Viking-Pilot Posted at 2017-12-14 07:55
Even if I believe that having some control regarding the drone flight is good for the hoby as we can minimize the hazard of reckless piloting, I still don't like the sense of being observed and not having privacy, it's very "Big Brother" like, and I don't know the scope of it...I just think that our privacy is being expossed a lot allready by everything we do in our dayly life, internet, social media, mobile apps, web stores etc.

Concur completely

Viking-Pilot Posted at 2017-12-14 09:58
Yes I agree with you, but what worries me is the usage of the information gathered and who is going to have access to it.

That is exactly the concern most should consider
No one ever seems to think of the unintended consequences of things like this
This is nothing like an aircraft using a coded transmission that the FAA picks up on radar and uses to ensure safety and deconfliction.
This data set leads to far more personal information that has no certainty of security and susceptible to hacking.  Paranoid maybe...cautious absolutely...
A) I'd feel much better about it if it were a secure anonymous code known only to the authorities (yes I know nothing seems to be completely secure anymore, but better chance than it resting on an individual level).  Even an aircraft buzzing a lake can have a complaint lodged against it that the authorities can track down and determine what and who was wrong if anyone, you can't text the pilot to say hey what the heck.
B) Best If it were completely voluntary i.e. you can fully turn it off and on AND when off there is zero transmission of data
C) I would very much prefer that these types of actions be preceded by some advanced info fully explaining this stuff before it is just sprung upon us
Those who sacrifice freedom for security will get neither and deserve none...

Genghis9 Posted at 2017-12-19 18:07
Concur completely

I'm glad I'm not the only one having these thought...;-)

Viking-Pilot Posted at 2017-12-20 00:33
I'm glad I'm not the only one having these thought...;-)

Nope you are not alone and I'm not the only one...
I stand amazed of how many who just don't seem to understand what is lost when they keep freely giving up bits and pieces of their life for so called security.  I admit it makes it hard at times too, as I'm all for increased safety and the prevention of idiots doing things they shouldn't but I don't believe these measures will really lead to that.

Genghis9 Posted at 2017-12-20 03:21
Nope you are not alone and I'm not the only one...
I stand amazed of how many who just don't seem to understand what is lost when they keep freely giving up bits and pieces of their life for so called security.  I admit it makes it hard at times too, as I'm all for increased safety and the prevention of idiots doing things they shouldn't but I don't believe these measures will really lead to that.

Well thanks for share your opinion and supporting my concerns ;-)

I expect that DJI is aware that if they decide to start broadcasting sensitive information without our explicit permission through our drones that they are liable. At least here in the EU I think a few governmental privacy agencies will have a field day if DJI isn't complaint with the current law.

I do believe Aeroscope is more kind of proof of concept because in its current state it's broken by design for any official use. I don't have problems with being identified by authorities while flying. I do have problems being for instance impersonated as it is totally doable to do it. Let's assume I have authorization for flying in restricted zone. I am emitting beacon with some kind of ID and intent. Somebody else can easily listen to it and reproduce that same beacon basically impersonating my drone. Another idea is to "pollute" the area with fake beacons just with electronics, without anything actually being in the air and among those fake one, one real will be flying but hard to tell which one is fake and which one is real. I mean, we already do have ADS-B and MLAT and so on, so why to reinvent the wheel? And those ADS-B readings become legit only after the confirmation from the radar... so far better system than some naive listener in the public frequency range (which means you can legally emit whatever crap you want on that band fooling the poor Aeroscope).

Raploc Posted at 2017-12-20 04:43
I expect that DJI is aware that if they decide to start broadcasting sensitive information without our explicit permission through our drones that they are liable. At least here in the EU I think a few governmental privacy agencies will have a field day if DJI isn't complaint with the current law.

As it stands now only people broadcasting the information will be the pilot only if he chooses to. Data privacy is something we all hope we are been protected by, but it seems since we’ve had the PC we have all sold our souls to the Devil, and I don’t see an easy way back.

I'm at a 50 / 50 on this.
If someone else receives the info and then locks in on your control frequencies , they could cause an instant crash or cause harm to nearby people / properties and you would be blamed as the registered owner / user.
Other than that, I don't update anymore anyway, too many other glitches come down from bad code practices.
And I'm tired of debugging the stuff.

eYeSkYeYe Posted at 2017-12-20 04:48
I do believe Aeroscope is more kind of proof of concept because in its current state it's broken by design for any official use. I don't have problems with being identified by authorities while flying. I do have problems being for instance impersonated as it is totally doable to do it. Let's assume I have authorization for flying in restricted zone. I am emitting beacon with some kind of ID and intent. Somebody else can easily listen to it and reproduce that same beacon basically impersonating my drone. Another idea is to "pollute" the area with fake beacons just with electronics, without anything actually being in the air and among those fake one, one real will be flying but hard to tell which one is fake and which one is real. I mean, we already do have ADS-B and MLAT and so on, so why to reinvent the wheel? And those ADS-B readings become legit only after the confirmation from the radar... so far better system than some naive listener in the public frequency range (which means you can legally emit whatever crap you want on that band fooling the poor Aeroscope).

Very good point

Just wondering, is it AC or RC sending out information, If not the AC then it not worth much.
If other crafts is supposed to show up on the "Radar" in the App then it would be useful somehow, if not it makes no sense for me to have it all.
Also i think DJI really should specify how it works, is it still transmitting some information even if we "Opt Out" and not entering any information in the fields.

KedDK Posted at 2017-12-22 02:14
Just wondering, is it AC or RC sending out information, If not the AC then it not worth much.
If other crafts is supposed to show up on the "Radar" in the App then it would be useful somehow, if not it makes no sense for me to have it all.
Also i think DJI really should specify how it works, is it still transmitting some information even if we "Opt Out" and not entering any information in the fields.

Yeah I have a problem with the lack of information provided, it seems like we have to squeeze everything out of dji, it’s hard to really comment so we always end up with so much speculation.

Anyways Happy Christmas to you and yours and all the Danish people I’ve met here.

#Quick Reply Here#

Sir, I also am for it for many reasons as it may be able to do many things. I have read someones post link about it. As i see it the good and honest have none to worry about but the ones that do wrong do worry. Just as someone was flying drugs, phones etc into a prison hear in AZ. The found a carshed drone with drugs and are investagaitng on finding who.  Also safety as malfuntions do happen and if near a airport a atc can be warned and devert aircraft away from it until it is down. Yes DJI has very good software but when a malfuntion accures ?????

It’s a great feature IMO - for as long as you have the option to turn it off LOL

This is bad! Not good! It’s a hobby stupids! That’s all

Sorry to bring up an old thread but did this update get pulled? My spark and remote says everything is up to date. I have version .006 on the remote. I have no remote id tab in my go 4 app.