In this case I prefer ‘I’m sorry you’re too stupid to understand the context of my remarks.’

“That said, if someone wants to take pictures of your kids in their bathing suits, it’s far easier, cheaper, and quieter for them to use a ladder (or a tree blind) and a camera with a telephoto lens.”

Yes, except that would be from off of their property, still subject to litigation (not self-defense, castle doctrine,…

According to the FAA rules for model aircraft, if you don’t want to use 83’ for a real aircraft ,in which case all the scare mongering about damaging an aircraft in the above article is bologna and its just property damage, then you still shouldn’t be operating within 500’ *of people*.

I understand your concern, about…

I’m happy to let the courts decide what case I can make when it comes to protecting my family. If that drone is low and slow enough that it poses a nuisance that I can take it down, its not ‘en route’ somewhere else, and its well below 83’, and the drone itself IS a weapon, and 83’ is a case law minimum, not a…

If your drone is on my property, unannounced, without a flight plan, flying below 83’ then I’m in fear of my life defending myself from an unknown aggressor with the capability of lacerating or dropping on top of me. Go ahead and take me to court for your property damages when it was posing a clear danger to my family…

On the other hand, once you invade my property with something that can conceivably hurt me or my child and whose flight path I have no way of knowing, I think I will win any court case involving me destroying your “aircraft” by any means necessary and I will have a lot of support from the public — its over my property…

Yeah, the article is wrong. The FAA regulates 500’ on up, and legal precedent says you own the air up to 83’. IANAL, but I am sure it comes down to who has the better lawyers. Personally I can’t wait to see some drone owners prosecuted.

Your comment on airspace extending from the blades of grass up is incorrect. The drones are certainly violating my airspace if flying below 83’, and possibly if below 500’

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St…

Its not accurate - it needs to shoot NERF darts.

Don’t listen to them; you’ve risked nothing and if its not a scam, you can buy the game and be just as well off as any of the people who spent thousands on in-game merchandise within a few weeks of playing.

I don’t know what is going on with this, but I’m skeptical. I never backed it because I feel that if you have a reasonable business plan you can get financing through conventional means - and the only reason not to do this is because you don’t want to be beholden to anyone telling you they need to see a return on…

I only have one data point to work from, but the evidence suggests you should never try to make the game Destiny was supposed to be, you’ll wind up with Destiny.

But if the money spigot turns off they might have to actually start freezing features and releasing stuff instead of redoing artwork and ships.

Then you’re already dead by this point and someone is explaining how you went for their gun.

/wish I was joking

The Culture, of course -vis a vis- The Player of Games. Personal drug delivery devices, custom-bodies enhanced for hedonistic pursuits, mind-uploading, nanotechnology and sentient AI companions —- and imposing our will on every other civilization we encounter. Whats not to like?

What, its already a utopia? No.... ask…

I actually was pointing out how hypocritical you were to think accusing someone of enjoying Pokemon is an insult after a TLDR diatribe about how crap games that defy models of play are above criticism because how dare anyone codify what games are or what someone might enjoy.

I never insulted you. I criticized an idea…

Everyone is for allowing the developer to pursue their vision, until it makes them uncomfortable.

Saw the last line, didn’t waste any time reading your post. There is a theory of games and they encompass more things than ‘pokemon’ (seriously, how dare anyone enjoy something, right?). You are absolutely free to throw caution to the wind and make a punishing, arbitrary, unrewarding experience that no one is going to…

No, thats fine, its that they tweeted ‘bae’ that makes them horrible.

We could fund the kickstarter with kickstarter, a kick-kickstarter. The stretch goals could be more humiliating than simply getting kicked in the rear, perhaps noogies and swirlies.

It could be bigger than star citizen.