Tilt-Rotor Drone

A drone is defined a an unmanned aircraft that can fly autonomously[2]. In the year 2016, there exist many applications for small scale drones. Drones, having had primarily military applications, now have use in hobby robotics, photography, and even in surveying. But drones have not yet been perfected and still have room for much improvement. Several problems with drones come in the form of battery life, stability, and size. Large drones can fit many sensors and probes, but are heavy and have less flight time. For autonomous drones, stability can be an issue even though there exist many stable drones. Finally, drones can be large which make them difficult to move around. The project proposed in this document is a form of drone called a tilt-rotor drone. It uses only two rotors, unlike the popular four rotor design. The goal is maximizing this drone\u27s flight time while minimizing its size and cost

Domesticating the Drone: The Demilitarisation of Unmanned Aircraft for Civil Markets

Remotely piloted aviation systems (RPAS) or ‘drones’ are well known for their military applications, but could also be used for a range of non-military applications for state, industrial, commercial and recreational purposes. The technology is advanced and regulatory changes are underway which will allow their use in domestic airspace. As well as the functional and economic benefits of civilian RPAS (C-RPAS) sector, the potential benefits for the military (M-RPAS) sector are also recognised. A wide range of actors have nurtured this dual-use aspect of C-RPAS development, and celebrated militaristic visions of the technology. However, concerns have been raised about the public rejecting the technology because of their association M-RPAS and concerns about some potentially controversial applications, for example in policing and border control. In contrast with the enthusiasm for dual-use exhibited throughout the consultation process, the strategy for avoiding public rejection would downplay the connection between military and non-military RPAS and focus upon less controversial applications such as search and rescue. We reflect upon this contrast in the context of the European agenda of responsible research and innovation. In doing so, we do not rely upon critique of RPAS development per se, in their neither their civilian nor military guise, but explore the extent to which current strategies are compatible with a responsible and socially beneficial C-RPAS development.JRC.G.6-Digital Citizen Securit

The Development and the Future of Privacy in Maine

In the United States, privacy law has traditionally developed in concert with intrusions created by newfangled technologies. This pattern has held true in Maine. Beginning in the late 1960s, the state has experienced three eras of privacy reform that track the technological advances of the mid-century, the internet era, and the new era of social media and big data. This Article details these three eras of reform and advances several proposals for responding to the challenges posed by the era that we are living through today. Indeed, at the beginning of the 2020s, there is much work on the horizon to ensure that Maine’s privacy laws keep up with new technological and social developments. The coronavirus pandemic looms large over all facets of society and privacy law is no exception. The pandemic had made us even more reliant on online services that collect, use, and share previously unfathomable quantities of data, leaving residents’ personal information vulnerable to misuse. Increased attention to racial injustice and over-policing in the wake of George Floyd’s tragic murder have likewise highlighted privacy issues with which Maine must continue to grapple. Finally, Northeastern University recently opened the Roux Institute in Portland, offering various graduate-level degrees pertaining to the practical application of artificial intelligence and machine learning in the digital and life sciences. This development offers exciting educational and economic opportunities for the state, but also indicates that regulating AI and machine-learning technologies will be important to preserving Mainers’ privacy rights in the near future. All of these recent challenges, moreover, have emerged against the backdrop of the existing privacy threats posed by social media, big data, mass surveillance, and more. This Article is thus well-timed to inform those who will be tasked with shaping Maine privacy law in the coming years and decades. In Part I of the Article, I detail the three eras of reform highlighted above. In Part II, I propose that Maine enact a general consumer privacy law endowing Mainers with certain rights to their personal information, vesting consumer privacy rulemaking authority in a state agency, regulating automated decision-making technologies, and more. After proposing the general consumer privacy law, I identify five privacy threats that warrant additional attention from the legislature: facial recognition technology; biometric information; smart-home devices; data brokers; and the Maine Information and Analysis Center. Part III briefly concludes the Article

The Daily Texan

Texas Student Medi

When AI goes to war: youth opinion, fictional reality and autonomous weapons

This paper relates the results of deliberation of youth juries about the use of autonomous weapons systems (AWS). The discourse that emerged from the juries centered on several key issues. The jurors expressed the importance of keeping the humans in the decision-making process when it comes to militarizing artificial intelligence, and that only humans are capable of moral agency. They discussed the perennial issue of control over AWS and possibility of something going wrong, either with software or hardware. Concerns over proliferation of AWS and possible arms race also entered the discussion and the jurors were skeptical about the possibility of regulation and compliance once AWS enter military arsenals. We conclude that the juries were very apprehensive and hostile to the introduction of autonomous weapons systems into military conflicts

Drohnentechnologie und moderne Kriegführung

Are armed drones a permissible and harmless military technology from the point of view of international humanitarian law? With this question, the author puts the much-discussed armed drones to the test of Article 36 of the First Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions, which imposes on states an obligation to test new weapons and means of warfare. Furthermore, the work deals with three controversial political theses around the effects of drone technology on modern warfare and explains what relevance these have from the perspective of international humanitarian law. The present work thus gives a complete view of the question of the admissibility of armed drones raised above.Handelt es sich bei bewaffneten Drohnen um eine aus Sicht des humanitären Völkerrechts zulässige und unbedenkliche Militärtechnologie? Mit dieser Frage stellt die Autorin die viel diskutierten bewaffneten Drohnen auf den Prüfstand des Art. 36 des Ersten Zusatzprotokolls der Genfer Konventionen, welcher den Staaten eine Prüfpflicht neuer Waffen und Mittel der Kriegführung auferlegt. Im Weiteren befasst sich das Werk mit drei kontroversen politischen Thesen rund um die Auswirkungen der Drohnentechnologie auf die moderne Kriegführung und legt dar, welche Relevanz diese aus der Sicht des humanitären Völkerrechts haben. Das vorliegende Werk gibt somit eine vollständige Sicht auf die oben aufgeworfene Frage der Zulässigkeit bewaffneter Drohnen

A re-examination of the cultural resistance orthodoxies within scholarly open access communication

This paper presents a critical re-consideration of the problems in achieving a greater embrace of the praxis of open access (OA) to research publications within the UK academy. It offers an ideological critique of the underlying subversion of scholarly communication by an industrialised publishing sector. It also considers the ideological and financial drivers that have caused the emergence of an open access to research publications movement. Through examining this developing open access paradigm, it problematises aspects of the UK academy's reluctance to engage. While examining academics’ imperative to disseminate research, through exploring the legacy publication model, it proposes that that the higher education policy landscape must also be accounted for, when considering engagement barriers. Hence, the paper concludes that the conditioning of academics by a neoliberal policy-saturated environment likely contributes to their reticence to embrace the praxis