
Like a Swarm of Lethal Bugs: The Most Terrifying Drone Video Yet - PhearTheCeal
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/02/like-a-swarm-of-lethal-bugs-the-most-terrifying-drone-video-yet/273270/
======
karpathy
Just in case someone is wondering, we are not even remotely close to
technology like this. The control problem is very hard, but the perception
problem perhaps even harder, Especially when most of the processing needs to
be done onboard because you need the perception to be part of the control loop
and work at reasonably high frequencies. Higher-level perception tasks such as
identifying power lines or people are even further out.

~~~
IheartApplesDix
Actually, there is commercially available optical flow sensors available
today.

~~~
scoot
I laughed when I heard the reference to optical flow sensors, like somehow
strapping an optical mouse sensor (albeit with appropriate lens technology) to
the bottom of a drone somehow solves all the sensing and control problemthin
loved in bringing this technology to the mainstream.

An optical flow sensor has _very_ limited utility; it's possibly the least
useful of all the sensors you could add to a UAV. It's inclusion in this video
was purely marketing fluff for the technically illiterate, thanks to its
fancier-than-it-actually-is sounding nomenclature.

~~~
IheartApplesDix
Obviously, Optical flow sensors are a bit more complicated than mouse sensors,
(although similar). Optical flow is very similar to how insects judge their
relative location, and it's a critical component in existing advanced drone
technology, early in application, but almost a decade old in theory.

------
zeteo
These are about as practicable as developing lightsabers. They are:

1\. Difficult to build. It's proving incredibly hard to achieve any decent
range for electrical road vehicles. This multiplies manifold when trying to
cram components into a much smaller space and make the whole thing _fly_.

2\. Difficult to control. Gusts of wind, predatory birds, reliable bandwidth
etc.

3\. Trivially easy to defend against. Think mosquito nets, burqas and cheap
radio jammers.

~~~
GiraffeNecktie
1\. I believe that was addressed in the video. These are very short range
devices that can be recharged by solar energy or by sitting on power lines.

2\. See the video.

3\. You might be able to deny access to buildings with mosquito nets but
you're not going to stop close range surveillance, painting targets and other
uses. Mosquito nets themselves would be relatively trivial to dismantle with a
swarm of these (you'd only need to land one with explosives on the net).

~~~
zeteo
1\. The short range is a killer. You already need to know where the bad guys
are, within an area of a few blocks. And solar panels with such small form
factor are a joke in comparison with the energy demands of powered flight.
(Sure, there are solar powered drones, but they need huge wings, perfect
weather, and are little more than powered gliders.)

2\. I didn't see any good counter-arguments there. Care to detail.

3\. Explosions will alert the building's occupants, and you just sacrificed a
complex, expensive device for a $0.50 mosquito net.

------
arbuge
"When I watch that simulation I am horrified. I also think to myself, this
technology is more likely to diminish American security than to enhance it."

Quite so, but that's no argument for the US not working on it anyway. The
enemy will have it eventually no matter what. We might as well have it too.

~~~
blake8086
What is this "we" you speak of?

~~~
dchichkov
Civilized humanity? As in the opposite to fundamentalists?

~~~
CapitalistCartr
Yeah, not really. I'm a proud American citizen; I spent six years in the US
Air Force. But I have no illusions as to our military, and the uses to which
our Congress puts it, as representing "Civilized humanity, . . . the opposite
to fundamentalists".

We spend about as much money as the rest of the World put together on our
military, and have a force about equal to the rest of the World put together.
This allows us to live in a unique position in history. We can assume our
safety from the horrors most of humanity have experienced; we can go about our
daily lives without concern for dire, hellish possibilities. It allows us to
plan for, and save for, lesser emergencies only.

As a WASP male I am incredibly fortunate to live in the time and place I do.
But we aren't somehow superior to our enemies because of this stroke of luck.

~~~
dchichkov
We are making investments into science and technology. For example, technology
that protects biosphere on earth from complete extinction by an asteroid
strike. Countries with fundamental regimes, generally do not. Good enough?

------
DamnYuppie
I believe most right thinking people in this world are terrified of the
military power of the USA. Even I, being a US citizen, am starting to become
very concerned with our military weapons and their usage as they seem far more
likely to be turned on us then our enemies. Call me a nut job if you want but
we are all just a proclamation away from being "domestic terrorists".

~~~
obviouslygreen
Yes, our military (I'm also a US citizen) has a whole lot of things that do
bad, painful, often fatal things. They're scary for any number of reasons, one
of which is certainly the possibility of their use against us.

However, this is in no way limited to the US. Many, many governments --
possibly most -- have similarly awful and destructive, if not as
technologically advanced, ways to harm anyone and/or everyone in range.

It would make more sense to be afraid specifically of the US military if there
were no one else out there throwing around this kind of power. As people who
don't want to be shot at, blown up, or dissolved instantaneously by hordes of
angry electrosquitoes, singling out the US as the main subject of our
trepidation seems a bit arbitrary.

~~~
baseh
Instead of the current war/combative/investigative tasks that they have, I
hereby demand all the drones be re-commissioned and given the following tasks:

\- Keeping track of the forest cover and water resources

\- Geographical surveys to identify use & misuse of resources

\- Track and identify poachers and loggers

\- In cities, keep an eye on the air pollution and particulate levels

\- Identify factories emitting pollutants above the limits

\- Tracking inclement weather

\- Attend to humanitarian needs in disaster situations

------
pekk
You know what is terrifying? The deployment of any single military technology
ever developed against one's person.

~~~
nathan_long
Yes. Just think about a sword. "You designed this tool _specifically for
hacking people apart_!?"

------
sukuriant
This sounds quite wonderful --- for the open battlefield. I quite support the
use of anything humane that can reasonably improve our soldiers' intel on the
ground, as intelligence is everything in a war.

That said. I am terrified of the thought that this could be used against a
country's own denizens, be it by the police, or by the military actively
seeking out targets of their own. Furthermore, while this is being developed
by a country that is actually quite high on the freedom and anticorruption
graphs, what happens when either those countries become more of a
dictatorship; or, more likely to happen soon, countries that very clearly
violate human rights, or generally oppress their people get a hold of them?

It's sad that, when looking at a technology, you have to look at both, "Wow!
This is incredible! We'll lose fewer lives on the battlefield, and our
soldiers will come safe because we can avoid traps, etc!" as well as "...
someday, these are going to be acceptable to point at our own people, in the
interest of something that doesn't deserve such invasion of ... everything."
Countries are not God, and it's scary when they start trying to recklessly
wield such omniscience. I know I couldn't trust myself knowing all that these
drones could offer. I'm not sure I could trust many, if anyone, with such
knowledge.

~~~
pekk
I am really not sure why the inevitable conclusion is that the US will direct
every bad technology against its own citizens. Does it not occur to anyone
that they might be at least as likely to be attacked by non-governmental
groups?

~~~
jamieb
More US Citizens have been killed by the Federal Government than by any other
organized group. The military has been involved with strike breaking [1]. The
military was used to suppress the southern states from seceding from the
union. [2] Say what you want about the horrors of slavery, but the southern
states had the right to secede and were suppressed militarily. More recently,
the President has suspended the 4th amendment, and, quite relevant to this
article, authorized murder of US Citizens using drones.

These are facts. There's no leaping to conclusions here.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_union_busting_in_the...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_union_busting_in_the_United_States#Union_busting_with_military_force)
[2]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War#Causes_of_se...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War#Causes_of_secession)

~~~
jbattle
I'm not sure the civil war is a good argument. If they seceded lawfully, they
weren't citizens. If they weren't lawfully seceding, they were
traitors/insurrectionists. In arms no less.

More germane might be the experiments at Oak Ridge.

------
primitur
I personally, recreationally, have been building RC flying machines since the
70's, and have recently returned to the subject after a decade or so of
torpor, with renewed vigor only a pair of growing sons can provide. My teenage
young mind would asplode to know what my elderly hands are doing with the
micro-tech that is, Thank the (Moores) Law, currently available.

So .. my kids took one look at this video, groaned about the CG, then sat down
and started building their own versions out of some broken Amber2 parts we had
laying on the repair bench.

The Pentagon might have the deployment desire figured out, but we hobbyists
are already flying drones like this, hand-made, for peaceful and fun purposes.
If this ever changes, we're going to be in for a rough ride .. my kids know
how to recycle a DVD drive into working micro-planes that can carry camera
parts: are they going to grow up in a world where knowing how to do such
things without tacit approval will be illegal?

------
ccarter84
Someday we'll be fondly remembering with our leaders weren't all secluded deep
indoors, behind EMP fields, or stuck riding around in popemobiles.

~~~
pavel_lishin
And a decade after that our children will roll their eyes when we tell them
that we, their parents, used to walk around without wearing a Faraday suit,
external EMP generators, and RA/LIDAR early-alert systems built into our
goggles.

------
wtvanhest
_"Who knows? Sure, we have a technological advantage right now, but micro-
drones sure seem like a disruptive technology that will eventually help rather
than hinder attempts at asymmetric warfare."_

Does this quote remind anyone else of the innovator's dilemma?

------
pavel_lishin
With the sound off, it could almost be a Lexx trailer.

~~~
tunesmith
With the sound on, it sounds as if it is marketed for 14-year-olds. Are
military presentations actually like this? Makes me think we need more women
in those positions.

~~~
axusgrad
I was wondering if they took their font from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, or
if they both took it from the same place.

------
mistercow
Sure, but a lot of this is pure scifi at this point.

~~~
trylater
really? [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/02/flying-robots-
nano-...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/02/flying-robots-nano-
quadrotor-drones-swarm_n_1249442.html)

~~~
mistercow
Yes, we have small flying robots. But off the top of my head, here are a few
technologies mentioned in the video that we are not very close to:

1\. Small wing-flapping robots that can adjust to wind gusts

2\. Tiny, hybrid helicopter-birdplanes that magically don't spin when in
rotor-mode, despite apparently having no anti-torque mechanism whatsoever.
Also they look exactly like birds when perched and when flying.

3\. Device that can harvest enough waste energy from vibrating machinery for
_powered flight_ (this one might be straight-up impossible)

------
jcoder
It's a video game, folks. At best, it's psyops—what could be better than the
enemy truly believing that you are all-seeing, wasting their time paranoidly
looking around at pigeons and flies?

------
whiddershins
Have any of you ever heard a small flying machine in real life? They are very
noisy.

If you try to "surveil" me in my hallway like that, I WILL hear your tiny
wings flap, flap, flapping.

~~~
ckvamme
This is very true. Right now the only solution is to plant somewhere. But
props / wings will become quieter as the systems become more efficient (think
of a fan vs a DC motor prop).

------
abecedarius
Relevant novel by Stanislaw Lem: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Invincible>

------
gnosis
Direct link to the video: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0KbuE1z9_k>

------
Shorel
Related video:

[http://www.ted.com/talks/vijay_kumar_robots_that_fly_and_coo...](http://www.ted.com/talks/vijay_kumar_robots_that_fly_and_cooperate.html)

------
dev1n
Daniel Suarez's novel "Kill Decision" is a more riveting take on these drones.
I highly suggest it to anyone interested in drones portrayed in a sci - fi
plot.

------
pkamb
Does anyone remember _Space Station Silicon Valley_ on the N64?

<http://i.imgur.com/vxNjIQf.jpg>

