Skip to content

America’s drone 9/11 is coming — and just like on 9/11, we aren’t ready

Technology
21 14 0
  • This month, Ukraine pulled off its own Pearl Harbor, decimating more than 40 of Russia’s strategic bombers worth more than $7 billion. This despite lacking an air force.

    The attack was a masterclass in asymmetric warfare. It involved 117 explosive drones, hidden inside wooden sheds, quietly trucked to remote Russian bases from Siberia and the Arctic, then unleashed in coordinated waves.

    Flash back to early December 2024, when strange lights hovered over New Jersey skies. Residents flooded 911 and social media with reports. But what followed was worse: government paralysis.

    No one — not the Federal Aviation Administration, not the FBI, not Gov. Phil Murphy (D) — could say what the drones were, how many there were or where they came from. Instead, they gaslit the public, blaming the sightings on helicopters and meteors.

    We have seen this movie before, most recently in the early days of the COVID-19 crisis, when government obfuscation and lack of coordination between local, state and federal agencies generated confusion, outrage and chaos. After the New Jersey drone debacle, we should all be sounding alarm bells about our unpreparedness in the face of this new threat.

    Complacency comes in a variety of forms — misplaced hope, denial, fatalism — but the results are always the same. It leaves you flat-footed in the face of imminent threats. It prevents you from doing what needs to be done to avoid a worst-case outcome.

    The antidote to complacency is vigilance, that is, having a plan for what we will do if suicide drone attacks start.

    Such a plan would start by breaking down the walls between silos such as the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Defense, FAA, FBI and others within the federal government itself. It would hard-wire the broken connections with law enforcement at the state and local level. It would establish accountability: Who is going to keep watch around the clock, assess the threat in real time and notify everyone with a need to know?

    The agency with the mandate to build this kind of nationwide, coordinated response is FEMA. That’s what makes the president’s proposal to dismantle it not just misguided, but dangerous. Now more than ever, we need a powerful, professional FEMA to unify efforts across government and industry to confront the asymmetric threats of this new era.

    It is the responsibility of the federal government to envision and prepare for this worst-case scenario. Innovative solutions are needed, whether to create an impenetrable dome, new jamming technology or high-tech weaponry to shoot drones out of the sky. Only businesses and certain parts of the military have this kind of know-how, and only FEMA can build the public-private ventures we will need to get it done.

    I fear the day drones are used in the US to cause harm. My job utilizes them almost every day, and I imagine they would be banned on a civilian level faster than we’ve ever seen the government function.

  • The US will never cease using 9/11 to push for expansion of the police state, and as an excuse to throw more money at private arms manufacturers. These demons are salivating at the prospect of another major attack, because they want to sell more weapons.

    Temptations, Ghorman-style, I’m thinking.

  • This month, Ukraine pulled off its own Pearl Harbor, decimating more than 40 of Russia’s strategic bombers worth more than $7 billion. This despite lacking an air force.

    The attack was a masterclass in asymmetric warfare. It involved 117 explosive drones, hidden inside wooden sheds, quietly trucked to remote Russian bases from Siberia and the Arctic, then unleashed in coordinated waves.

    Flash back to early December 2024, when strange lights hovered over New Jersey skies. Residents flooded 911 and social media with reports. But what followed was worse: government paralysis.

    No one — not the Federal Aviation Administration, not the FBI, not Gov. Phil Murphy (D) — could say what the drones were, how many there were or where they came from. Instead, they gaslit the public, blaming the sightings on helicopters and meteors.

    We have seen this movie before, most recently in the early days of the COVID-19 crisis, when government obfuscation and lack of coordination between local, state and federal agencies generated confusion, outrage and chaos. After the New Jersey drone debacle, we should all be sounding alarm bells about our unpreparedness in the face of this new threat.

    Complacency comes in a variety of forms — misplaced hope, denial, fatalism — but the results are always the same. It leaves you flat-footed in the face of imminent threats. It prevents you from doing what needs to be done to avoid a worst-case outcome.

    The antidote to complacency is vigilance, that is, having a plan for what we will do if suicide drone attacks start.

    Such a plan would start by breaking down the walls between silos such as the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Defense, FAA, FBI and others within the federal government itself. It would hard-wire the broken connections with law enforcement at the state and local level. It would establish accountability: Who is going to keep watch around the clock, assess the threat in real time and notify everyone with a need to know?

    The agency with the mandate to build this kind of nationwide, coordinated response is FEMA. That’s what makes the president’s proposal to dismantle it not just misguided, but dangerous. Now more than ever, we need a powerful, professional FEMA to unify efforts across government and industry to confront the asymmetric threats of this new era.

    It is the responsibility of the federal government to envision and prepare for this worst-case scenario. Innovative solutions are needed, whether to create an impenetrable dome, new jamming technology or high-tech weaponry to shoot drones out of the sky. Only businesses and certain parts of the military have this kind of know-how, and only FEMA can build the public-private ventures we will need to get it done.

    This feels like an excuse to strengthen the security state or prepare Americans for either a flase flag or known terrorist attack that will be used to justify war. Probably with Iran. Perhaps it is my innate distrust but I am far more worried about how my government might use drones against me than any foreign government.

  • This month, Ukraine pulled off its own Pearl Harbor, decimating more than 40 of Russia’s strategic bombers worth more than $7 billion. This despite lacking an air force.

    The attack was a masterclass in asymmetric warfare. It involved 117 explosive drones, hidden inside wooden sheds, quietly trucked to remote Russian bases from Siberia and the Arctic, then unleashed in coordinated waves.

    Flash back to early December 2024, when strange lights hovered over New Jersey skies. Residents flooded 911 and social media with reports. But what followed was worse: government paralysis.

    No one — not the Federal Aviation Administration, not the FBI, not Gov. Phil Murphy (D) — could say what the drones were, how many there were or where they came from. Instead, they gaslit the public, blaming the sightings on helicopters and meteors.

    We have seen this movie before, most recently in the early days of the COVID-19 crisis, when government obfuscation and lack of coordination between local, state and federal agencies generated confusion, outrage and chaos. After the New Jersey drone debacle, we should all be sounding alarm bells about our unpreparedness in the face of this new threat.

    Complacency comes in a variety of forms — misplaced hope, denial, fatalism — but the results are always the same. It leaves you flat-footed in the face of imminent threats. It prevents you from doing what needs to be done to avoid a worst-case outcome.

    The antidote to complacency is vigilance, that is, having a plan for what we will do if suicide drone attacks start.

    Such a plan would start by breaking down the walls between silos such as the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Defense, FAA, FBI and others within the federal government itself. It would hard-wire the broken connections with law enforcement at the state and local level. It would establish accountability: Who is going to keep watch around the clock, assess the threat in real time and notify everyone with a need to know?

    The agency with the mandate to build this kind of nationwide, coordinated response is FEMA. That’s what makes the president’s proposal to dismantle it not just misguided, but dangerous. Now more than ever, we need a powerful, professional FEMA to unify efforts across government and industry to confront the asymmetric threats of this new era.

    It is the responsibility of the federal government to envision and prepare for this worst-case scenario. Innovative solutions are needed, whether to create an impenetrable dome, new jamming technology or high-tech weaponry to shoot drones out of the sky. Only businesses and certain parts of the military have this kind of know-how, and only FEMA can build the public-private ventures we will need to get it done.

    I’m hearing that we clearly need to arm everyone over the age of 11 with personal carry, guided surface-to-air missiles. It’s the only logical conclusion.

  • This month, Ukraine pulled off its own Pearl Harbor, decimating more than 40 of Russia’s strategic bombers worth more than $7 billion. This despite lacking an air force.

    The attack was a masterclass in asymmetric warfare. It involved 117 explosive drones, hidden inside wooden sheds, quietly trucked to remote Russian bases from Siberia and the Arctic, then unleashed in coordinated waves.

    Flash back to early December 2024, when strange lights hovered over New Jersey skies. Residents flooded 911 and social media with reports. But what followed was worse: government paralysis.

    No one — not the Federal Aviation Administration, not the FBI, not Gov. Phil Murphy (D) — could say what the drones were, how many there were or where they came from. Instead, they gaslit the public, blaming the sightings on helicopters and meteors.

    We have seen this movie before, most recently in the early days of the COVID-19 crisis, when government obfuscation and lack of coordination between local, state and federal agencies generated confusion, outrage and chaos. After the New Jersey drone debacle, we should all be sounding alarm bells about our unpreparedness in the face of this new threat.

    Complacency comes in a variety of forms — misplaced hope, denial, fatalism — but the results are always the same. It leaves you flat-footed in the face of imminent threats. It prevents you from doing what needs to be done to avoid a worst-case outcome.

    The antidote to complacency is vigilance, that is, having a plan for what we will do if suicide drone attacks start.

    Such a plan would start by breaking down the walls between silos such as the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Defense, FAA, FBI and others within the federal government itself. It would hard-wire the broken connections with law enforcement at the state and local level. It would establish accountability: Who is going to keep watch around the clock, assess the threat in real time and notify everyone with a need to know?

    The agency with the mandate to build this kind of nationwide, coordinated response is FEMA. That’s what makes the president’s proposal to dismantle it not just misguided, but dangerous. Now more than ever, we need a powerful, professional FEMA to unify efforts across government and industry to confront the asymmetric threats of this new era.

    It is the responsibility of the federal government to envision and prepare for this worst-case scenario. Innovative solutions are needed, whether to create an impenetrable dome, new jamming technology or high-tech weaponry to shoot drones out of the sky. Only businesses and certain parts of the military have this kind of know-how, and only FEMA can build the public-private ventures we will need to get it done.

    I don't think the current government is capable or interested in making sound decisions. I don't think the public is capable of electing a better government. For profit orgs don't have the public's best interest as a priority. So this is bad

  • I am much more concerned about the military itself attacking the U.S. population.

    Who says they won't use drones and blame it on another country?

  • This feels like an excuse to strengthen the security state or prepare Americans for either a flase flag or known terrorist attack that will be used to justify war. Probably with Iran. Perhaps it is my innate distrust but I am far more worried about how my government might use drones against me than any foreign government.

    You're preaching to the choir

  • I’m hearing that we clearly need to arm everyone over the age of 11 with personal carry, guided surface-to-air missiles. It’s the only logical conclusion.

    Why over 11?

  • Counterpoint: a few small drones with a small amount of explosives targeting civilians over July 4th in every state capital would tank the us economy.

    Or be the public motivation somebody is looking for to join in a war he totally doesn't want to join even though he just handed a bunch of tech bros military seniority roles...

  • Why over 11?

    They’re large enough to handle it

  • You're preaching to the choir

    I honestly was not aware

  • Who says they won't use drones and blame it on another country?

    Or... Use drones and just take full credit. No need for obfuscation with our current media.

  • This feels like an excuse to strengthen the security state or prepare Americans for either a flase flag or known terrorist attack that will be used to justify war. Probably with Iran. Perhaps it is my innate distrust but I am far more worried about how my government might use drones against me than any foreign government.

    These are my current fears as well.

  • I think you are misunderstanding the point. Swap out 9-11 moment with "watershed moment".

    A drone doesn't need to be able to carry more than 500-1000g to be an incredibly effective tool of war, and it absolutely was, basically, consumer grade drones that Ukraine used.

    And all in all, probably, the whole operation cost less than a single tomahawk cruise missile.

    I made this point that the article is making here, a few months ago. The US military industrial complex has completely missed the mark on where modern warfare is going., and the US has spent trillions to build a system that can be challenged for billions.

    Because the trillions is the point.. Not security.

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

    Technology technology
    28
    90 Stimmen
    28 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    L
    Easier for the gullible maga base to remember and parrot as if the title actually means anything. You know they don't actually read the bills, they only know what fox tells them.
  • 121 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    L
    Oh perhaps taking them out of the country then. I imagined the persons were only taking the hard drives into China
  • 392 Stimmen
    65 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    Z
    Yes and no. Yes people are this stupid. But also bot networks. But also alt accounts. And many of those stupid people let the algorithm to pick them their political views, which is manipulated by both the bot activity and the platform holders.
  • 283 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    fingolfinz@lemmy.worldF
    Magats wanted people with their same mental capacity to run things and oh look, it’s lots of incompetence
  • 73 Stimmen
    38 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    F
    For sure they are! Meta more then the others though
  • Why doesn't Nvidia have more competition?

    Technology technology
    22
    1
    33 Stimmen
    22 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    B
    It’s funny how the article asks the question, but completely fails to answer it. About 15 years ago, Nvidia discovered there was a demand for compute in datacenters that could be met with powerful GPU’s, and they were quick to respond to it, and they had the resources to focus on it strongly, because of their huge success and high profitability in the GPU market. AMD also saw the market, and wanted to pursue it, but just over a decade ago where it began to clearly show the high potential for profitability, AMD was near bankrupt, and was very hard pressed to finance developments on GPU and compute in datacenters. AMD really tried the best they could, and was moderately successful from a technology perspective, but Nvidia already had a head start, and the proprietary development system CUDA was already an established standard that was very hard to penetrate. Intel simply fumbled the ball from start to finish. After a decade of trying to push ARM down from having the mobile crown by far, investing billions or actually the equivalent of ARM’s total revenue. They never managed to catch up to ARM despite they had the better production process at the time. This was the main focus of Intel, and Intel believed that GPU would never be more than a niche product. So when intel tried to compete on compute for datacenters, they tried to do it with X86 chips, One of their most bold efforts was to build a monstrosity of a cluster of Celeron chips, which of course performed laughably bad compared to Nvidia! Because as it turns out, the way forward at least for now, is indeed the massively parralel compute capability of a GPU, which Nvidia has refined for decades, only with (inferior) competition from AMD. But despite the lack of competition, Nvidia did not slow down, in fact with increased profits, they only grew bolder in their efforts. Making it even harder to catch up. Now AMD has had more money to compete for a while, and they do have some decent compute units, but Nvidia remains ahead and the CUDA problem is still there, so for AMD to really compete with Nvidia, they have to be better to attract customers. That’s a very tall order against Nvidia that simply seems to never stop progressing. So the only other option for AMD is to sell a bit cheaper. Which I suppose they have to. AMD and Intel were the obvious competitors, everybody else is coming from even further behind. But if I had to make a bet, it would be on Huawei. Huawei has some crazy good developers, and Trump is basically forcing them to figure it out themselves, because he is blocking Huawei and China in general from using both AMD and Nvidia AI chips. And the chips will probably be made by Chinese SMIC, because they are also prevented from using advanced production in the west, most notably TSMC. China will prevail, because it’s become a national project, of both prestige and necessity, and they have a massive talent mass and resources, so nothing can stop it now. IMO USA would clearly have been better off allowing China to use American chips. Now China will soon compete directly on both production and design too.
  • 117 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    S
    Common Noyb W
  • 19 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    S
    Jesus that's just straight up porn