Are Tethers the Answer To the Safety Issues of Follow-Me Drone Technology? 88
Hallie Siegel (2973169) writes Camera-equipped follow-me drone technology is hitting the scene in spades, promising extreme sports enthusiasts and others amazing aerial shots. Imagine, your own dynamic tripod that follows you on command. But what about the safety issue of having follow-me drones crowding the ski slopes? The tethered Fotokite addresses these concerns while sidestepping FAA regulations.
Isn't this MORE dangerous? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, but the logic here escapes me. Aren't the danger of crossed-tethers exponentially greater than the danger of colliding drones?
Re:This and more (Score:2, Insightful)
It will mitigate legal trouble, as long as nothing happens. A tethered object isn't subject to the same rules as a free flying object. The pilot will still be liable for damaged caused, but not for breaking FAA rules. It's in the blurb, so mod this redundant.
Re:This and more (Score:4, Insightful)
Funny I think the same thing about people with cars and guns. Yet somehow as a species we're content with the massive injury and death rate from those activities but a petrified from the highly remote chance that we may get killed by a terrorist, attacked by a shark, or hit by a falling drone.
Re:This and more (Score:4, Insightful)
Ahhh you must be one of those, "He mentioned guns so he must thing it should all be illegal, I better rebuff" types.
No, couldn't be further from the truth, you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I was saying that compared to getting killed by falling drones the above list is far more dangerous to the general health of people, and THEY ARE ALL LEGAL.
So everyone needs to take a deep breath, get some perspective and realise that getting killed by a flying drone is about likely as a terrorist attack. You should worry more about driving to a ski slope than dying on it.