

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Exhibitors instead flaunted their products like toys. Visitors demoed UAS in air, ground, and water spaces within the exhibit hall, which extended the length of a couple of football fields. There were onscreen displays, where attendees could fly virtual drones using a video game controller. Upstairs there were presentations on how UAS might be used to fight forest fires or quickly transport organs to hospitals on a moment's notice.
The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), which organized this week's event and is the industry's main lobbying group, has done a good job of sanitizing the business they're in. There was no talk of drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, and Afghanistan or of Customs Border Patrol, Homeland Security and the FBI using drones at home. There were no booths dedicated to the public's interest, as a way of addressing the legal framework for the growing industry. The only government agency present was the FAA, who's jurisdiction is restricted to regulating air traffic - they're not concerned with secrecy, privacy, and whether or not domestic law enforcement agencies, for example, can militarize their drones.
"Privacy is the reason that so many states have short-term bans. I call this dealing with the wackjobs." -Daryl Jenkins
The three-day show ignored this already existing drone industry, which specializes in death. There was little said about the Pentagon's 7,000 aerial drones, which collectively have killed, and the numbers are shaky because of secrecy, around 3,000 people without due process. Many activists, including Code Pink, which protested outside the convention Tuesday, are worried about this precedent -- the lack of regulation surrounding the use of drones abroad could be a harbinger of their use at home.
43 states have introduced 115 bills and resolutions to regulate drone usage at home, with ten of those bills being passed in eight states. Mead Treadwell, Alaska's Lieutenant Governor, became a lone voice at the convention when he questioned the industry's opposition to regulation.
"One of the unique and new characteristics of UAV technology is its capability for persistence," he said Tuesday, "and with persistence you can . . . collect lots of information...you need a warrant."
Executives and company analysts are assuring the public that the industry will regulate itself. The potential for abuse, they say, is paranoia and ought not to be taken seriously.
"One of the biggest problems of going to commercialization is privacy, mostly due to our own government's actions," said Daryl Jenkins, a former George Washington University professor who authored a widely cited study on the economic impacts of the rising UAS industry. "Privacy is the reason that so many states have short-term bans. I call this dealing with the wackjobs. If you're around me, you'll hear me use terms like fruitcake and wackjobs and that's what I learned in my PhD programs."
Jenkins estimates that the UAS industry will add some 100,000 jobs and generate $82.1 billion by 2025. Jenkins, an airline and aviation company consultant, notably has some $200 million dollars of his own that he looks forward to pouring into the nascent industry. The possibilities for generating revenue are endless and exciting, he says.
"Will companies give UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, another term for UAS) away for free in exchange for data?" he suggested to the audience.
The only barriers are the states' proposed laws, he said, adding that businesses should be able to regulate themselves.
We'll "put together an ethical code or standard that everyone subscribes to," he said. "We can handle it ourselves."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

Exhibitors instead flaunted their products like toys. Visitors demoed UAS in air, ground, and water spaces within the exhibit hall, which extended the length of a couple of football fields. There were onscreen displays, where attendees could fly virtual drones using a video game controller. Upstairs there were presentations on how UAS might be used to fight forest fires or quickly transport organs to hospitals on a moment's notice.
The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), which organized this week's event and is the industry's main lobbying group, has done a good job of sanitizing the business they're in. There was no talk of drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, and Afghanistan or of Customs Border Patrol, Homeland Security and the FBI using drones at home. There were no booths dedicated to the public's interest, as a way of addressing the legal framework for the growing industry. The only government agency present was the FAA, who's jurisdiction is restricted to regulating air traffic - they're not concerned with secrecy, privacy, and whether or not domestic law enforcement agencies, for example, can militarize their drones.
"Privacy is the reason that so many states have short-term bans. I call this dealing with the wackjobs." -Daryl Jenkins
The three-day show ignored this already existing drone industry, which specializes in death. There was little said about the Pentagon's 7,000 aerial drones, which collectively have killed, and the numbers are shaky because of secrecy, around 3,000 people without due process. Many activists, including Code Pink, which protested outside the convention Tuesday, are worried about this precedent -- the lack of regulation surrounding the use of drones abroad could be a harbinger of their use at home.
43 states have introduced 115 bills and resolutions to regulate drone usage at home, with ten of those bills being passed in eight states. Mead Treadwell, Alaska's Lieutenant Governor, became a lone voice at the convention when he questioned the industry's opposition to regulation.
"One of the unique and new characteristics of UAV technology is its capability for persistence," he said Tuesday, "and with persistence you can . . . collect lots of information...you need a warrant."
Executives and company analysts are assuring the public that the industry will regulate itself. The potential for abuse, they say, is paranoia and ought not to be taken seriously.
"One of the biggest problems of going to commercialization is privacy, mostly due to our own government's actions," said Daryl Jenkins, a former George Washington University professor who authored a widely cited study on the economic impacts of the rising UAS industry. "Privacy is the reason that so many states have short-term bans. I call this dealing with the wackjobs. If you're around me, you'll hear me use terms like fruitcake and wackjobs and that's what I learned in my PhD programs."
Jenkins estimates that the UAS industry will add some 100,000 jobs and generate $82.1 billion by 2025. Jenkins, an airline and aviation company consultant, notably has some $200 million dollars of his own that he looks forward to pouring into the nascent industry. The possibilities for generating revenue are endless and exciting, he says.
"Will companies give UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, another term for UAS) away for free in exchange for data?" he suggested to the audience.
The only barriers are the states' proposed laws, he said, adding that businesses should be able to regulate themselves.
We'll "put together an ethical code or standard that everyone subscribes to," he said. "We can handle it ourselves."

Exhibitors instead flaunted their products like toys. Visitors demoed UAS in air, ground, and water spaces within the exhibit hall, which extended the length of a couple of football fields. There were onscreen displays, where attendees could fly virtual drones using a video game controller. Upstairs there were presentations on how UAS might be used to fight forest fires or quickly transport organs to hospitals on a moment's notice.
The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), which organized this week's event and is the industry's main lobbying group, has done a good job of sanitizing the business they're in. There was no talk of drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, and Afghanistan or of Customs Border Patrol, Homeland Security and the FBI using drones at home. There were no booths dedicated to the public's interest, as a way of addressing the legal framework for the growing industry. The only government agency present was the FAA, who's jurisdiction is restricted to regulating air traffic - they're not concerned with secrecy, privacy, and whether or not domestic law enforcement agencies, for example, can militarize their drones.
"Privacy is the reason that so many states have short-term bans. I call this dealing with the wackjobs." -Daryl Jenkins
The three-day show ignored this already existing drone industry, which specializes in death. There was little said about the Pentagon's 7,000 aerial drones, which collectively have killed, and the numbers are shaky because of secrecy, around 3,000 people without due process. Many activists, including Code Pink, which protested outside the convention Tuesday, are worried about this precedent -- the lack of regulation surrounding the use of drones abroad could be a harbinger of their use at home.
43 states have introduced 115 bills and resolutions to regulate drone usage at home, with ten of those bills being passed in eight states. Mead Treadwell, Alaska's Lieutenant Governor, became a lone voice at the convention when he questioned the industry's opposition to regulation.
"One of the unique and new characteristics of UAV technology is its capability for persistence," he said Tuesday, "and with persistence you can . . . collect lots of information...you need a warrant."
Executives and company analysts are assuring the public that the industry will regulate itself. The potential for abuse, they say, is paranoia and ought not to be taken seriously.
"One of the biggest problems of going to commercialization is privacy, mostly due to our own government's actions," said Daryl Jenkins, a former George Washington University professor who authored a widely cited study on the economic impacts of the rising UAS industry. "Privacy is the reason that so many states have short-term bans. I call this dealing with the wackjobs. If you're around me, you'll hear me use terms like fruitcake and wackjobs and that's what I learned in my PhD programs."
Jenkins estimates that the UAS industry will add some 100,000 jobs and generate $82.1 billion by 2025. Jenkins, an airline and aviation company consultant, notably has some $200 million dollars of his own that he looks forward to pouring into the nascent industry. The possibilities for generating revenue are endless and exciting, he says.
"Will companies give UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, another term for UAS) away for free in exchange for data?" he suggested to the audience.
The only barriers are the states' proposed laws, he said, adding that businesses should be able to regulate themselves.
We'll "put together an ethical code or standard that everyone subscribes to," he said. "We can handle it ourselves."