Hats off to California Governor Jerry Brown for vetoing a bill that was not necessary. The act of bing a peeping Tom is illegal already. There’s no need to include drones in the conversation, unless you add cameras, telescopes, remote control cars, smart phones.  Using a drone for such an activity is just plain dumb.

This is yet another situation where people’s paranoia and lack of education on an emerging technology makes much more of an issue than it really is. If someone wanted to spy or be a peeping Tom, a flying noisy weed-whacker with flashing lights and a GoPro which produces super-wide landscape images would not be the optimal choice for the job.  This article describes many far better ways one can spy without using a drone.

The problem is the public thinks drones are “all seeing.” If a drone is flying above 350 feet above someone’s roof they think the thing somehow has the technology to see through walls to the inside of their bedroom. If that technology existed wouldn’t peeping Toms already be using it on some other device?

There’s a naked lady in her bedroom in this photo below.  Can you see her?

Welcome to the Ambient Flight “Drones for Good” section.  Each week we will highlight a news item featuring drones doing something good, in an effort to counterbalance the negativity and paranoia drones are receiving in the press and in public opinion.

This article in the Duke Chronicle highlights the use of drones for marine lab studies in the recently opened Marine Conservation Ecology Unmanned Systems Facility.

“We’re interested in using these systems (drones) to go out and count animals, to study coastal habitats and obtain coastal imagery, to see how coastlines might be eroding, as well as for emergency response to maritime emergencies.” ~David Johnston – drone facility’s executive director and assistant professor of the practice of marine conservation ecology at The Nicholas School of the Environment.

The article (please read it) continues on saying the use of drones is much safer than the helicopters they used to use for the same research and that drones open up areas of research previously not accessible.  Additionally, “drones offer access to lower altitudes and tighter spaces and are particularly useful when studying endangered species, because loud planes or helicopters risk altering the animals’ behavior.”

This is great news and I can’t wait to see what findings and new information come as a result of this use of drones for good.

Here is an interesting article in Forbes regarding the FAA’s granting a commercial license to a paper airplane pilot, called a Section 333.  As ridiculous as this article is, I agree some kind of regulation is necessary for many operators of flying vehicles of all types, not just drones.

The technology is advancing so fast I can’t help but think that the FAA and any other federal agencies are and will continue to be 1-2 years behind. States are taking matters into their own hands and quite often putting into place laws which are completely outrageous and over-the-top, which will generally be ignored by drone pilots.

I’m looking into getting my own Section 333 license for commercial flying. I do plan to fly for money at some point, though so far I have yet to bill that first client.