A Drone Hijacking Device Will Take Over Illegal Drones Within Its Range

8 thoughts on “A Drone Hijacking Device Will Take Over Illegal Drones Within Its Range”

  1. The way you invoke legality in this article is more than just troubling in this new era dominated by xenophobia, racism and Big Oil extinctionists.
    The choice seems to be coming down to either behaving legality, or protecting basic human rights and continuation of the species. An easy choice to make.

    Why not stick with the technical and logistical aspects of counter-drone deployments and edit out the references to “legality” so you’re not mistaken for a neo-fascist?

    “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” – MLK

    1. And which part of article you feel, is troubling in this new era. I would be more than happy to edit that if you could provide a little more justified context behind your suggestions.

      1. There are so many examples and the issues are morally complex.

        One example: Let’s say one country invades an occupies another, then uses drones to assist or carry out military operations. Under international law, and to the occupied, all the drone operations are illegal. To the occupiers, however, a nationalistic reality bubble has been created, and the drones are legal.

        Another example: Let’s say a country elects a racist leader who vows to target and harass certain religious and ethnic groups. Drones are used by the police and militia in this operation. As he controls all levels of government, laws are changed or already exist that make this legal. However, it violates the Universal charter of human rights and is illegal according to international law, and perhaps triggers multiple court-cases challenging the interpretation of domestic laws.

        These examples are far from hypothetical. We are not in an age when “preventing illegal acts” is an morally-acceptable mindset. It is indeed the mindset of a neo-fascist. Remove all references to legal/illegal and that changes. This technical concept might play a role in effective civil disobedience.

        Read this quote again and really think about it. Look up some history if you don’t know what is being referred to.
        “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” – MLK

        1. Okay, I can see this from your point of view but, the issues you’re raising are way more complex and vague that I don’t think anybody would give a damn to drone hijacking device then. If the whole government becomes corrupt and performs operations that, in the eyes of the occupied, are illegal; I seriously don’t think that government will last an countable time.

          And to my article, It’s a consumer level product that we’re talking about. And the technical part makes the functionality of this device pretty clear. This technical detail, out in public, can give them the power to prevent those illegal acts of “higher powers” or anyone. But then again, it makes the whole device illegal in eyes of government, right?

          This is what I’m trying to say, you cannot only focus on one side. and I mentioned legal aspects in the article just to give readers a scope of this device, which you took too seriously.

          1. What are you trying to say in terms of countable time? The Apartheid government in South Africa lasted from 1948 to 1991. The contemporary examples are the same. The time is countable and often significant.

            I stand by my point. The two biggest military and surveillance powers the world has ever seen are united and controlled by openly racist, xenophobic individuals. Removing all references to legal/illegal would de-politicize the article, and make it more relevant to a time when civil disobedience has never been more important.

          2. Oh don’t worry about that part. The article is not even close to the political issues that you’re referring too. Also, even if the same thought about legalities crosses someone else’s mind by reading this article, it doesn’t mean that this article will harm society in any way.

            It’s more related to personal privacy and not politics. Anyway, thanks for pointing these facts. It sure gave a completely new POV to this article.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.