If the standards don’t make it impossible for the average person to make a legitimately recognized drone for personal use.
Let’s face it, these things are sensor deployment systems. The only purpose they serve is to gather information. We have other things like this, such as gasp! The Internet. Which is currently (somewhat) free and (relatively) open. I want to be able to make my own drone and do what I want to with it, within a set of reasonably attainable, clear and easily understandable rules. That way, if some authority wants to claim their drones picked up something, then my personal drones should have picked it up too, and they are open and fully auditable. Are the authorities drones going to be open and autditable, or will we run into the same problem as the guy who demanded the breathalyzer source code be analyzed so that he could reasonably argue his DWI case?
Of course, company that makes the devices claimed all sorts of “trade secrets” bullshit when this guy’s future and freedom is on the line. The judge granted the code review and gasp! bugs were found. Many bugs. It seems their trade secrets are a bunch of random guessing and rounding to determine BAC. Basically, in a number of samples, there would be an overwhelmingly large number of those samples that would be rounded UPWARDS to .05, making the person over the legal limit even though they weren’t.
I hate closed sensors and I would never allow one to decide the fate of my freedom. :tup: