6 ms·
Amazon Can Now Test Its Delivery Drones in the U.S
- trose 11y agoHopefully Amazon develops some stealthier drones for this program. One commercial drone can sound like an angry swarm of bees on its own. Being anywhere near a distribution center could because maddening if they have hundreds of drones coming and going.
- uberdog 11y agoI'm interested in this as well and did some research on it and apparently most of the noise is generated by the ESCs (the components that control the speed of the rotors) and not the rotor blades themselves.
- startupfounder 11y agoI have mixed feelings about the rapid pace that technology is replacing human jobs. As a consumer I couldn't be happier about getting things delivered faster and higher quality experiences with sub 1 hour delivery. Across the board technology companies are replacing humans and consolidating services. My concern comes when I think about the accelerating rate that technology is replacing human jobs faster than humans can re-educate themselves to get new jobs. Education here is the missing link and if you look at our public education system it sucks, is leaving many poor and underserved people behind and creating a two class system. I look forward to reading the pros and cons of technology replacing jobs with the understanding that HN is a pro technology community.
- serge2k 11y agoWe shouldn't be impeding progress to save jobs. I believe an ultimate goal should be to reach the point where people don't need jobs.
- cm127 11y agoI agree, but how do you reach that point? Automating a steady income is a lot of work, and the goal is to just give it away? I don't see that happening anytime soon.
- widowlark 11y agoI have been having this debate with colleagues since I started taking Economics. We have not yet found a way to replace the current labor system without impeding the incentives that effect progress.
- hsuresh 11y agoAs much as i like technology adoption to go up, i am not sure if progress is really about replacing humans from jobs. I am not yet convinced that people don't need jobs. Besides, technology progress can happen much faster than change in governance, policies and culture.
- vijayr 11y agoI wonder the suffering that humanity has to go through before we reach a stage where we don't need jobs (assuming it is even possible to reach that stage). If we can replace human workers systematically, thoughtfully and steadily with the goal of freeing humans from work (at least most of it), that would be awesome. But I can't think of a single leader/country who is that forward thinking and smart. Every new technology (self driving cars for example) is going to very quickly replace humans, and nobody is going care about those displaced humans and that is going to be a big problem.
- jsprogrammer 11y agoYou could become that leader and/or petition your country to be that forward thinking and smart. It (displacement) does seem to be a huge risk and it's probably better to devise solutions now rather than after huge displacements have occurred.
- 11y ago
- merger 11y agoQuadcopter Drones are just not viable for delivery with current battery technology. Maximum lift is a couple of pounds for 15-20 minutes of flight. Wide use of overhead power lines in cities makes drone delivery unsafe in cities. Rural areas could make sense, lots of open space for landing, sparse population and long drives for drivers,straightforward navigation and obstacle avoidance. But that's not something Quadcopters would be good for, these long-distance hauls, some sort of drone plane would make more sense. I feel this is somewhat misguided, even a modern version of a pneumatic mail tube system would make more sense to me. There many other much better use cases for drones and Quadcopters in other industries. I'd expect self-driving cars to have more impact on delivery.
- rhino369 11y agoAre gasoline quadcopters viable?
- NickNameNick 11y agoDepends what you want to do, Gas engines are heavy, compared to electric motors and lithium batteries, so for modest endurance flights, electric works out better now, but for long endurance flights gas or diesel would be better. Curtis youngblood demo'd a nitromethane powered quad as seen here http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/curtis-youngblood-single-motor-internal-combustion-collective http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/curtis-youngblood-single... I can't imagine anyone would use a nitro powered platform for any commercial use, the fuel is too expensive and the motors require too much maintenance.
- jsprogrammer 11y agoI don't think we need autonomous machines flying around polluting (noise and chemical) spaces.
- trhway 11y ago>Quadcopter Drones are just not viable for delivery with current battery technology. AMZN can allow itself to implement infrastructure/process to use something like Al metal-air cells. Stick in, stick out, sent resulting Al oxide to re-processing. You'll get efficiency and range of at least gas engine without mess/maintenance. There are more advanced schemas available (like potassium based - more energy dense, easier for reprocessing), unfortunately most of the money is in Li based schemas which would make sense only if Li were to be the main by weight component, which isn't going to happen in any near future. >Wide use of overhead power lines in cities makes drone delivery unsafe in cities. that just control/sensor problem, pure tech and very solvable issue. >I feel this is somewhat misguided we need to utilize 3D en-mass, in particular for transportation. Whatever industry starts it doesn't really matter in big picture ... End result anyway will be an autonomous octocopter for commute :) (the autonomous cars Google develops will be great for trucks which will roam roads empty of people carrying cars)
- imaginenore 11y agoRobotization and automation will leave tens of millions of people in the US without jobs. There's just no way around it. This is happening as we speak. The next 30 years will be absolutely nuts. That's why some form of socialism will become inevitable. We will absolutely have to provide millions of people with food, shelter and basic medicine. Or face famine and revolts.
- guiambros 11y agoI think that sooner or later we'll end up with higher taxes, and basic income. Over the next 20-30 years we'll have fewer well paid employees making more money, and masses of people out of job market, depending on welfare and government support.
- Crito 11y agoUltimately better education isn't going to be good enough. 100 workers replaced by a robot won't all get 100 jobs fixing or making that robot. Buggy-whip factory workers may have found new jobs in car factories, but it would be a mistake to assume that is how things will always play out. Unless we want serious societal unrest, I am convinced that we need to get something like basic income off the ground sooner rather than later.
- trhway 11y ago>100 workers replaced by a robot won't all get 100 jobs fixing or making that robot. they will get jobs servicing each other as doctors, teachers, nurses, lawyers, soldiers, playwriters, government clerks/officers, etc... Basically actively employed in a re-distribution of the products made by the robots. Government for example one can see as an instance of such basic income program (it just comes with such strings attached as spending 9to5 in the office and regular kissing of the lower back of your superior)
- Crito 11y ago> "they will get jobs servicing each other as doctors, teachers, nurses" Are those robots going to create increased demand for doctors, teachers, and nurses, by virtue of automating away a welding job? Is your typical factory worker a viable doctor? If I lost my developer job, I don't think I would make a viable doctor, and I am a fairly smart university educated person. Not everybody is cut out for that kind of work; I sure aren't. > "soldiers" Military inefficiencies aside, don't be so sure they'll be safe from automation either. Furthermore, I shudder to think what future developments would necessitate even more soldiers. > "playwrights" The arts may flourish with some form of basic income in place, but without it, it is doubtful that it will become a viable career that can feed families for a significant portion of ex-factory workers. > "government clerks" Definitely not safe from automation. Computer automation alone, no robots required, eliminates many of those sort of jobs.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoThat's optimistic! Why aren't they doing that now, then? Not the right training, or no job available? Why is that going to suddenly change when McD's starts automating the driveup window?
- bdamm 11y agoAre you familiar with the writings of Karl Marx?
- mblevin 11y agoThe best-case scenario here is articulated well by Tyler Cowen in "Average is Over"[1] - new, future blue-collar equivalent jobs are going to be created to interact with and train the Cambrian explosion of narrow AI applications and robotics, assuming an ongoing paradigm of mostly supervised learning. The worst case scenario on the other hand is pretty dystopian. I for one, welcome our new overlords. [1]http://www.amazon.com/Average-Is-Over-Powering-Stagnation-ebook/dp/B00C1N5WOI http://www.amazon.com/Average-Is-Over-Powering-Stagnation-eb...
- manachar 11y agoIf you see a human doing something it's only because it's too expensive for a robot/machine/software to do it. Delightfully, robot comes from a Czech word originating in "hard work, servitude, serfdom". Basically a slave. Any business looking to drive down costs push their human components as close to slavery as is allowable by law or acceptable to the workers. So when people fight to preserve human jobs in say, fast food, agriculture, or factories, in general you see them preserved by humans opting to work for less or in worse conditions. Cheap human labor actually starts to limit technological progress at this point. So, where's that leave the future? Hopefully we can move to a post-employment world, where people don't need masses of near-robot human resources to make profits. I don't know what the world looks like, but to me it's better than a world where humans compete with each other to be better robots for their bosses.
- jsprogrammer 11y agoWhy would one need to 'make profits' in a post-employment world?
- grandalf 11y agoIt means that human labor can be put to more productive use. Would you be happy delivering packages all day? Why would you assume someone else would be?
- hayksaakian 11y agoI would prefer a world that rewards people who pro-actively re-educate themselves. At the very least, it punishes people with a "fixed" world view.
- ereckers 11y agoDoes anyone know of a good video or presentation that both describes and visually shows us how this will work in practice? I've seen the earlier news clips showing the drone delivering a package to the back porch of a house, which got a simple shrug out of me, but how's this envisioned at scale? Do I look out my second story window and see a drone pass by every 10 minutes? Or is there initial use cases outside of residential that will be the first to adopt the technology? I just want to see it with my own eyes, before actually seeing it with my own eyes.
- cmurf 11y agoAmazon's been ripping on the FAA since the beginning, about how the FAA needs to do XYZ+5001 things. And yet Amazon has hardly come up with a plan of its own to answer some basic questions such as yours. FAR 91.119 in part says: "no person may operate an aircraft below...an altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface." There are numerous regulations that should apply to drones, just as there are ones that shouldn't, and ones yet to be written unique to drones. But has Amazon provided any input on the existing regulatory paradigm? I haven't heard anything but whining. I don't see how, or why, an autonomous aircraft should be exempt from the regulation cited above. It's the same thing we expect of other aircraft. We're talking about ~50lb (plus or minus, what, 40lb?), at up to 400' above the ground, at up to 100mph. As a pilot of both single and multi-engine airplanes, I'm very appropriately expected to be at an altitude and location that in the event of a power plant failure I can prevent on-ground injuries. We can't just let companies throw up their hands and say "yeah, it's a problem we're working on, but we must not have deliveries impeded in the meantime!"
- digisth 11y agoIf delivery-by-automated-drone ever actually becomes a serious service, might it be a good idea to start considering "building/structure electronic tagging"? That way, drones don't have to rely solely on GPS, or (I'm guessing) OCR of addresses and such. Obviously, with "guided" delivery, which is what we're going to have for now, this is less of a problem, but the ideal would be to have them be fully automated end-to-end (pickup, fly, dropoff, return with no human intervention.) With a beacon, we could give rough coordinates, then have the drones hone in on the beacon signal with the proper address. I'm not sure what would make a good "beacon with address metadata" technology, but it seems worth thinking about.
- amelius 11y agoI guess that's exactly what Google is using wifi data for.
- chrismcb 11y agoPlease don't let amazon or any other corporation fill our skies with drones. I don't mind one here or there for photography purposes, but to have drones buzzing about delivering packages is just wrong. Keep our skies clear
- cmurf 11y agoThe Drone Wars http://rapere.io/ http://rapere.io/ I can see neighborhoods having these things, to attack overflying drones that have no purpose being near the neighborhood. Parks departments taking out drones from "no drones" parks. With all this type of automation, compliance will also have to be automated. It's impractical to call the cops and say "I've got a drone buzzing around the neighborhood".