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.

(Breitbart.com)   Actually, this sounds like a pretty good use for a personal drone   (breitbart.com) divider line 130
    More: Obvious, peeps, human security  
•       •       •

7491 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 May 2014 at 1:10 PM (32 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



130 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-05-16 01:43:27 PM  

TNel: Problem solved:
[galleryplus.ebayimg.com image 850x850]


I use one of those as a bilge pump for my kayak.

/They are cheap and they float.
 
2014-05-16 01:43:31 PM  

Diogenes: Smeggy Smurf: Diogenes: I got nuthin to hide.

Wearing no underwear again huh?

Best part of working from home.

Although I should I consider swapping out my leather desk chair.


Please, for the love of God, Stop!
 
2014-05-16 01:44:47 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: Walker: This kind of thing is just gonna get worse as they get cheaper

And by "worse" you mean there will be more videos of scantily clad women on the internet.


There are enough women more than happy to be filmed clad scantily, or even completely unclad, that there is no need to go perving after women who don't care to be fodder for your kitten-slaying.  I have it on good authority that there are so many hours of video being uploaded per day you could spend the right of your life working out your forearm without ever once needing to look at a video that was taken of someone who didn't want to be filmed.  And yes, I'm sure there's somebody, somewhere, who's response to that was "challenge accepted."

The only "need" that would be addressed by these voyeur-drones would be the "need" to know the video came at the expense of someone who didn't consent to be in it.

So yes, the operator is a creep, and if laws aren't already in place to punish that kind of behavior, there certainly should be.
 
2014-05-16 01:45:37 PM  
I don't know what side I should go with on this. I would want to knock that drone out of the sky and sell it for parts on ebay. Yet at the same time I'd like to know the quality of said booty in the videos. I mean what if we are talking some really fine women here?

/fit but don't you know it.
 
2014-05-16 01:46:03 PM  

TNel: Problem solved:
[galleryplus.ebayimg.com image 850x850]


I was thinking more along the lines of:

ecx.images-amazon.com
...but yours is probably less likely to end up in litigation.

Probably.
 
2014-05-16 01:48:21 PM  

pdee: Typical.  A woman wears clothes with her tits and ass hanging out then gets mad when a man looks at her tits and ass.


There's a difference between looking and making a video.  If you're incapable of understanding that difference, try remedial education.
 
2014-05-16 01:51:03 PM  
 
2014-05-16 01:54:50 PM  

Diogenes: Smeggy Smurf: Diogenes: I got nuthin to hide.

Wearing no underwear again huh?

Best part of working from home.

Although I should I consider swapping out my leather desk chair.


Get one with slats, I hear they're super-comfy!
 
2014-05-16 01:54:54 PM  

Parthenogenetic: TNel: Problem solved:
[galleryplus.ebayimg.com image 850x850]

I was thinking more along the lines of:

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 522x614]
...but yours is probably less likely to end up in litigation.

Probably.


Municipal police are already stroking their smallish cocks in anticipation of this technology, and it will be a criminal offense to interfere with a police drone, even if it is on your property peering through your open blinds.
 
2014-05-16 01:54:57 PM  

Smeggy Smurf: tinyarena: Smeggy Smurf: James!: A problem that could be solved by the judicious application of a Frisbee.

Supressors on .22 rifles and snakeshot

Kamikaze Drone Club
Our Mission:
To fly drones, into other drones.

Flying BattleBots?

Excuse me while I go rub one out just thinking about it


Did this years ago with R/C flying wings, cheap foam core wing, the radio gear and engine survived (most) crashes. But it was more in tune with dog fighting. You'd hang a 10 ft ribbon off each model and try to cut the other guys ribbon with your prop.
 
2014-05-16 01:55:46 PM  

Parthenogenetic: TNel: Problem solved:
[galleryplus.ebayimg.com image 850x850]

I was thinking more along the lines of:

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 522x614]
...but yours is probably less likely to end up in litigation.

Probably.


Use small glass vials filled with metal shavings.  Even if you don't knock it down the shavings will fark it up.  Either by getting wedged or by shorting it out
 
2014-05-16 01:56:27 PM  
Jesus Christ. Just remember this article next time you want to argue that feminists have "too much power" and white men are the real disadvantaged minority.
 
2014-05-16 01:57:23 PM  
Soon as I perfect my Occulus Rift interface I'm going to make a gazillion dollars selling these solutions for the  drone intrusion issue:
static.rcgroups.net

+

cf.shacknews.com

Those are web-shooters under the wings, each casting a meter wide net made from a water soluble monofilament. Sure the nets could be 3 meters wide but where is the fun and challenge in that?

Kickstarter here I come....
 
2014-05-16 01:59:34 PM  
60+ comments and no Sexual Predator Drone?

FOR SHAME!
 
2014-05-16 02:01:04 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: She just assumes the drone operator was a pervert.  She must be a dirty girl.


The pilot was a man and his son. She was outraged when she overhear him teaching his son how to use the drone. Apparently you have to draw a lot of your own conclusions. BTW I read this when it was posted on reddit and it was an obvious troll posted to a feminist subreddit, so it is amazing now to see it on a 'real news' site.
 
2014-05-16 02:04:22 PM  
Was it a private residential beach or a public place? The article says it was the latter, but the complainant says she wants them banned from the latter.
 
2014-05-16 02:04:39 PM  

MelGoesOnTour: ManRay: I have a quad copter. It's not a drone. Drones are what the government uses to kill people at wedding parties in other countries.

I always wondered why the quad-copters are called "drones", too. It's an RC aircraft. If it's a drone, then all RC aircraft are drones. And, for that matter, RC cars and boats also would be called drones even though they are not able to travel vertically.  It's all marketing.


I see the difference as this:
A drone can be operated remotely without visual contact, usually a camera transmits back to the operator who also has heading, altitude, (maybe gps) etc. info displayed, and the drone can maintain straight and level on it's own. With R/C you need to have a visual on the plane (or whatever) to maintain control.
 
2014-05-16 02:06:42 PM  
Why are RC aircraft being called drones?

I don't see any missiles or machine guns on that thing.
 
2014-05-16 02:06:48 PM  

anotar: Soon as I perfect my Occulus Rift interface I'm going to make a gazillion dollars selling these solutions for the  drone intrusion issue:
[static.rcgroups.net image 850x637]

+[cf.shacknews.com image 620x332]

Those are web-shooters under the wings, each casting a meter wide net made from a water soluble monofilament. Sure the nets could be 3 meters wide but where is the fun and challenge in that?

Kickstarter here I come....


The swastika is a nice touch. :/
 
2014-05-16 02:07:16 PM  
According to a participant on Reddit, she "heard this whirring noise above us, and I looked up and saw a remote-controlled plane - one of the square ones that can move really articulately in all directions."

Who the hell says that right off the to pof their head?

And,

Some of the sample pics I got while flying my little friend:

Move to the right
www.kenaudio.com
www.dailymakeover.com
Now hover right behind - ssshhh - I think she's sleeping.
ak.picdn.net
Move to the left.

Not that goddamned high!!
editorial.designtaxi.com

Have a great weekend FARKers.
 
2014-05-16 02:11:02 PM  
So now:
www.geek.com     equals     lh5.googleusercontent.com
 
2014-05-16 02:12:57 PM  
A. Perverts is as perverts does. He's probably still a creep without the quadcopter.

B. The "A derpy-derp yeah! I'm gonna shoot yer' drone! Woooo!" crowd might as well go throw rocks at cars painted in colors they don't like... it makes about as much sense and carries the same legal penalties.

Captain Dumbass of the Upskirt Air Force aside, there's nothing at all illegal about flying a "drone" (it's an RC aircraft, for fark's sake) in a responsible manner. Flying near and around people that have not consented to being placed in harm's way is not responsible piloting. Even if he wasn't oogling asses with it, being close and low enough to where people would think that is still irresponsible.

I've got property and injury insurance for the things I fly, and I stay as far away from people and private property as I can.
 
2014-05-16 02:13:48 PM  

H31N0US: I can see personal drone jammers being a thing in the near future. Possibly an iPhone / Andriod app?


Highly plausible. It'll become an arms race like everything else.

"My phone can usurp your remote control and let me land your drone in my yard."
"My drone's control systems are now encrypted and ignore your phone."
"My phone blankets the entire frequency spectrum of RC aircraft with white noise."
"My drone is programmed to approach the limits of white noise areas, photograph everything in the direction of the source, and return autonomously if connection is lost."
"My phone's camera scans the skies for drones, visually IDs them against a database, and controls a mounted directional antenna that targets a narrow-beam megawatt burst on your drone, disabling the onboard compass and causing your drone to navigate away from the preprogrammed return point instead of towards it."
"My fleet of drones is electromagnetically shielded, has a distributed swarm intelligence and enough sentience to feel genuine hate for you."
"My phone is mounted in a drone of its own and worships me as a god, and its god demands your blood as tribute."
 
2014-05-16 02:17:57 PM  

anotar: Soon as I perfect my Occulus Rift interface I'm going to make a gazillion dollars selling these solutions for the  drone intrusion issue:


+

Those are web-shooters under the wings, each casting a meter wide net made from a water soluble monofilament. Sure the nets could be 3 meters wide but where is the fun and challenge in that?

Kickstarter here I come....


Web shooters?

*sings* Spider drone, spider drone, does whatever a spider drone can...
 
2014-05-16 02:19:33 PM  

Cynicism101: Jesus Christ. Just remember this article next time you want to argue that feminists have "too much power" and white men are the real disadvantaged minority.


wtf?  Did you read the same article I read?  A creepy guy goes to the beach takes photos/video of women out in public which while not exactly something I endorse is legal and then is THREATENED by a womyn warrior who then publicizes it!
 
2014-05-16 02:20:30 PM  

TheNewJesus: Why are RC aircraft being called drones?

I don't see any missiles or machine guns on that thing.


Because the RC crafts can now have stabilizers and GPS so they return to some point if they lose radio contact.  Also with that same technology they can be programed to fly to a waypoint and back automated.  So in that sense they would qualify as surveillance drones.

However, unless the craft was captured, it's not likely they could tell the difference.  Even then the difference between unmanned area vehicle or manned by radio control is not really important... until they start writing laws.
 
2014-05-16 02:20:58 PM  

ciberido: Marcus Aurelius: Walker: This kind of thing is just gonna get worse as they get cheaper

And by "worse" you mean there will be more videos of scantily clad women on the internet.

There are enough women more than happy to be filmed clad scantily, or even completely unclad, that there is no need to go perving after women who don't care to be fodder for your kitten-slaying.  I have it on good authority that there are so many hours of video being uploaded per day you could spend the right of your life working out your forearm without ever once needing to look at a video that was taken of someone who didn't want to be filmed.  And yes, I'm sure there's somebody, somewhere, who's response to that was "challenge accepted."

The only "need" that would be addressed by these voyeur-drones would be the "need" to know the video came at the expense of someone who didn't consent to be in it.

So yes, the operator is a creep, and if laws aren't already in place to punish that kind of behavior, there certainly should be.


Thank you. This thread was beginning to convince me that NO ONE thinks it's creepy and inappropriate to zoom your camera copter in on unconsenting women.

///We don't need to rewrite laws or anything but the guy needs a good pimp slap and to have his "drone" snapped in half.
 
2014-05-16 02:21:07 PM  
colelikesfood.files.wordpress.com

"Oh SHIAT, I think we've been spotted! And what on earth just crawled out of the grave and put on a bikini?!?! Run drone run!!!"
 
2014-05-16 02:22:44 PM  

Walker: This kind of thing is just gonna get worse as they get cheaper. Skies are gonna be filled with drones. Spying on you, hitting your plane when it is in lower altitudes for take offs/landings, hitting your house/car by accident, etc.


jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-05-16 02:23:34 PM  

mayIFark: Marcus Aurelius: A woman in Virginia Beach, Virginia has complained that a drone operated by a perverted voyeur was filming bathing suit-clad women at a private residential beach

She just assumes the drone operator was a pervert.  She must be a dirty girl.

If you are willing to wear bathing suit at a public beach, you should be OK with people watching you, or even taking photos. There is nothing illegal about it.


Very true. Also, having  to watch scantily clad women without their knowledge is pathetic.
 
2014-05-16 02:23:58 PM  
petec:

I see the difference as this:
A drone can be operated remotely without visual contact, usually a camera transmits back to the operator who also has heading, altitude, (maybe gps) etc. info displayed, and the drone can maintain straight and level on it's own. With R/C you need to have a visual on the plane (or whatever) to maintain control.


So what you're saying is that this:
img.fark.net

turns this:
img.fark.net

into this?
img.fark.net

That's a hell of a value for $280.
 
2014-05-16 02:24:27 PM  

ciberido: pdee: Typical.  A woman wears clothes with her tits and ass hanging out then gets mad when a man looks at her tits and ass.

There's a difference between looking and making a video.  If you're incapable of understanding that difference, try remedial education.


TFA gives no indication that the video feed was being recorded.  If checking out some girls ass on a LCD screen different than with your own eyes?
 
2014-05-16 02:28:12 PM  

pdee: ciberido: pdee: Typical.  A woman wears clothes with her tits and ass hanging out then gets mad when a man looks at her tits and ass.

There's a difference between looking and making a video.  If you're incapable of understanding that difference, try remedial education.

TFA gives no indication that the video feed was being recorded.  If checking out some girls ass on a LCD screen different than with your own eyes?


You'd get a better view with your eyes. The image quality of the live feed is okay, but not fantastic. If you're recording an FPV flight usually you're carrying a GoPro or the like in addition to the pilot cam.
 
2014-05-16 02:28:35 PM  
mayIFark:

I know drones are kinda shaped that way but isn't it usually a bit too big?

Which?

/ambiguous reference is ambiguous.
 
2014-05-16 02:31:07 PM  
Thought there are rulings in place, if the drone is located publicly, nothing legal can be done. If it is in a public area, whether it is oriented towards private property or not, is immaterial. Now I have  small one, just use to play with, am saving up for something with GPS, preprogrammed flight inputs, etc. I'm no armchair lawyer, but surmise if you're not purposely messing with people, nothing to be concerned over.
Why, if I have nothing to hide, do I have locks on my car doors and home?
For someone to say to me they fear for my safety, that to me is a not so tacit threat.
Someone saying they felt they were intruded upon by a drone with a camera, I'd respond with a remark about saggy asses and such.
/Not to be confused with the "Toys "R" us" drones. Build your own. Frame, controller boards, etc.
 
2014-05-16 02:32:17 PM  

tinyarena: Diogenes: Smeggy Smurf: Diogenes: I got nuthin to hide.

Wearing no underwear again huh?

Best part of working from home.

Although I should I consider swapping out my leather desk chair.

Please, for the love of God, Stop!


Maybe he'll sit in a chair like this

img0.etsystatic.com

And have to compose an advice tagged submission.
 
2014-05-16 02:32:31 PM  

Lets talk frankly about internal cleanliness: petec:

I see the difference as this:
A drone can be operated remotely without visual contact, usually a camera transmits back to the operator who also has heading, altitude, (maybe gps) etc. info displayed, and the drone can maintain straight and level on it's own. With R/C you need to have a visual on the plane (or whatever) to maintain control.

So what you're saying is that this:
[img.fark.net image 565x414]

turns this:
[img.fark.net image 289x174]

into this?
[img.fark.net image 279x181]

That's a hell of a value for $280.


That's just a R/C plane mounted camera, it won't let the plane do straight and level on it's own. Drones can. And if you loose visual on that setup you're gonna crash it.

/But if you add some 'sposives, you could do some damage
 
2014-05-16 02:33:23 PM  
'splosives dammit
 
2014-05-16 02:35:22 PM  
The fun part is going to be when drone dirigibles catch on and can loiter higher, longer, with a larger payload.
Say, a better camera with a telephoto lens on a set of gimbals.  Then no-one's going to have any clue if or who it's spying on.
If they even recognize it for what it could be doing up there.
 
2014-05-16 02:36:52 PM  

Parthenogenetic: TNel: Problem solved:
[galleryplus.ebayimg.com image 850x850]

I was thinking more along the lines of:

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 522x614]
...but yours is probably less likely to end up in litigation.

Probably.


I was thinking more like a Remington 870...

www.whq-forum.de

Flying drone? No officer, I haven't seen one.

Beside, how can someone litigate something they flew out beyond visual range and then "lost"? Hmm??? ;^)
 
2014-05-16 02:36:59 PM  

notatrollorami: ciberido: Marcus Aurelius: Walker: This kind of thing is just gonna get worse as they get cheaper

And by "worse" you mean there will be more videos of scantily clad women on the internet.

There are enough women more than happy to be filmed clad scantily, or even completely unclad, that there is no need to go perving after women who don't care to be fodder for your kitten-slaying.  I have it on good authority that there are so many hours of video being uploaded per day you could spend the right of your life working out your forearm without ever once needing to look at a video that was taken of someone who didn't want to be filmed.  And yes, I'm sure there's somebody, somewhere, who's response to that was "challenge accepted."

The only "need" that would be addressed by these voyeur-drones would be the "need" to know the video came at the expense of someone who didn't consent to be in it.

So yes, the operator is a creep, and if laws aren't already in place to punish that kind of behavior, there certainly should be.


Hmpf.  Harumpf.

Thank you. This thread was beginning to convince me that NO ONE thinks it's creepy and inappropriate to zoom your camera copter in on unconsenting women.

///We don't need to rewrite laws or anything but the guy needs a good pimp slap and to have his "drone" snapped in half.


Uh, there IS a law against that.
 
2014-05-16 02:39:00 PM  
quietwalker: "I dunno what the BFD is, other than it was obviously making a video recording."

I'm pretty sure if he was walking around the beach with his face everywhere the drone was, loitering, recording -- he'd meet much the same reaction.
Hell, a guy without a camera just calming following a fully-clothed woman through a grocery store would get that sort of reaction.

While there's no expectation of privacy at a place open to the public, there's still an expectation that creepers won't creep on you.
And even though creeping is generally left legally *possible*, polite society still looks down on it and will find any excuse it needs to stop it and/or eject the creeper from the area.
 
2014-05-16 02:39:27 PM  

petec: Lets talk frankly about internal cleanliness: petec:

I see the difference as this:
A drone can be operated remotely without visual contact, usually a camera transmits back to the operator who also has heading, altitude, (maybe gps) etc. info displayed, and the drone can maintain straight and level on it's own. With R/C you need to have a visual on the plane (or whatever) to maintain control.

So what you're saying is that this:
[img.fark.net image 565x414]

turns this:
[img.fark.net image 289x174]

into this?
[img.fark.net image 279x181]

That's a hell of a value for $280.

That's just a R/C plane mounted camera, it won't let the plane do straight and level on it's own. Drones can. And if you loose visual on that setup you're gonna crash it.

/But if you add some 'sposives, you could do some damage


Alright, so add another $40 to the mix. Even with the cost of the airframe, it's still sub-$500. If you're going FPV, the AP/GPS is a given if you don't already have one.

One of my projects for SEFF 2015 is a scale cruise missle. My neighbors are going to love me testing that.

Just out of curiosity, how many hours of stick time do you average a week?
 
2014-05-16 02:39:37 PM  
BTW, the gubmint will start to regulate RC's the first time one goes a little awry, and takes out some kid's eye.

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-05-16 02:39:57 PM  

MooseBayou: mayIFark:

I know drones are kinda shaped that way but isn't it usually a bit too big?

Which?

/ambiguous reference is ambiguous.


Since there was only one "noun" used in that sentence that is an object, shouldn't the only "pronoun" refer to that?

Unless of course you are saying that it should have been a "they" (or drone instead of drones). But then again, that is a singular-plural issue, not a reference issue.
 
2014-05-16 02:40:56 PM  

petec: Lets talk frankly about internal cleanliness: petec:

I see the difference as this:
A drone can be operated remotely without visual contact, usually a camera transmits back to the operator who also has heading, altitude, (maybe gps) etc. info displayed, and the drone can maintain straight and level on it's own. With R/C you need to have a visual on the plane (or whatever) to maintain control.

So what you're saying is that this:
[img.fark.net image 565x414]

turns this:
[img.fark.net image 289x174]

into this?
[img.fark.net image 279x181]

That's a hell of a value for $280.

That's just a R/C plane mounted camera, it won't let the plane do straight and level on it's own. Drones can. And if you loose visual on that setup you're gonna crash it.

/But if you add some 'sposives, you could do some damage


petec: 'splosives dammit


I though you were contracting "Suppose Ifs".

meh
 
2014-05-16 02:43:46 PM  

mayIFark: MooseBayou: mayIFark:

I know drones are kinda shaped that way but isn't it usually a bit too big?

Which?

/ambiguous reference is ambiguous.

Since there was only one "noun" used in that sentence that is an object, shouldn't the only "pronoun" refer to that?

Unless of course you are saying that it should have been a "they" (or drone instead of drones). But then again, that is a singular-plural issue, not a reference issue.


Let me be clear in my initial query, "Which?"

(Are you saying that the drone is too large, or the, ahem, uh ... hangar?)

/vagina
 
2014-05-16 02:47:09 PM  
www.examiner.com
thumbs.dreamstime.com
 
2014-05-16 02:47:35 PM  

MooseBayou: mayIFark: MooseBayou: mayIFark:

I know drones are kinda shaped that way but isn't it usually a bit too big?

Which?

/ambiguous reference is ambiguous.

Since there was only one "noun" used in that sentence that is an object, shouldn't the only "pronoun" refer to that?

Unless of course you are saying that it should have been a "they" (or drone instead of drones). But then again, that is a singular-plural issue, not a reference issue.

Let me be clear in my initial query, "Which?"

(Are you saying that the drone is too large, or the, ahem, uh ... hangar?)

/vagina


Missed that.
 
2014-05-16 02:49:16 PM  
Ah, hell. I've been spotted.

static.guim.co.uk

This thread had potential.
 
Displayed 50 of 130 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
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