hitman007 Posted at 2017-9-15 07:15
Russia to the rescue!  I learned today about a Russian company that makes software that defeats all the DJI GO app restrictions. You can fly anywhere at any altitude and maximum speed.  Why does Russia have all the good hackers?

Yeeeaah...about that...that is a case of the cure being worse than the poison.  Sooooo, we can fix a dictatorial problem with a Chinese company by using hacking software from some Russian hackers, nope not so much in my book.  
First, I figured it was only a matter of time before someone hacked this, and so it is.  Next, it should tell DJI that there is no interest in this feature, although from there standpoint it is easy to deny.  However, to me whether you opt out of the feature or hack it out what is the difference, either way you would release DJI from any responsibility which has got to be their only driving factor.

Edit: I take that back, I am sure they are also concerned with flight safety too, both for those on the ground and in the air.

hitman007 Posted at 2017-9-15 07:15
Russia to the rescue!  I learned today about a Russian company that makes software that defeats all the DJI GO app restrictions. You can fly anywhere at any altitude and maximum speed.  Why does Russia have all the good hackers?

No no and nooooo.     I do not need to fly in a different way than the Danish rules prescribe. I just want to fly unobstructed with the item I've legally purchased without being smashed by the manufacturer's homemade flight rules. It's not me the Russian hackers get their "stolen" money from.  

Regards Leif.

Genghis9 Posted at 2017-9-15 08:09
Yes, I see what you mean about that...
...but you did say if you protest you can get their attention that is encouraging at least.
Agreed, leave all this info in there and inform all operators about these warning and danger areas.  However, permit the UAV owner to opt in or out of the control feature, that aspect should be purely optional IMHO not dictated.

'However, permit the UAV owner to opt in or out of the control feature, that aspect should be purely optional IMHO not dictated.'

I don't see the point. The GEO system was intended to protect us from idiots who fly in dangerous areas. Why give them the option to opt out of those areas, it defeats the original purpose.

Geebax Posted at 2017-9-15 15:00
'However, permit the UAV owner to opt in or out of the control feature, that aspect should be purely optional IMHO not dictated.'

I don't see the point. The GEO system was intended to protect us from idiots who fly in dangerous areas. Why give them the option to opt out of those areas, it defeats the original purpose.

Geebax,
My fine friend, I really can't explain it better than I have.  I've made my point clear.  This is an issue of individual responsibility and accountability, I am unwilling to abdicate that to a foreign corporation if given the choice otherwise (yes yes, I hear you, well then don't buy the darn thing, very true, however, DJI makes very good UAVs, the best, and I chose the best, I just don't want them to continue controlling my property after I own it).  
If you feel you need protecting OK fine, I wish you the best in relying on others, even ones in another country to protect you.  However, I believe in rugged individualism and in being responsible for protecting myself for which I believe I am immanently capable of doing.

Genghis9 Posted at 2017-9-15 15:19
Geebax,
My fine friend, I really can't explain it better than I have.  I've made my point clear.  This is an issue of individual responsibility and accountability, I am unwilling to abdicate that to a foreign corporation if given the choice otherwise (yes yes, I hear you, well then don't buy the darn thing, very true, however, DJI makes very good UAVs, the best, and I chose the best, I just don't want them to continue controlling my property after I own it).  
If you feel you need protecting OK fine, I wish you the best in relying on others, even ones in another country to protect you.  However, I believe in rugged individualism and in being responsible for protecting myself for which I believe I am immanently capable of doing.

It is not a case of protecting myself in any way, it is protecting us all as UAV owners from the hobby being legislated out of existence by idiots. And from what I recelll at the time, that was also DJI's motivation in implementing the GEO system.

Left to their own devices, the morons of this world can buy a Phantom and fly it anywhere they like, with the result that knee-jerk laws will be put in place that impact all of us. The problem is the only requirement at present to owning and flying a Phantom is money, and morons have plenty of money.

Geebax Posted at 2017-9-15 17:04
It is not a case of protecting myself in any way, it is protecting us all as UAV owners from the hobby being legislated out of existence by idiots. And from what I recelll at the time, that was also DJI's motivation in implementing the GEO system.

Left to their own devices, the morons of this world can buy a Phantom and fly it anywhere they like, with the result that knee-jerk laws will be put in place that impact all of us. The problem is the only requirement at present to owning and flying a Phantom is money, and morons have plenty of money.

OK...you say Tomato I say Toematoe...
I do not need to be protected from the morons, not by DJI.
We already have laws, rules, and regulations here, we just need to see that they are enforced by all including the morons.
We have representatives that we can petition to support our hobbies as any restrictions do not just apply to UAVs but all airborne hobbyists which number in the thousands if not hundreds of thousands.

I do agree, the size of one's bank account does not indicate one's level of intelligence or ability.

Error post.

Genghis9 Posted at 2017-9-15 08:09
Yes, I see what you mean about that...
...but you did say if you protest you can get their attention that is encouraging at least.
Agreed, leave all this info in there and inform all operators about these warning and danger areas.  However, permit the UAV owner to opt in or out of the control feature, that aspect should be purely optional IMHO not dictated.

It almost does not matter when the outcome is that the pilot hanging in the air has to answering trivial question rather than to care for his flight. Everything must of course be done while the drone is on the ground before the start and not after you are airborne.

No DJI, take care of fabrikate your drones and leave safe flight to the respective authorities and the pilot !!!

It is strange that DJI on its own, not can figure out to show the restricted/blocked areas on the card in DJIGO that the pilot has at his hand. But it does probably belong to Chinese logic and avoid this.  

Regards Leif.

Landbo Posted at 2017-9-15 20:27
It almost does not matter when the outcome is that the pilot hanging in the air has to answering trivial question rather than to care for his flight. Everything must of course be done while the drone is on the ground before the start and not after you are airborne.

No DJI, take care of fabrikate your drones and leave safe flight to the respective authorities and the pilot !!!

'It is strange that DJI on its own, not can figure out to show the restricted/blocked areas on the card in DJIGO that the pilot has at his hand. But it does probably belong to Chinese logic and to avoid this.  '

Not strange at all. To do this, the device on the RC unit would only be able to do this if the pilot had internet access to maps, or had cached them in advance. Many people, including myself, fly without maps.

The aircraft on the other hand, has the information on-board in the firmware.

Landbo Posted at 2017-9-15 20:27
It almost does not matter when the outcome is that the pilot hanging in the air has to answering trivial question rather than to care for his flight. Everything must of course be done while the drone is on the ground before the start and not after you are airborne.

No DJI, take care of fabrikate your drones and leave safe flight to the respective authorities and the pilot !!!

Leif,
I agree completely with your line of thinking

BTW, at the risk of sounding wrong, I always liked that name Leif...sounds Viking, and while those guys were some brutal folk I respect their way (not so much their religious beliefs) but certainly their warrior spirit!

Geebax Posted at 2017-9-15 20:35
'It is strange that DJI on its own, not can figure out to show the restricted/blocked areas on the card in DJIGO that the pilot has at his hand. But it does probably belong to Chinese logic and to avoid this.  '

Not strange at all. To do this, the device on the RC unit would only be able to do this if the pilot had internet access to maps, or had cached them in advance. Many people, including myself, fly without maps.

Because Mr. Geebax does not use the card, we are undoubtedly many who do to control the drone's position, even in relation to restrictions. Therefore, many misunderstandings could be avoided if you know where you are in relation to the outstanding world.

You can not use the DJI's GEO/NFZ system for anything because it's so full of errors. Even DJI tells you everywhere you need to search the information at the local authorities !!!

The world is a bit bigger than the small area Mr Geebax nose can throw shadow over.   

Regards Leif.

Landbo Posted at 2017-9-15 22:31
Because Mr. Geebax does not use the card, we are undoubtedly many who do to control the drone's position, even in relation to restrictions. Therefore, many misunderstandings could be avoided if you know where you are in relation to the outstanding world.

You can not use the DJI's GEO/NFZ system for anything because it's so full of errors. Even DJI tells you everywhere you need to search the information at the local authorities !!!

No need to get insulting. there are MANY flyers who do not use the map function, I am just one of them. In most of the areas I fly, there is no WiFi or Cell service, and in any event, it does not matter, as I can always see my aircraft with the naked eye.

Genghis9 Posted at 2017-9-15 20:38
Leif,
I agree completely with your line of thinking

Tnx.

Then look at the old Nordic gods, Thor, Odin and Loke. They are much more fighting in those people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor

Regards Leif.

Landbo Posted at 2017-9-15 22:31
Because Mr. Geebax does not use the card, we are undoubtedly many who do to control the drone's position, even in relation to restrictions. Therefore, many misunderstandings could be avoided if you know where you are in relation to the outstanding world.

You can not use the DJI's GEO/NFZ system for anything because it's so full of errors. Even DJI tells you everywhere you need to search the information at the local authorities !!!

"You can not use the DJI's GEO/NFZ system for anything because it's so full of errors."

I can 100% agree on this. As i have pointed out in other threads 90% of my flights are performed in a big area of a EWZ that only exist in DJI world while a lot of other areas that actually is a EWS does not show up in the DJI system,

Check tex. the route from Nyborg to Halskov, not that it make sense to me that a drone would be of much disturbance in comparison as the thousands of cars "flying" over each hour 24/7.

If anything at all, there should only be a warning if in or near any zone and this error has to be presented before takeoff not sometihng one should notice and get rid of while being airborne.

Geebax Posted at 2017-9-14 16:55
You missed one. DJI could ignore the court order altogether, as they are an incorporated Chinese company under private ownership, and need not abide by any US laws.

Yes that is true, but the USA can ban their products from being sold in the USA

Geebax Posted at 2017-9-15 22:36
No need to get insulting. there are MANY flyers who do not use the map function, I am just one of them. In most of the areas I fly, there is no WiFi or Cell service, and in any event, it does not matter, as I can always see my aircraft with the naked eye.

With the risk of insulting Mr. Geebax again I respect the Lord's inability to navigate for a map. What I do not understand is Mr. Geebax's reluctance that others who navigate well on maps should not be allowed to do that !!!

And it has nothing to do with flying beyond the VLOS.   

Regards Leif.

I feel the OP's pain, I'm restricted to 60m disrance where I am and just 200m a mile and half further away, I know my drone has no problems flying further than that.

I feel the geo Lock penalises  the honest people, the idiots will always find a way to fly dangerously. .

Landbo Posted at 2017-9-16 03:52
With the risk of insulting Mr. Geebax again I respect the Lord's inability to navigate for a map. What I do not understand is Mr. Geebax's reluctance that others who navigate well on maps should not be allowed to do that !!!

And it has nothing to do with flying beyond the VLOS.   

'With the risk of insulting Mr. Geebax again I respect the Lord's inability to navigate for a map. What I do not understand is Mr. Geebax's reluctance that others who navigate well on maps should not be allowed to do that !!!'

Sorry, it must be lost in translation, but I cannot understand a word of that. In particular, I have no idea what the religious referrence is about.

'And it has nothing to do with flying beyond the VLOS. '

It means that if I can see the aircraft, I do not need a map to know where it is.

Geebax Posted at 2017-9-16 14:57
'With the risk of insulting Mr. Geebax again I respect the Lord's inability to navigate for a map. What I do not understand is Mr. Geebax's reluctance that others who navigate well on maps should not be allowed to do that !!!'

Sorry, it must be lost in translation, but I cannot understand a word of that. In particular, I have no idea what the religious referrence is about.

Sorry, it must be lost in translation, but I cannot understand a word of that. In particular, I have no idea what the religious referrence is about.

Yes, there is an error in translation. Change the word "Lord's" to "Mr. Geebax".

It means that if I can see the aircraft, I do not need a map to know where it is.

And then it's a shame if Mr. Geebax is flying on a place where there are restrictions from the authorities without and discovering it. He would know it if the boundaries were marked on a predloaded map in DJIGO4.

And then is the discussion over from my side !!!

Regards Leif.

Landbo Posted at 2017-9-17 00:33
Sorry, it must be lost in translation, but I cannot understand a word of that. In particular, I have no idea what the religious referrence is about.

Yes, there is an error in translation. Change the word "Lord's" to "Mr. Geebax".

'Yes, there is an error in translation. Change the word "Lord's" to "Mr. Geebax".'

You really are a rude idiot, I will not take part in any further discussion with you.

Landbo Posted at 2017-9-15 10:12
No no and nooooo.     I do not need to fly in a different way than the Danish rules prescribe. I just want to fly unobstructed with the item I've legally purchased without being smashed by the manufacturer's homemade flight rules. It's not me the Russian hackers get their "stolen" money from.  

Regards Leif.

Exactly. With the Russian hack, it is now up to you to fly the way the Danish rules prescribe. Not DJI's interpretation of those Danish rules.  Its just you and you local authority as it should be. You break the law, you get arrested or fined. Thats what freedom is all about.  DJI has decided to take that freedom away from you by controlling how you and your drone fly.  No, No No,  DJI needs to stick to making drones, not rules.

Genghis9 Posted at 2017-9-15 08:15
Yeeeaah...about that...that is a case of the cure being worse than the poison.  Sooooo, we can fix a dictatorial problem with a Chinese company by using hacking software from some Russian hackers, nope not so much in my book.  
First, I figured it was only a matter of time before someone hacked this, and so it is.  Next, it should tell DJI that there is no interest in this feature, although from there standpoint it is easy to deny.  However, to me whether you opt out of the feature or hack it out what is the difference, either way you would release DJI from any responsibility which has got to be their only driving factor.

You have to remember as a Chinese company, the workers at DJI are very familiar with being told how to do things and what to think by their government. I am sure they do not even understand why anyone would push back on their software flight limitations. They live in a world where freedom of choice is a foreign concept.

hitman007 Posted at 2017-9-17 05:27
You have to remember as a Chinese company, the workers at DJI are very familiar with being told how to do things and what to think by their government. I am sure they do not even understand why anyone would push back on their software flight limitations. They live in a world where freedom of choice is a foreign concept.

Concur, but I'm unwilling to exchange one for the other with the Rooskies

Now this is strange ... I fly LITCHI and I can fly literally anywhere without trouble ... no NFZ shows on tablet.
I fly GO and the red NFZ covers my house but I can still fly.

My P3P is on 1.10.09 FW .... but before was on 1.11.20 and that was no different ...

Strange ....

Nigel

The problem here is that DJI believe that they can become / should be law enforcement, which they are not. What would happen -almost anywhere in the world - if a private company tried to use physical staff, dressed as police officers, to enforce what they *believed* to be local laws? In the real world imitating a police officer is itself an offence.

"Sorry Madam! I cannot permit you to walk your dog in this park as there is clearly a No Dogs sign at the gate."

Yes, a public park may ban dogs but vigilantes dressed as the police are frowned on even more)

I agree to this post.