Foxy,

The greens are the biggest luddites. The only technology they accept is renewable generation which has been around for decades, and even then god forbid if anyone should put a wind turbine anywhere near them.

Dear Lester,

We're obviously living in different realities.
Obviously!

Australia is one of the standout countries in terms
of its science. It's science is world class.
None of this matters.
New ideas instead of being welcomed for the
opportunities they open up for the improvement of
the human lot, are looked upon as threats.
Little has changed over the years -
when ignorance and vested interests are confronted by
scientific facts.

One perfect example is an Australian whose ideas were
rejected in this country so seven years ago he went to
California and now he has a multi-million dollar
business and his services are in demand all over the
state with the likelihood of expanding to other states.
His product is solar-power. In this country the government
prefers tree-planting - while at the same time allowing
the forests of Tasmania to be razed for wood-chipping.
And there are many inventions that have been successful
overseas , invented by Australians - but were rejected
in this country.

So much for supporting "new ideas" and "New technology"
And don't blame it on the "socialists!

SM the article you linked to suggested it was the professional operators worried about "recreational and uncertified commercial users" and that the professionals were the ones keen to access and comply with regulations. Other than common sense rules I suspect that those with most to gain from tight rules are those making money from the things, if they can get the red tape tight enough for others then you will have to hire them rather than DIY.

There are real issues but I suspect mostly from the power they give to government when combined with a range of other rapidly developing technologies. Extra regulations can expand to meet the ability of government to detect (and fine for) breaches.

There will be some issues that they should ensure are adequately covered by existing laws at the moment around privacy as a quiet low level flying device changes the rules a lot in regard to the places where we might otherwise have a sense of privacy.

I suspect most of us would be less than happy to find a snoopy neighbor using one to film around our yards or through windows etc. I've not thought to much about the safety aspect but the likely use of the drones is likely to be very different to the way model aircraft have generally been used with a higher risk of harm to others.

R0bert

What the hell has GM technology got to do with drones?
Watch the drones and be scared.
I have one and it saves me heaps in surveillance man-hours and is fully evidential in court.
They may be immoral but they are here to stay and they are getting smaller and smarter..

There are many jobs performed by men (strangely, there are very few women volunteering to take the dirty, dangerous and disgusting jobs traditionally done by men) where drones could reduce cost and injury.

There needs to be a Standard and rules for operation. The practical guys who would be involved in sorting it out can usually be trusted to know where to concentrate and when to stop. That is as long as the generalist graduate public service bureaucrats don't get in the road.

I could do with a drone to monitor the drones who lift my crab pots by mistake.

I don't object to drones flying over my place and filming my activities
providing that the law allows me to shoot down such drones.