2debate

 

Over 1 million consumer drones…

have been registered in the US alone with 100,000 new registrations each month and it is without question that commercial drones also have fully arrived. The applications are vast: From communities racing with their remote controlled drones while wearing 3D glasses projecting the cockput view from the aircraft to personal assistants gathering items or assessing crowds.

FPV racing is a bit special because it usually requires a defined territory to race in but drones operated by consumers may pose a security risk. They may crash into crowds, may be used by terrorists or may get in the way of emergency helpers like the drone a journalist used to cover the rescue mission surrounding the soccer team that was trapped in a cave in Thailand earlier this year.

All of these effects call for a ban of consumer drones while we still can, says Sebastian. After all, they’re only toys anyway and a nuisance when blocking the view or disturbing wildlife.

Dirk’s position is more permissive. He believes that we should limit what drones are allowed to do but that a ban is too extreme and not called for. Aren’t there already no-fly zones and smart drones that avoid crowds?

Listen how the argument played out in the end. Are drones useless toys that can be used by terrorists or rather the future of personal technology? Should we ban or not? Some pointers to things we mentioned during the episode:

• A drone that has no moving parts and flies without making a sound
• ISIS drones drop grenades on US troups
• Venezuela President Maduro survives ‘drone assassination attempt’
• About the movie “Eye in the sky”
• A playlist on ted.com with 15 videos “Will drones save or destroy us?”
• Video from re:publica 2016: “Flying Computers”

Thank you for listening to this debate. We promised in our last newsletter drones and cannabis and now made true on one half of it. Let us know what you thought, vote and to all our US listeners: Happy Thanksgiving!

Sebastian & Dirk

Picture: CC0, Pixabay