What's the FCC's statutory authority for this? This adds mobile LIDAR units to the FCC's "Covered List". The CFR entry for the Covered List [1] claims this is under the Secure and Trusted Communications Act of 2019, [2] or the FCC's authority to regulate RF emitters. RF is generally considered to end at 3 terahertz, per the ITU.
Whether the FCC has jurisdiction over non-communication uses of lasers is not at all clear. Lasers are usually regulated in the US by the Food and Drug Administration.<p>Expect lawsuits.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-1/subpart-DD/section-1.50000" rel="nofollow">https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-A...</a><p>[2] <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-116publ124/pdf/PLAW-116publ124.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-116publ124/pdf/PLAW...</a>
Stop manipulating our markets under the guize of national security or protecting Americans. If we need to be protected from bad behavior we need to be protected by all bad behavior regardless of it's origin.
Has back doors? Ban it. Has awful security around sensitive data? Ban it. Makes technology available to the masses that is a national security risk? Ban it(if you most). Why give US companies a pass on this? It's because the US government wants in on using the products with bad behavior while still trying to stop other governments the same power.
It's not even about security.<p>Likely just a maneuver for a bribe. Like TikTok and so on...
The idea is to provide protection for incubating a local industry in what's deemed a key strategic sector. But that's not the best way to do it. See what the Jones Act did to US shipbuilding.<p>We should make foreign companies manufacture here, just like China did. It also works as a jobs program and builds up and industrial base and skill, as we've seen with the Japanese automotive sector.
Unfortunately, they're half in the bag of running the country like a business. People, the rich ones, the ones who manage this site and who buy things like twitter, CBS, CNN, etc etc, want this.<p>This isn't anything more than grift for grift sake.
American consumers are stuck with crappier and much more expensive tech. Thanks Mr President! I'm sure that's what your voters were asking for!
What about Lidar-equipped (and why not, even cameras) foreign cars that scan every one of the country's roads and everything around them? Cars are increasingly packing this kind of tech and telemetry.
Volvo EX90 has a lovely lil bump above the windshield collecting LIDAR stats for some future purpose … Volvo … Li … Geely … PRC … feeling sleepy … can’t stay focused … everything is fine.
i think its mostly to do with reach .. road only telemtry is much narrower in scope compared to a drones reach and also purpose built for mapping buildings, topography etc
There's a quality to the number, ubiquity, and unassuming nature of cars. They're everywhere all the time, and reach places where a drone would be at least highly suspicious.<p>This ban makes sense if they suspect the enemy is covertly scanning using unsuspecting users' drones. But if they suspect foreign actors are using the drones to scan, well they won't be stopped or slowed down by the ban. Whoever is interested in targeted mapping of buildings and specific areas won't be put off by Lidar drones not being commercially available. Independently Lidars and drones still are, and combining the two for malicious purposes is a no-brainer.
Related:<p><i>National Security Determination Threat Posed by Foreign-Produced Robotic Devices [pdf]</i><p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49095714">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49095714</a>
Aaaaand this "ban" will be just as incompetently executed as the ban that happened like, what, a couple weeks ago about drones? Literally all the manufacturers did was create some shell companies, change the branding a bit, and boom. So much for banning things, amiright? Not to mention the shear amount of customer confusion because now they have to figure out what differentiates all these new brands nobody has ever heard of.
> Conversely, the notice also details the billions that domestic drone makers like Skydio, which has committed $3.5 billion to US manufacturing, have raised since the original ban<p>I'm so fucking tired of Adam Bry's fucking bullshit. Show me the consumer drone I can buy from Skydio.
How’s a Lidar is a national risk?! (It’s easy to build a lidar based drones in a weekend project) Also, knowing plenty of US based drone manufacturers, most of their stuff are dependent on Chinese parts, the radio communication is on top of that list. If I were DJI, I would make Lidar and similar components modular, so they can still sell these drones while consumers can buy these modules later or DIY it, like literally most of the drones, which will be great for other consumers in the world for the easy repairability.
I don't think it's LiDAR itself that is the risk. The FCC note read more like the cause is trade and supply-chain protectionism. (<a href="https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/robots-nsd.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/robots-nsd.pdf</a>)
The obvious concern would be China building high-res maps of every inch of US cities.
Steel manning this argument:<p><pre><code> Electronic warfare resistant loitering munitions. They would transmit sparse point clouds to the enemy for training.
</code></pre>
Not saying I support it.
How is this worse than 4k video, in this age of analytical abundance? The steel content of this argument is pretty low; it's essentially 'technology operates normally = national security risk.'<p>Why not ban pencils? You can draw maps or schematics of secret things, plus they can be used to stab people!
4k video is worthless compared to LiDAR. You are never going to get sub millisecond dead reckoning from video processing. Previously this required things like extremely expensive, export controlled ring laser gyroscopes (they do not drift and cannot be easily interfered with or jammed like the cheap IMU in your phone)<p>There are many more reasons LiDAR kicks ass but none of them have anything to do with why they are doing this.
<a href="https://m.youtube.com/shorts/U1MigIJXJx8" rel="nofollow">https://m.youtube.com/shorts/U1MigIJXJx8</a>
> Electronic warfare resistant loitering munitions<p>Most fpv drones don’t even have GNSS, they fly on acro mode or manual one, so that won’t prevent a “loitering munition”. Now for gnss denied autonomous navigation, Lidar isn’t the corner stone part, for indoor ones other sensors do well if not better like stereo cams, outdoor, you don’t need Lidar that much, but also you can use image based navigation, where it compares prestored images to land marks to navigate accurately. That being said, it’s not like Lidars are completely banned, you can buy one, 2d or 3d lidar, and equip it on your drone that you built, you don’t need dji to have it ready for you, so that ban won’t really mitigate any risk assuming there is one.<p>> They would transmit sparse point clouds to the enemy for training<p>Restricted facilities already restrict any kind of drone, other locations you can access these info without the need to transmit any point clouds data anyway.
> How’s a Lidar is a national risk?!<p>The anti-flock community believes it's because they can destroy image sensors from a distance. And banning the foreign ones means they can order domestic-made drones to have firmware that prevents them from operating in certain ways or in certain (government) areas, among other things.<p>The finance community thinks they just don't want competition that might rival or sell better than domestic ones, similar to the ban on Chinese EVs.<p>The privacy community thinks they only want surveillance to be possible from within, likening it to previous bans on DJI drones and Chinese routers. And the administration is currently working on trying to ban other kinds of networking gear as well as cellular modems from China (which is basically every phone in the country).<p>Would love to hear other theories. Perspectives are fun.
I am sure if the US gov asks DJI to do those things they will be happy to comply. They are just here to make money.
> And banning the foreign ones means they can order domestic-made drones to have firmware that prevents them from operating in certain (government) areas, among other things.<p>Yeah because DJI drones are well known for their easy to hack firmware and lacking support for no fly zones..right? And they would openly flaunt any US law making any drones sold or flown the US to obey the NFZs? But wait, that's exactly what DJI drones used to do even without a law on the books, before FCC banned them.
FCC's move is fair .. an adjacent view to this is best summed up by Palmer Lucky in this interview (<a href="https://www.hoover.org/research/palmer-luckey-wants-america-win" rel="nofollow">https://www.hoover.org/research/palmer-luckey-wants-america-...</a>?) ...<p>“Imagine if there had been a novel … like a Tom Clancy novel” where, during the Cold War, the Pentagon’s most secure electronics would be made by the Soviet Union under Kremlin supervision ..<p>Imagine running an aerial LiDAR/SLAM over gov sites .. mil bases .. ports .. airports .. power plants ... eeven if the system is completely benign .. ur talking about a technology whose output can be an extremely detailed representation of the physical environmen.
Even if one accepts this argument as valid, an outright ban on an entire technology is the <i>most</i> freedom restricting, invasive, economically disruptive remedy possible. There are more targeted remedies which can be equally effective for national security purposes but, coincidentally, those remedies aren't as protectionist.
Palmer Luckey owns a drone company. He can't have an objective opinion on his competitors being banned.
> the Pentagon’s most secure electronics would be made by the Soviet Union under Kremlin supervision<p>What electronics here are among the Pentagon's most secure? Why would the Pentagon have to buy LIDAR from a Chinese company?<p>Will we ban every import of something the Pentagon might buy?<p>> Imagine running an aerial LiDAR/SLAM over gov sites<p>> a technology whose output can be an extremely detailed representation of the physical environmen.<p>How do you evision those things happening? How are either of those things prevented by this ban?
This move has nothing to do with national security. It, like everything else this administration has done, is protectionism where some groups that have bribed Trump or have his halfwit children as beneficiaries get to move into the vacuum left by vastly superior options being banned from the market.<p>> best summed up by Palmer Lucky<p>Oh gosh, by the guy with the drone company? Surely 100% sincere, honest commentary! No way it's self-serving nonsense.<p>> Imagine running an aerial LiDAR/SLAM over gov sites .. mil bases .. ports .. airports .. power plants ... eeven if the system is completely benign .. ur talking about a technology whose output can be an extremely detailed representation of the physical environmen.<p>For most of this they could find any number of commercial providers with extremely precise maps. I mean, you understand that satellites are doing this now, right? I'm sure Palmer just forgot to mention that. China's last gen satellites we know create a 3D map within 10cm accuracy, and they're probably better now.
Another move to remove competition for Don Jr.?
That, or to avoid surrendering yet another technology relevant to the future to China. As if them manufacturing the bulk of world's solar panels, wind turbines and heading for EVs isn't bad enough.
Maybe if half of the US government wasn't trying to discourage solar power, wind power, and EVs there might be more interest in making them domestically.
US companies don't even sell consumer drones, so are they going to stay competitive by forcing consumers to buy $4000 enterprise models for their kids to play with?
Hobbyist drones also don't ship with lidar in stock.<p>The concern isn't China dominating the area of $20 toys. The concern is platforms relevant to industry and military.<p>Whether that, in turn, can be disentangled from "the area of $20 toys" in case of drones is unclear to me.
> Hobbyist drones also don't ship with lidar in stock.<p>Is Neo a $20 toy? LIDARs are getting cheap quick, at some point when ToF sensors add $10 to BoM they will be in all drones.. I guess except US only SKUs? Not like you can't get pretty much the same data using just a single camera, GPS+IMU fusion and structure-from-motion..
That is false. DJI Air 3S, Mini 5 Pro, Mavic 4 Pro, and even the Neo 2 are consumer drones that ship with forward-facing LiDAR for obstacle avoidance.<p>FCC proposal doesn’t distinguish that safety sensor from mapping-grade or military LiDAR - it covers any drone that “contains or integrates” LiDAR.<p>If Air and Mini ain't hobbyist grade idk what is.
China has been leading in drones since a very long time. It’s not something they took from the US
If we cared enough to be effective, we would be subsidizing / encouraging local manufacture of all of those at a competitive, non-luxury price.
The US is a tiny part of the world, however self-absorbed and exceptional it imagines itself. And everyone else is going to continue buying the best options while the US drives it lifted rolls-coal pickups and tells about the olden days.
That isn't stopping them from developing LIDAR in any way<p>Moreover they also have 2 market leaders in that techs
I mean, the rest of the world still exists and is generally happy to buy reasonably priced Chinese tech. American isolationists get rather carried away by geography to the point of assuming the rest of world is in a state of cinematic collapse with a few super enemies stalking the ruins. Trump's comments the other day suggesting he's capable of destroying the Swiss economy overnight demonstrate a sort of socioeconomic myopia predicated on the idea that the US is the only consumer market that matters.
Stopping US import of any of these technologies doesn't suddenly make them disappear. They still exist. You can't "ignore them and they'll go away", this is real life.<p>And as an American citizen I am always hearing how bad it is for China to have a leg up on us in X, Y or Z, and yet our government is the one that is regularly saber rattling (and starting wars over!) the shifting economic realities of the US clearly being an empire in decline.<p>These days we also regularly saber rattle our own "allies" for fuck's sake.<p>Long past time to ask yourself if maybe we're the baddies.
That seems to be the whole point of USA these days
[dead]
We're quickly reaching the point where Lidar isn't needed, pure vision workflows are getting much better.
No, it very much depends on the application, what you're trying to do. Different tools for different jobs. Don't conflate.
Well, Elon thought that too and we still haven't seen any robotaxi
The current version of FSD drives better than most humans. You literally put in the destination address, press Start Self Drive, and it gets to your destination without you ever touching the steering wheel, and parks for you in the end. IMO it's ready for large scale robotaxi deployment. I only take steering wheel if I want to take a different route or park in a different place vs where Tesla decides to park.
Hearing its definitely going to happen <i>by the end of the year</i>
Since last month they are operational in multiple states now.<p><a href="https://preview.redd.it/475jdxno8xfh1.jpg?width=2252&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=02a1d0d588b9d54f44d117ec2c1dcc2400b566f1" rel="nofollow">https://preview.redd.it/475jdxno8xfh1.jpg?width=2252&format=...</a>
yeah, who could ever need accurate and immediate depth perception, having to carry a 4090 in my roomba to badly reconstruct it from 4 pictures so it can stop bumping into walls is like the future man
LiDAR in drones is not necessarily the "stereo vision" application you are thinking of, it can also be something as simple as a LiDAR altimeter.