Yet another potential for deep invasion of privacy has reared its ugly head, and I've decided it will make a great topic for my first attempt at a DK Diary.
Articles on ARSTechnica and the NY Times caught my eye yesterday (Feb. 22nd). It seems part of the reauthorization for FAA funding includes provisions which require the agency to allow more extensive use of UAV's better known as drones, within 90 days. An additional requirement calls for the agency to create rules which allow much more extensive use of drones by private parties.
So what, exactly, is a drone or UAV?
Perhaps the simplest way to think of a UAV is "It's a radio-controlled model aircraft on steroids."
UAV is an acronym for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. There are two basic types: The UCAV (Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle), which can carry various types of weapons, and the simple UAV for surveillance or scientific data gathering, which can be equipped with a variety of cameras or chemical and biological sensors.
UAVs can take a number of forms, limited only by the designer's resources and the laws of physics. The photo in the NYT article shows a design like a starfish, with a lifting motor at the end of each leg and a video camera in the middle, while the photo at ARSTechnica shows a more conventional airplane-like design.
The construction and use of such craft is not in any way limited to those with deep pockets. Simple UAV's can be easily and (relatively) cheaply built by anyone who's reasonably good with their hands and the appropriate tools, as illustrated by this site.
Smile! You're on Candid Camera!
I've worked in nearly every branch of electronics, from fixing Teletype machines to dealing with land/mobile (and amateur, or 'ham') radio, microcontrollers, and computer networks. If I've learned one thing about technology, as a whole, I can sum it up by saying it is a tool; a neutral tool, which can serve good or bad purposes at the drop of a hat. The wielder of the tool is ultimately responsible for how it is used.
Put more simply, let me say it as a corollary of Murphy's Law: "If any tool or technology can be abused, it will be abused."
Some examples: A drone equipped with an infrared camera can, with the right technology and under the right conditions, pick up the movements of bodies inside a home, or any other heat source. A drone equipped with a good directional microphone can easily pick up conversation from a couple of hundred feet in the air (one of the proposed rules for surveillance drones is they be limited to 400 feet or less of altitude).
And let's not forget technology will continue to advance. There already exist drones which are solar powered, giving them nearly unlimited flight time. I would also wager it won't be too many more years before we see airborne millimeter wave scanners.
Electrically-powered drones are nearly silent in operation; Would you even notice one hovering near your windows?
One extreme possibility, which I don't believe can be ignored, is of non-military law enforcement agencies being entrusted with armed drones, and allowed to fly such within the United States.
While such technology can indeed be abused, it also has many valuable uses: Search-and-rescue, disaster management (searching for survivors or trouble spots), agriculture, legitimate security (say, oil pipeline or utility surveillance), and following of criminal suspects without risky road pursuit, are just a few possibilities.
In summary, I don't see any way we can stop such technology from being developed, nor do I truly believe we should try anything so extreme. The best possible thing to do is talk about it, spread the word, and make your concerns known to your legislators and others in your respective communities. Learn about the technology involved with UAV's, and what your options are if you become the target of abuse by it.
It may sound like an overused cliche, but it's still true: 'Knowledge is power.'
Keep the peace(es).