US government? Seriously? Giving up your freedom now because you're afraid of some future regulation seems kinda weak. It makes me wonder why I served and why so many have died for our freedom...

Oh and it's already been said but you can't use the word "illegal" to describe operating a drone outside of FAA "guidelines". Guidelines... So DJI is restricting our flights because of the suggestions of a group of guys in Washington? That doesn't bother any of you?

 

[kyle76joslin]

It's pretty simple..kinda like the military. You know what to expect...so it's up to the individual to make the decision. Join or not join...buy and fly or not. As for recording flights and info...I'm assuming its like a security camera...ya don't really look at the footage unless something happened. As for downloading or the fear of personal information being assimilated from your phone while its hooked up to the controller, go the stand alone rout. I just hooked up a CrystalSky monitor. My USAA mobile app and any other info is no where near in danger.
Side note, being military myself...if you have any sort of clearance...your being tracked none the less. Just sayen.