Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(City Pages)   The Onion strikes again. Radio DJ posts photoshop of three drones over Obama's inauguration with "they're obviously scanning the crowd for potential trouble"   (blogs.citypages.com) divider line 18
    More: Dumbass, onions, obama, inauguration  
•       •       •

16568 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jan 2013 at 3:10 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-01-24 02:20:11 PM  
3 votes:
literallyunbelievable.org has become one of my favorite sites. It a regular feature in my daily breaktime surf now.
2013-01-24 04:41:31 PM  
2 votes:

Crotchrocket Slim: propasaurus: I like his fallback position when he's called on it: why wouldn't you have surveillance drones? It's an efficient use of the technology.

So, terrible, 1984 is here, evil drones when he thought Obama was doing it. Otherwise, why not use them.

Someone please explain to me how police using UAVs to monitor the skies is any scarier than having a police pilot up in a helicopter, monitoring the skies. Are we assuming that all UAVs must be armed? Why not the same assumption for police helicopters and other aircraft? Why is this particular technology so scary?

Answer: drone detractors don't know a thing about them that isn't put up on the internet without citation by some gravelly voiced asshole who has an internet radio show, and they think drones are some sort of Decepticon Terminators or something.


The difference is simple. MONEY. It costs a lot of money to use aerial surveillance to monitor individuals using planes and helicopters. This was the major deterrent in the abuse of such technology. So removing the cost barriers involved allows for much much more abuse and monitoring. They now can fly a drone almost 24/7 with very little cost and they can monitor entire cities with a single drone. They now want to use this tech to monitor Americans wholesale.

So you keep thinking this isn't any different than a pilot in a noisy helicopter costing thousands to stay in the air over a specific target vs. a drone flying 24/7 watching anything and everything. Yup no difference at all. No way that these things will be abused. Lets leave not even discuss WHY law enforcement thinks they need these etc etc
2013-01-24 03:49:05 PM  
2 votes:
I don't understand the freak out about drones. Can't you do everything with a normal plane that you can do with a drone?

I don't get this line of thinking:

Oh a plane/satellite can fly above me and photograph what I am doing? Oh ok. not a big deal.

WHAT AN UNMANNED PLANE CAN FLY ABOVE ME AND PHOTOGRAPH WHAT I AM DOING? NOW I AM OUTRAGED!!!

Why does it make any farking difference if someone is inside the plane or not? Is it because it's new technology so people are freaking out?


Same can be said with:

The military can launch a missile from miles away to kill people in buildings? Oh ok.

WHAT THE MILITARY CAN DROP A MISSILE FROM A UNMANNED PLANE TO KILL PEOPLE IN BUILDINGS!!! OMG the Constitution is now in shatters!!!!

What the fark is the difference is we blow people up using missiles from ships, missiles from manned airplanes or missiles from unmanned airplanes. It's the same farking thing.
2013-01-24 03:36:27 PM  
2 votes:
blogs.citypages.com

Methinks he doesn't understand the 1984 reference
2013-01-24 03:28:09 PM  
2 votes:
twitter and facebook have made everyone your crazy grandma who forwards chain emails.
2013-01-24 02:53:07 PM  
2 votes:

Cythraul: Why would a drone fly so low over its target as to be seen by the naked eye? Isn't their nominal operational altitude like, waaaay, waaaay high up?


There were a great deal of African-Americans present at the inauguration, and from a sufficiently high altitude they take on the appearance of shadows on the ground. So the drones have to come down a little lower than normal.
2013-01-24 07:56:10 PM  
1 votes:

Aigoo: Too fast on the button...

While several states currently only allow them to be used in the vicinity of military posts/bases (such as my own state of Oklahoma, which currently restricts the testing to the Elgin area), the fact that law enforcement agencies and large events (such as the aforementioned Superbowl) are already including them in their plans (even if they end up scrapping it due to cost) should be of some concern.

To get you started on educating yourself, I'll just leave these right here:

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/08/23/docs-law-enforcement- ag encies-plan-to-use-domestic-drones-for-surveillance

http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/domestic-drones

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Bay-Area-Law-Enforcement-Agenci es -Test-Drones-173415551.html

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/12/california-law-enforcemen t- move-to-buy-drones-draw-controversy/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/10/homeland-security-in cr easingly-loaning-drones-to-l/

http://www.pnj.com/viewart/20130116/NEWS02/301160033/Panel-votes-ban -s pying-drones

http://rt.com/usa/news/missouri-drone-surveillance-us-579/

https://www.eff.org/foia/faa-drone-authorizations

So, I'm sorry. About domestic drones only being permitted in airspace surrounding military installations... you were saying?


/over 5 million results on Google, covering several states' law enforcement agencies use of, or efforts to obtain drones for domestic surveillance.
//several of those entries cover states' legislation to ban the practice.
///happy reading!


Oh noes being observed in public where I don't have any expectation of privacy THIS IS AN OUTRAGE

You put more info out about yourself that is available to the NSA when you logged into Fark today than what hours of being tailed by a drone could ever produce.

Technologically ignorant people are goddamn insufferable. If you're going to piss yourself about the tools the government is using at least have a more realistic reason to piss yourself.
2013-01-24 05:53:14 PM  
1 votes:

fusillade762: vpb: I doubt it is possible to fly remotely operated drones in such a close formation.

A better question is why would you want to?



upload.wikimedia.org

Showboating. Why else?
2013-01-24 05:40:48 PM  
1 votes:
Too fast on the button...

While several states currently only allow them to be used in the vicinity of military posts/bases (such as my own state of Oklahoma, which currently restricts the testing to the Elgin area), the fact that law enforcement agencies and large events (such as the aforementioned Superbowl) are already including them in their plans (even if they end up scrapping it due to cost) should be of some concern.

To get you started on educating yourself, I'll just leave these right here:

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/08/23/docs-law-enforcement- ag encies-plan-to-use-domestic-drones-for-surveillance

http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/domestic-drones

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Bay-Area-Law-Enforcement-Agenci es -Test-Drones-173415551.html

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/12/california-law-enforcemen t- move-to-buy-drones-draw-controversy/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/10/homeland-security-in cr easingly-loaning-drones-to-l/

http://www.pnj.com/viewart/20130116/NEWS02/301160033/Panel-votes-ban -s pying-drones

http://rt.com/usa/news/missouri-drone-surveillance-us-579/

https://www.eff.org/foia/faa-drone-authorizations

So, I'm sorry. About domestic drones only being permitted in airspace surrounding military installations... you were saying?


/over 5 million results on Google, covering several states' law enforcement agencies use of, or efforts to obtain drones for domestic surveillance.
//several of those entries cover states' legislation to ban the practice.
///happy reading!
2013-01-24 04:27:40 PM  
1 votes:

spamky: [blogs.citypages.com image 628x484]

Methinks he doesn't understand the 1984 reference


I like how he tried to play the "It coulda been real, so I'm not wrong!!!!11!!" card towards the end.
2013-01-24 04:27:32 PM  
1 votes:

Corvus: I don't understand the freak out about drones. Can't you do everything with a normal plane that you can do with a drone?

I don't get this line of thinking:

Oh a plane/satellite can fly above me and photograph what I am doing? Oh ok. not a big deal.

WHAT AN UNMANNED PLANE CAN FLY ABOVE ME AND PHOTOGRAPH WHAT I AM DOING? NOW I AM OUTRAGED!!!

Why does it make any farking difference if someone is inside the plane or not? Is it because it's new technology so people are freaking out?


I feel the same way. It's just like a police helicopter, right? I think the real problem is that with a plane, helicopter, blimp, and what have you there is an amount of presence and cost involved. You hear the plane or helicopter, and it costs a lot of money to have this big thing flying around. But, if you have this little drone it sort of goes 'out of sight'. It's not intentionally being hidden, but it's harder to notice and some people think that is deliberate. With their small size, lower operating costs, and longer loiter times more governments (state, local) will have the resources to employ them and use them more.

In the end, it is just a technology. Technology isn't good or bad, it's how you use it that makes it so.
2013-01-24 04:20:00 PM  
1 votes:

propasaurus: I like his fallback position when he's called on it: why wouldn't you have surveillance drones? It's an efficient use of the technology.

So, terrible, 1984 is here, evil drones when he thought Obama was doing it. Otherwise, why not use them.


Someone please explain to me how police using UAVs to monitor the skies is any scarier than having a police pilot up in a helicopter, monitoring the skies. Are we assuming that all UAVs must be armed? Why not the same assumption for police helicopters and other aircraft? Why is this particular technology so scary?

Answer: drone detractors don't know a thing about them that isn't put up on the internet without citation by some gravelly voiced asshole who has an internet radio show, and they think drones are some sort of Decepticon Terminators or something.
2013-01-24 03:55:33 PM  
1 votes:
We're living Poe's Law.
2013-01-24 03:40:07 PM  
1 votes:

spamky: [blogs.citypages.com image 628x484]

Methinks he doesn't understand the 1984 reference


Methinks he doesn't know what 'fiction' is. Or 'books.'
2013-01-24 03:19:13 PM  
1 votes:

Cythraul: Why would a drone fly so low over its target as to be seen by the naked eye? Isn't their nominal operational altitude like, waaaay, waaaay high up?


Haha PN...

I think the joke was that they were doing a ceremonial flyover, like how some ball games are kicked off with a flyover of some local jets...
2013-01-24 03:17:50 PM  
1 votes:
Even if this was real. Is the Secret Service deploying a couple of drones to monitor an event the POTUS is attending really a big deal? I mean randomly buzzing them around the country is not cool, but you have an event with Obama, the Chief Justice, and a number of other notables, it's not exactly a big deal.

If it wasn't the drone it would likely be some agents in a borrowed UH-60 with binoculars and a camera pod on the helicopter. At least the drone costs us less in gas.

/if not a UH-60, whatever helicopter they can get their hands on
2013-01-24 03:04:59 PM  
1 votes:
I like his fallback position when he's called on it: why wouldn't you have surveillance drones? It's an efficient use of the technology.

So, terrible, 1984 is here, evil drones when he thought Obama was doing it. Otherwise, why not use them.
2013-01-24 02:59:10 PM  
1 votes:

unlikely: literallyunbelievable.org has become one of my favorite sites. It a regular feature in my daily breaktime surf now.


If YouTube and Freeper comments have taught me anything, there is no shortage of stupid in this country.
 
Displayed 18 of 18 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report