
Weird, Birdlike Mystery Drone Crashes in Pakistan - ColinWright
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/08/weird-birdlike-mystery-drone-crashes-in-pakistan/
======
patio11
Here's a potentially scary thought for you: in ~2000, this would have been
proof positive of state involvement. In 2011, this is barely newsworthy. In
2021, this will be about as within the reach of the average middle class
teenager as a three ounce device capable of instantaneous worldwide encrypted
communication.

This is not going to be a happy adjustment for people who have to maintain
physical security of e.g. a base in Iraq or a community center in a small town
in Iowa outside which the president is speaking. At the moment the man-
portable drones mostly carry cameras, but the US is proving _in spades_ that
cameras are really lethal if you do them correctly. The smart money is not on
"a camera will be the most lethal thing ever attached to a $100 electronic
device the size of a seagull."

~~~
DanielBMarkham
Several years ago I thought about writing a short story which included an
attack/assassination of an important political figure. The point was to do
some brainstorming about ways such an attack could be conducted.

After an hour or two, I decided never to write about this subject. The
exercise was very eye-opening.

The difference between a normal, naked person and a person armed with tech is
increasingly dramatically. I do not think this is a similar situation as we
had with machine guns -- you could just outlaw all of them. Nobody is going to
want to outlaw RC planes, or wearable cameras, or some sort of AI-augmented
robotics. And even if you could, vast numbers of people would simply break the
law. Disarming the population is not an option here.

But the trend that you describe is definitely unmistakable.

~~~
pavel_lishin
> Nobody is going to want to outlaw RC planes, or wearable cameras, or some
> sort of AI-augmented robotics.

Never underestimate the power of a well-funded PR campaign spreading FUD.
"Could HACKERS be targeting YOUR CHILDREN with ROBOT BIRDS? More at 11."

~~~
DanielBMarkham
No, thinking about it some more, you're correct.

And they'll do it just the same way they're doing the internet: a little
nibble at a time. It will be efforts to "Save children" "protect orphans"
"help the little guy" "control the evil corporations" and every other overused
FUD campaign that's worked so well in the past. They'll just re-purpose it --
and take tiny bites.

If they told us up front how much control they wanted, nobody would ever agree
to it. (This is a systemic problem and not related to some hypothetical
"they". I anthropomorphise and use hyperbole simply to express how frustrating
it all is. The really sad part is that "they" -- who will be different people
in different situations -- mean well and only want to help out. I think it
would be much easier on everybody if Darth Vader showed up. At least it would
be obvious what was going on. Reasoning about systemic problems is not for
those with cartoon ideas of good guys and bad guys.)

~~~
pavel_lishin
> "help the little guy" "control the evil corporations"

I think the current frame of thinking in America is exactly the opposite.

> I think it would be much easier on everybody if Darth Vader showed up.

I guess Cheney's more of an Emperor figure, though I don't know how many times
you can shoot someone in the face before people catch on.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
I would ask you to consider that the nature of this problem is folks picking
sides. Once you have picked your side, the restrictions in freedom your side
proposes seem okay -- or at least tolerable -- while the other side is always
draconian and worthy of disdain, protest, and rebellion.

That's what I mean by systemic. Everybody is ready to jump up and go fight for
truth and justice -- as long as what they are really doing is sticking it to
the other side. When it's their guys doing the same thing? Suddenly it's bad,
but not that bad. Hey, maybe it's bad, but they mean well.

I'll never forget after our current president got elected. A reporter went to
talk to some demonstrators outside the White House. These guys were very upset
about the killing of civilians, the police state, scanning records, and all of
that. But -- guess what? They were all packing up and going home.

The reporter asked "But aren't all these things continuing to happen?"

I'll never forget the guy. He said, "Yes, but we have a new president now, and
I think we should give him a chance."

Here's a guy screaming about killing babies one day. The next day, we're still
killing babies, but hey, gotta let the new guy get a feel for the job. No
fewer people got killed -- he was no closer to the goals he himself identified
-- but his protest wasn't worth it any more.

I can't say this enough: it's not one side or the other. Thinking in terms of
good guys and bad guys is a critical part of this problem: it's the engine
that allows the system itself to continue to ratchet down on freedoms. We have
met the enemy, and he is us. A systemic problem is a problem where everybody
is acting for a good cause, working as intelligently as they can, and yet the
outcome is still poor. Many times a facet or an exacerbator of these problems
is the creation of groups of people who blame other groups for being the
"real" cause of the problem. [Insert long discussion about evolutionary nature
of us-versus-them reasoning and clan formation]

------
lallysingh
A Modified Lockheed Desert Hawk, used by the British:
[http://defensetech.org/2011/08/29/mystery-drone-crash-in-
pak...](http://defensetech.org/2011/08/29/mystery-drone-crash-in-pakistan/)

~~~
blantonl
Definitely a Desert Hawk:

<http://www.lockheedmartin.com/products/DesertHawk/index.html>

------
yannis
It looks like a Festo bird see
<http://www.festo.com/cms/en_corp/11369_11439.htm#id_11439>

------
electrichead
Hm, I could've sworn I saw this thing in a TED talk recently. It was flying
around the room in their demo.

~~~
bradleyland
This is _not_ the Festo SmartBird from the TED talk. As noted in the article,
there are several design differences, as well as the severe restrictions on
weight when it comes to the flight mechanics of the SmartBird.

The SmartBird is a really great tech demo, but ornithopter style flight is not
practical in settings like those found in military operations. The extreme
weight restrictions, delicate mechanisms, complicated flight, and slow speed
make other traditional flight mechanisms far more practical. The small
propeller and ailerons are nearly invisible from the ground, and if kept light
weight, the sound of the propeller won't be heard over ground noise. There's
no reason to use a more complex design.

------
dfield
I, for one, welcome our new robotic over birds.

