Skip to content

Gov. Landry signs new drone defense law; first in nation

Technology
24 18 0
  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    well this sorta makes sense

    with all that stuff Ukraine managed to pull off, domestic drone terrorism is probably something the thinktanks already thought up, calculated the risks of, and told the guy to do something about

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    kinetic and non-kinetic methods

    ??? What that means??

    kinetic is shooting guns or throwing things like nets.

    non-kinetic is jamming control signals (or maybe even GPS?) or threatening the operator, so he lands it.

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    Conveniently will cover any drone taking aerial footage of protests or police state suppression tactics

  • Conveniently will cover any drone taking aerial footage of protests or police state suppression tactics

    "Moooooom! They're looking at me!!!"

  • well this sorta makes sense

    with all that stuff Ukraine managed to pull off, domestic drone terrorism is probably something the thinktanks already thought up, calculated the risks of, and told the guy to do something about

    I’ve thought of this years ago. Y’all are just lucky I’m not a terrorist.

  • I’ve thought of this years ago. Y’all are just lucky I’m not a terrorist.

    image

    ::: spoiler spoiler
    some text here so the image federates right
    :::

  • well this sorta makes sense

    with all that stuff Ukraine managed to pull off, domestic drone terrorism is probably something the thinktanks already thought up, calculated the risks of, and told the guy to do something about

    Its the timing of all this with Iran that has me most concerned and the fact that Trump just got rid of the only agency that does a thorough investigation into industrial explosions.

    And the fact that the Mossad snuck in drones to Iran recently for their attack

    And the video of Landry signing this bill and mentioning our nuclear power plants and saying Trump will be signing his own EO soon

    And the fact that Trump also just fired a Biden appointee who was head of the Nuclear safety board that oversees America's nuclear reactors

    Hopefully all just part of a really weird series of coincidences

  • Its the timing of all this with Iran that has me most concerned and the fact that Trump just got rid of the only agency that does a thorough investigation into industrial explosions.

    And the fact that the Mossad snuck in drones to Iran recently for their attack

    And the video of Landry signing this bill and mentioning our nuclear power plants and saying Trump will be signing his own EO soon

    And the fact that Trump also just fired a Biden appointee who was head of the Nuclear safety board that oversees America's nuclear reactors

    Hopefully all just part of a really weird series of coincidences

    I highly doubt that Iran would attack the US directly - the most they would do is cyberwar

    the US has the military power to force Farsi to become a dead language, and I don't think the Iranian government would want to mess with force that powerful like that

    I think what your seeing is probably a bunch of coincidences, there's other explainations for that stuff you listed, like trump replacing govt workers with his own or wanting more deregulation for power plants.

    I wouldn't worry too much of a threat like that from Iran.

  • Its the timing of all this with Iran that has me most concerned and the fact that Trump just got rid of the only agency that does a thorough investigation into industrial explosions.

    And the fact that the Mossad snuck in drones to Iran recently for their attack

    And the video of Landry signing this bill and mentioning our nuclear power plants and saying Trump will be signing his own EO soon

    And the fact that Trump also just fired a Biden appointee who was head of the Nuclear safety board that oversees America's nuclear reactors

    Hopefully all just part of a really weird series of coincidences

    Nah. Bills don't appear overnight, been in the works for a minute.

  • I highly doubt that Iran would attack the US directly - the most they would do is cyberwar

    the US has the military power to force Farsi to become a dead language, and I don't think the Iranian government would want to mess with force that powerful like that

    I think what your seeing is probably a bunch of coincidences, there's other explainations for that stuff you listed, like trump replacing govt workers with his own or wanting more deregulation for power plants.

    I wouldn't worry too much of a threat like that from Iran.

    I'm not worried about a threat from Iran. I'm worried about a false flag being blamed on Iran

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    Of course it's LA. What a hell-hole

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    Since nobody has mentioned it, all of this is turbo illegal and the federal courts will absolutely nuke this from orbit. State governments do not control airspace, full stop. The courts have been very clear on this. Manned vs unmanned doesn't matter to the FAA, it's still one hell of a PP slap from the feds for encroaching on their turf. Additionally, any form of jamming (desense, deauth, noise, location spoofing, fraudulent signals etc) is illegal and regulated by the FCC, and doing it with intent to take down an aircraft means you get strung up by both the FCC and FAA simultaneously. In particular doing literally anything to the GPS band will pose a massive and immediate risk to manned passenger aircraft and the feds aren't going to look kindly on that.

  • I highly doubt that Iran would attack the US directly - the most they would do is cyberwar

    the US has the military power to force Farsi to become a dead language, and I don't think the Iranian government would want to mess with force that powerful like that

    I think what your seeing is probably a bunch of coincidences, there's other explainations for that stuff you listed, like trump replacing govt workers with his own or wanting more deregulation for power plants.

    I wouldn't worry too much of a threat like that from Iran.

    Iran already tried to kill Trump before the election

  • Conveniently will cover any drone taking aerial footage of protests or police state suppression tactics

    This.

    Hungary has this thing where the agitprop always gets some footage taken before the protest starts so the crowd looks smaller as it's only the early people there from police drones.

    You can't fly your own drone to counter the narrative.

  • Since nobody has mentioned it, all of this is turbo illegal and the federal courts will absolutely nuke this from orbit. State governments do not control airspace, full stop. The courts have been very clear on this. Manned vs unmanned doesn't matter to the FAA, it's still one hell of a PP slap from the feds for encroaching on their turf. Additionally, any form of jamming (desense, deauth, noise, location spoofing, fraudulent signals etc) is illegal and regulated by the FCC, and doing it with intent to take down an aircraft means you get strung up by both the FCC and FAA simultaneously. In particular doing literally anything to the GPS band will pose a massive and immediate risk to manned passenger aircraft and the feds aren't going to look kindly on that.

    Yes, absolutely, 100%.

    FAA has from the beginning been very forceful in asserting that it is the sole authority for things attempting to defy gravity.

    On the flip side though, the GOP stopped caring about anything courts say.

    So. Guess we'll see how this plays out for the next few years at least.

  • Since nobody has mentioned it, all of this is turbo illegal and the federal courts will absolutely nuke this from orbit. State governments do not control airspace, full stop. The courts have been very clear on this. Manned vs unmanned doesn't matter to the FAA, it's still one hell of a PP slap from the feds for encroaching on their turf. Additionally, any form of jamming (desense, deauth, noise, location spoofing, fraudulent signals etc) is illegal and regulated by the FCC, and doing it with intent to take down an aircraft means you get strung up by both the FCC and FAA simultaneously. In particular doing literally anything to the GPS band will pose a massive and immediate risk to manned passenger aircraft and the feds aren't going to look kindly on that.

    Things can change very quickly if there's an "attack" on U.S. soil they totally didn't know about in advance or anything when they signed this.

    Federal regulations and protections can get pushed aside real fast in the name of security, especially when you have states like Louisiana already working so closely with DHS.

  • Things can change very quickly if there's an "attack" on U.S. soil they totally didn't know about in advance or anything when they signed this.

    Federal regulations and protections can get pushed aside real fast in the name of security, especially when you have states like Louisiana already working so closely with DHS.

    Or if you just ignore federal courts, which seems to be the current fashion.

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    Hmm, if laws do pass preventing states from making laws against AI, then we may have legal conflicts regarding laws against drones. They use AI.

  • 19 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Y
    In your opinion, what's the best way to find and remove malware for the average user? I currently use Malwarebytes and windows defender. I'm wondering if this is enough or should I change something?
  • 259 Stimmen
    67 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    L
    Maybe you're right: is there verification? Neither content policy (youtube or tiktok) clearly lays out rules on those words. I only find unverified claims: some write it started at YouTube, others claim TikTok. They claim YouTube demonetizes & TikTok shadowbans. They generally agree content restrictions by these platforms led to the propagation of circumspect shit like unalive & SA. TikTok policy outlines their moderation methods, which include removal and ineligibility to the for you feed. Given their policy on self-harm & automated removal of potential violations, their policy is to effectively & recklessly censor such language. Generally, censorship is suppression of expression. Censorship doesn't exclusively mean content removal, though they're doing that, too. (Digression: revisionism & whitewashing are forms of censorship.) Regardless of how they censor or induce self-censorship, they're chilling inoffensive language pointlessly. While as private entities they are free to moderate as they please, it's unnecessary & the effect is an obnoxious affront on self-expression that's contorting language for the sake of avoiding idiotic restrictions.
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    16 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • 103 Stimmen
    102 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    A
    Lost In Stupid Parenthesis.
  • MCP 101: An Introduction to the MCP Standard

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    5 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    H
    Really? [image: 60a7b1c3-946c-4def-92dd-c04169f01892.gif]
  • 62 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    W
    What could possibly go wrong? Edit: reads like the substrate still needs to be introduced first
  • 14 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    M
    Exactly, we don’t know how the brain would adapt to having electric impulses wired right in to it, and it could adapt in some seriously negative ways.
  • *deleted by creator*

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet