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.

  • 51 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    B
    There is nothing open about openai, and that was obvious way before they released chatgpt.
  • Meta is now a defense contractor

    Technology technology
    54
    1
    362 Stimmen
    54 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    B
    Best decision ever for a company. The US gov pisses away billions of their taxpayers money and buys all the low quality crap from the MIL without questions.
  • 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.
  • 18 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    M
    Business Insider was founded in 2007.
  • 479 Stimmen
    81 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    douglasg14b@lemmy.worldD
    Did I say that it did? No? Then why the rhetorical question for something that I never stated? Now that we're past that, I'm not sure if I think it's okay, but I at least recognize that it's normalized within society. And has been for like 70+ years now. The problem happens with how the data is used, and particularly abused. If you walk into my store, you expect that I am monitoring you. You expect that you are on camera and that your shopping patterns, like all foot traffic, are probably being analyzed and aggregated. What you buy is tracked, at least in aggregate, by default really, that's just volume tracking and prediction. Suffice to say that broad customer behavior analysis has been a thing for a couple generations now, at least. When you go to a website, why would you think that it is not keeping track of where you go and what you click on in the same manner? Now that I've stated that I do want to say that the real problems that we experience come in with how this data is misused out of what it's scope should be. And that we should have strong regulatory agencies forcing compliance of how this data is used and enforcing the right to privacy for people that want it removed.
  • 177 Stimmen
    71 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    K
    I have zero problems with this on Lineage. ?? No spoofing either, just Lineage.
  • Is Washington state falling out of love with Tesla?

    Technology technology
    10
    1
    61 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    B
    These Tesla owners who love their cars but hate his involvement with government are a bit ridiculous because one of the biggest reasons he got in loved with shilling for the right is that the government was looking into regulations and investigations concerning how unsafe Tesla cars are.
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    B
    ... robo chomo?