Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: The E on December 02, 2013, 06:16:38 am
-
So apparently, Amazon wants to use octocopters as package delivery drones (http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/12/forget-amazons-two-day-shipping-soon-you-can-select-drone-delivery/).
Here we have yet another instance of Bezos et al trying to cut out a middleman. This time, it's the part of the postal services that handles lightweight Amazon Prime orders.
There are a couple problems with this:
1. Who insures the cargo?
2. How do you ensure secure delivery (I am aware that it is apparently common practice in the US to leave packages at the front door; there are more sane ways of handling packages!)?
3. How do you ensure correct delivery at all, given the ease with which these drones can be intercepted?
4. What exactly is the target market for this? At what point is it economically viable to maintain a drone fleet, given that their range is severely limited, and given that one of the big catalysts for amazon's success is the disentanglement of storefront and logistical backend (In order for this to be viable, an amazon warehouse has to be located right in the middle of high-density housing, this is definitely not the case at the moment)
Regarding question 4: As was pointed out on Twitter, this is a product by 20-25 year old tech people for 20-25 year old tech people; It's a solution to an essentially solved problem that substitutes technological progress for real-world practicability.
Finally:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BaeD3juIMAAF4Ek.jpg:large)
-
wtf? I hate this idea more than liking it. It sounds like it's something that would be doomed to fail from just even the thought of it before put into consideration. Crazy drones flying around over the place carrying boxes? People will be thinking in the least does the box have a bomb? Other people will just be freaked out and do something to take those out.
Drones delivering stuff? People already don't like the idea of drones with the stigma they carry (if drones are killing people, then it's for government surveillance). Something tells me this is more about wanting to learn about the people who are ordering so better ads and better product suggestions will pop up on amazon for you. Not to mention, does amazon have other dealings with this? Drones could do more than just deliver packages, they can snoop around, look in windows. I imagine amazon won't be the only people who end up with the shameless act of surveillance and populace assessment information.
-
wtf? I hate this idea more than liking it. It sounds like it's something that would be doomed to fail from just even the thought of it before put into consideration. Crazy drones flying around over the place carrying boxes? People will be thinking in the least does the box have a bomb? Other people will just be freaked out and do something to take those out.
This is a reasonable assumption.
Drones delivering stuff? People already don't like the idea of drones with the stigma they carry (if drones are killing people, then it's for government surveillance). Something tells me this is more about wanting to learn about the people who are ordering so better ads and better product suggestions will pop up on amazon for you. Not to mention, does amazon have other dealings with this? Drones could do more than just deliver packages, they can snoop around, look in windows. I imagine amazon won't be the only people who end up with the shameless act of surveillance and populace assessment information.
This is paranoid. There is remarkably little information Amazon could glean from any supposed surveillance cameras on their drones that would be more helpful to them than the stuff they already know about you. Not to mention that automating stuff like that is too hard for the benefits it would give you.
-
I personally would like to sit and watch these things get intercepted.. I'd find it amusing.
But if it was to be the way of the future, would be interesting to see how it all turns out. But I'll pass thanks.
-
Eh, I'd order something like that just to have one of those drones show up at my doorstep. :) Only once, though, and nothing too pricey. It's a fun idea, probably useless and impractical, but still fun.
-
How long until people are just shooting these out of the air purely to steal whatever they may be carrying?
-
Drones, especially octocopters, are a really inefficient way of mail service. I'm assuming this is only for a select few near the Amazon distribution offices that have a need for the Dork factor.
-
I suspect the entire thing is a PR stunt.
Announce drone delivery, get everyone to talk about your company, quietly cancel drone delivery 6 months later.
-
Drones delivering stuff? People already don't like the idea of drones with the stigma they carry (if drones are killing people, then it's for government surveillance). Something tells me this is more about wanting to learn about the people who are ordering so better ads and better product suggestions will pop up on amazon for you. Not to mention, does amazon have other dealings with this? Drones could do more than just deliver packages, they can snoop around, look in windows. I imagine amazon won't be the only people who end up with the shameless act of surveillance and populace assessment information.
This is paranoid. There is remarkably little information Amazon could glean from any supposed surveillance cameras on their drones that would be more helpful to them than the stuff they already know about you. Not to mention that automating stuff like that is too hard for the benefits it would give you.
Paranoid yes indeed.
Why wouldn't amazon share the surveillance information? The proposition is more in their favor if they do (they either do or don't). My thinking wasn't just having government support for getting this idea off the ground even though it was my main thought, but if government is involved, the information will be shared.
Amazon having the idea for consideration right now is definitely too open to figure out much of anything right now for sure. But, being paranoid of new ideas based on other known stuff like being monitored on phones, internet snooping, black boxes in cars, even gps data from your car is sold by the manufacturer to law enforcement agencies. There's only a bunch of people like me to simply not like the idea from the start.
Realistically...
The last thing is that i hardly believe these drones are fully autonomous. Perhaps they are, perhaps they aren't. I'm not inclined to believe they are self flying. Most drones are piloted by a human. Which would be better than self flying drones in this case. But, can self flying drones the fly out of the way of birds about to crash into it, or not crash into a bird itself (powerlines (maybe even clothes lines?), kites)? Will amazon be off the hook when a drone breaks down midair and destroys the windshield of you car delivering someone else's package (hey, you'd at least feel better if the package was for you)?
Hopefully just a pr stunt.
EDIT: Damnit, not to light credence to my cause. Al jazeera is playing right now. And amazon using drones is one of the headlines. Showing a drone taking off with a box. Amazon has a drone. Possibly not a pr stunt if they already have drones en masse. But, amazon is able to do deliver light weight packages with drones like they said they could.
-
Bear in mind that the kind of attention they've received from the press would cost millions to do using advertising.
Also (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25180906)
The drones, called Octocopters, could deliver packages weighing up to 2.3kg to customers within 30 minutes of them placing the order, he said.
However, he added that it could take up to five years for the service to start.
-
I'm going to send my future jaded self a motivational betamax.
-
It is basically a marketing play, but I have to wonder how it is supposed to work. Amazon is such a fixture amongst the Internet set that they, like Google, basically do not need advertising, since they're the gold standard any competitor has to be compared against. They do not need to "boost their profile", especially not with a marketing stunt aimed at the people that are already heavy Amazon users.
-
Well they bought Kiva Systems a while ago, maybe they want to corner the market on air and ground robots.
-
So apparently, Amazon wants to use octocopters as package delivery drones (http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/12/forget-amazons-two-day-shipping-soon-you-can-select-drone-delivery/).
Here we have yet another instance of Bezos et al trying to cut out a middleman. This time, it's the part of the postal services that handles lightweight Amazon Prime orders.
There are a couple problems with this:
(irrelevant list of technical problems)
I really have a whole different sensitivity about this than you have, The_E. When you make such a ridiculous list of possible technical issues with this, take notice that these are technical issues, and these guys (Bezos included) are extremely smart and detail-focused. These guys are really mental. So I'm 100% sure they are sussing these problems out as we are speaking.
The reason they have come out with this in 60 minutes is not only about PR. We can all be cynical and **** and that's so totes cool and ****, but we can also be a lot more serious and informed about these matters if we just want to. Yes, it's PR, but it is also (and MOSTLY) a sign to the legislative bodies and the regulatory bodies to start this discussion and get the regulations passed when they arrive with the solution to the sensible yet very much solvable problems you listed there.
So this PR stunt was not a silly Microsoft-type vaporware stunt (courier, etc), but something entirely different: a "HEY GUYS THIS IS GONNA HAPPEN SO REGULATE IT KBYETHNKS".
-
Sorry, but I am pretty sure that the irrelevant technical problems are not irrelevant. If the object of the exercise is to get high-value merchandise to customers quickly, then having a delivery mechanism that can ensure delivery is a prerequisite, not a goal.
The simple matter of these devices being severely limited in range is a big issue here; barring breakthroughs in energy storage that do not seem to be on the horizon right now, this has big implications for the economic viability of this concept.
Being serious and informed about these things also means being aware of the drawbacks. It also means being aware of the current political climate with regards to autonomous or semiautonomous flying vehicles, which seems to be trending towards a general dislike.
The simple fact of the matter is that this is a solution to problems the young hip hi-tech crowd thinks it has thought up by members of the young hip hi-tech crowd, and so it has limited applicability in the real world.
-
Being serious and informed about these things also means being aware of the drawbacks. It also means being aware of the current political climate with regards to autonomous or semiautonomous flying vehicles, which seems to be trending towards a general dislike.
Criticizing an idea for technical details that are well guarded in some R&D inside Amazon's headquarters is an exercise in futility, IMHO.
The other question you raise is a thousand times much more interesting, the "Do we really want this to happen" question, which is exactly why I think Bezos made the stunt. To raise awareness that this is "coming", to pave the way for its acceptance (or not!) and thus to make new deals with regulation bodies, etc.
But this wasn't your initial sensitivity, and that is why I disagreed with your take! Who really cares about technicalities, they have thousands of engineers it's their job to suss it out, not the societies'. If Bezos says they have the ways to do this thing, I believe him sufficiently so so that I am more engaged in that second question of yours.
The simple fact of the matter is that this is a solution to problems the young hip hi-tech crowd thinks it has thought up by members of the young hip hi-tech crowd, and so it has limited applicability in the real world.
Yeah, I mean who the hell will buy stuff in the internet, right? The people running such companies must be such fools, right? Oh wait.
-
But this wasn't your initial sensitivity, and that is why I disagreed with your take! Who really cares about technicalities, they have thousands of engineers it's their job to suss it out, not the societies'. If Bezos says they have the ways to do this thing, I believe him sufficiently so so that I am more engaged in that second question of yours.
The simple fact of the matter is that this is a solution to problems the young hip hi-tech crowd thinks it has thought up by members of the young hip hi-tech crowd, and so it has limited applicability in the real world.
Yeah, I mean who the hell will buy stuff in the internet, right? The people running such companies must be such fools, right? Oh wait.
This whole idiocy is a solution to a problem that only exists in the minds of the young hip tech crowd. Namely, "2 day delivery is waaaayyy too slow, I want the same availability of physical goods that exists for digital ones". There is a market for a service like this, the big question is whether that market is large enough to sustain the R&D/Lobbying costs that have to be sunk into making this thing practical.
-
I read the OP and all I thought was "too bad the spread on the family shotgun would be too wide and damage the package." Then I immediately wondered how many .22 rounds would be required to bring down an octocopter whilst leaving its cargo intact. :D Forget trap and skeet shooting, many firearms owners may suddenly discover a new hobby! :P
After all, I know the unsecure shipping practices already used by most couriers - UPS left a $400 Google Nexus 5 ON MY DOORSTEP WITHOUT EVENING RINGING THE BELL IN -10°c WEATHER!
-
There is a market for a service like this, the big question is whether that market is large enough to sustain the R&D/Lobbying costs that have to be sunk into making this thing practical.
Are you saying Bezos hasn't made that maths? The world is huge. Their client base is hundreds of millions in size. I'm pretty sure that cutting down intermediate jobs will pay for itself down the line even if the market is only a few percent of their overall share.
Again, I think these problems are a distraction (and not really *our* problem to solve!) and what really matters is the kind of questions you also raised, namely do we want this to happen, what is this new world we are creating, what kind of new landscapes of interactions is this gonna create, what are the unintended consequences this might create, etc.
-
Fans of Amazons new service compete for fastest delivery:
(http://www.fmfg.ca/sites/default/files/pages/trap-skeet/trap-skeet1.jpg)
-
Are you saying Bezos hasn't made that maths? The world is huge. Their client base is hundreds of millions in size. I'm pretty sure that cutting down intermediate jobs will pay for itself down the line even if the market is only a few percent of their overall share.
The world being huge IS the problem :P
Drone delivery only works if you have nodal warehouses in the city in which you want to deploy the service. This goes against the little trick Bezos used to make Amazon work in the first place; it introduces additional overhead for a service that is only used by a fraction of all Amazon customers, and can only be applied to a fraction of the inventory Amazon ships and sells.
-
You guys are wasting a topic of infinite humorous potential on a discussion of feasibility and technology. I am severely disappointed.
-
I'd rather have my merchandise delivered to me via ICBM
-
I'd rather have my merchandise delivered to me via ICBM
Actually a more practical thing than microdrones :P
-
I'll leave the humour with you, MP, you are doing a top job at it!
The world being huge IS the problem :P
Drone delivery only works if you have nodal warehouses in the city in which you want to deploy the service. This goes against the little trick Bezos used to make Amazon work in the first place; it introduces additional overhead for a service that is only used by a fraction of all Amazon customers, and can only be applied to a fraction of the inventory Amazon ships and sells.
Again, you are misplacing the usage of your intelligence here. You are really smart but I think you are thinking on the wrong problems (and the wrong ideas, there are certain things you are missing out and I'll get to them in a minute!).
However, I will entertain your questions. I think this "overhead" will pay itself out in the middle term very easily. Let's make a case study. Let's take the really pessimistic case that San Francisco city is really different than the rest of the world, and while the rest of the world stays in StatusQuoLand, SF will try out this tech. Let's also assume only 1% of Amazon's clients in SF will desire this utility.
Let's also assume SF has 1.000.000 clients for Amazon. This is probably on the really low end figure (I'm counting the whole city + suburbia). 1% is ten thousand clients. These clients will be offered service by a small helipad on their huge warehouses near San Francisco and a shifting number of 'copters (built as needed). That's the whole overhead we are talking here. A robot delivers the package to the copter, the copter picks it up and delivers it from a small helipad. The rest of the service continues as it has ever continued in the past.
The thing I said you are missing here is the 30 minute window and its importance in "impulse buying". If you can really get the buying time down to a 30 minute windowframe, the selling opportunities are really big. Also coming, renting. You need stuff right now badly. You have your phone, use the amazon app to buy/rent some important "thing", in 30 minutes you get it at your GPS location. This is a whole new market that opens up.
The technicalities may well "fail" on the safe side here, and the more I think about it, the more impressed I am with the idea.
The dangers (drones) are also real. So I think the real discussion is not "if", but "when" and "what then".
-
double post with the basic info.
the 60 minutes bit:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/amazons-jeff-bezos-looks-to-the-future/
-
initially i was thinking military-spec uavs with books attached to little parachutes, since then this has all been one long disappointment
-
I like it. Kinda. I haven't read the article
RE: surveillance: just make it so it only has enough memory to buffer maybe 1s of video, and give it a low enough transmission rate it can't send any kind of useful-res video back home. Make those hardware limitations, and it can't even be hacked to be a surveillance platform. Then if something happens to it, use GPS tracking to investigate.
RE: technical stuff: give it solar power, rechargeable batteries, and maybe even a small wind turbine, and you could have it 'roost' to recover energy between legs of the trip. But... what about rain? You don't want your package getting rained on, but to fully enclose a package...
-
Some quick Googling indicates this project is technically infeasible anyway; level 2A ballistic protection (body armour) weights about 1 lb per square foot of protection. Assuming dimensions of 30 cm x 30 cm x 30 cm, that's 2.72 kilograms of ballistic protection to armour the drones.
Given that they only have a payload capacity of 2.3 kg, it seems they have a choice: armour them so they can't fly, or let them fly unarmoured and be used as a more challenging version of a clay pigeon :P
(If you can't beat the technical non-humour, subvert it...)
-
Pfft. Come on MP, you need to think bigger and grander. Like programming a flock of your own quad rotors to intercept and steal packages from Amazon's. :pimp:
I mean think of it, you literally have the chance for true air to air piracy and want to waste it on skeet shooting. :o
-
I mean think of it, you literally have the chance for true air to air piracy and want to waste it on skeet shooting. :o
One of my coworkers coined the term 'octoskeet' after reading the article; it remains to be seen whether he meant the skeet shooting of octocopters, or the launching of octopus from skeet launchers and subsequent shooting competition at conventional ranges.
To be honest, either sounds funny as hell to watch =)
Though another new hobby occurs to me - reversing the tilt alignment of exactly half the rotors on the octocopters... ;)
-
there's a third possibility there.....
-
Well, on the plus side, now I can get my animu DVDs almost immediately. On the minus side, I give them two weeks until they go all Skynet on our asses.
-
Well, on the plus side, now I can get my animu DVDs almost immediately. On the minus side, I give them two weeks until they go all Skynet on our asses.
...assuming StarSlayer and his drone army aren't interested in them of course =)
-
I'm like a terribly nerdy Don Karnage.
-
I'm like a terribly nerdy Don Karnage.
That is the best reference of all time.
-
For a range of 10 miles for delivering packages less than 5 pounds. Why not have amazon deliverers on bicycle? For this 10 mile range, a human could deliver more packages on a bicycle simply by being able to carry more than one parcel. I'm only saying this because the range isn't that big, and it would open up a new line of employment for amazon on the bottom of the pay scale. Think newspaper delivery, but with parcels.
-
That's the thing, S, they want to get rid of precisely that "human" thing riding the bycicle.
-
Well, it could be viable. If the only thing required is cost of electricity to power the drone then it can be cheaper than traditional deliveries. But we cant be sure until it is tried in reality.
There will be plenty of customers for such a service, Id consider it too if it wasnt too expensive over normal deliveries, and the limited range may not be prohibitive if the warehouse is situated in a city.
I doubt people are going to complain too much about the drones. These are private drones for legitimate purposes, not military or police ones. The cool factor alone will outweight most of anti-drone paranoia. I am sure shooting down these drones or otherwise tampering with them is illegal.
One issue I see is danger that lots of drones can possess. What if it falls on someones head or into traffic? What about the spinning blades? Is this regulated in some way and if not, shouldnt it be?
-
There will be plenty of customers for such a service, Id consider it too if it wasnt too expensive over normal deliveries, and the limited range may not be prohibitive if the warehouse is situated in a city.
Which requires warehouses in the cities, of course. Warehouses, and the staff to run them, are expensive.
I doubt people are going to complain too much about the drones. These are private drones for legitimate purposes, not military or police ones. The cool factor alone will outweight most of anti-drone paranoia. I am sure shooting down these drones or otherwise tampering with them is illegal.
I think you are underestimating the anti-drone sentiment going around these days. Even if there is no organized political resistance against this, all it takes is a guy with a moderately powerful gun to bring one of these things down.
Sure, shooting at these things is a valid offense, you are after all destroying someone else's property, but policing this is kinda hard.
One issue I see is danger that lots of drones can possess. What if it falls on someones head or into traffic? What about the spinning blades? Is this regulated in some way and if not, shouldnt it be?
That's actually not that big a deal. Octocopters are very spindly, their weight distributed over a large area, and mostly plastic, carbon fiber, and aluminium. Having one crash into traffic would not be that dangerous because of the direct damage the impact would cause, but because of the driver being startled.
-
Again, you are making bad assumptions. The assumption that they are gonna build warehouses exclusively for drones is a really bad one. They are gonna use their existent (and future) warehouses and a little 100x100 cm pad with an open window. This is not rocket science and you insist on it.
-
Again, you are making bad assumptions. The assumption that they are gonna build warehouses exclusively for drones is a really bad one. They are gonna use their existent (and future) warehouses and a little 100x100 cm pad with an open window. This is not rocket science and you insist on it.
Their existing warehouses?
(http://www.mwpvl.com/assets/images/autogen/Amazon-NA-Distribution-Network.jpg)
You mean these ones? Which, I trust you are able to see, are not optimally distributed for such a scheme?
In order to offer this service where it can pull in the most revenue, there will have to be quite a few more fulfillment centers, each of which needing enough space to carry all items available on this service.
No, it is not rocket science. Never said it would be. Is it a good solution for the problem though? IMHO, no.
-
Isn't this project at least four to five years away? That's quite a long time. Time enough for Amazon to have been usurped by a competitor or time enough to have made some significant progress on this project. Speculation at this point is still very, speculative. Amazon's already acquired Kiva Systems who specializes in automated distro center robots. If they can make progress on the drone delivery concept then they quite possibly could have a completely automated a portion of their business. It could work, it could also be pretty pie in the sky.
-
I see nine red dots there, built in a year. How many more will be built the next 5 years?
-
Quite a few. And for this to work, quite a few which have to be in locations where this sort of service is practical (i.e. An environment where enough people live to generate enough calls for this service to be practical). Somehow, I have trouble believing that all of these areas will be conveniently located so that one can either rent or build the necessary facilities cheaply.
But hey, if Amazon can actually make this work, and make it work as more than just a gimmicky thing? More power to them. I doubt they'll be able to pull it off any more than they were able to pull off grocery deliveries on a large scale (Where they are just covering LA and Seattle at the moment), but I am willing to be surprised.
Of course, I also firmly believe that this is a service that the world just does not need, that it represents a case of diminishing returns regarding the potential profit vs the cost of setting it up, that organizing these deliveries through normal courier drivers would be easier and probably cheaper, that Bezos' (and Amazon's) desire to be a disruptive influence in every market they enter is ultimately damaging to the market as a whole, but whatever.
-
Oh sure, I also don't see them launching this service worldwide at the same time. I see this as a bonus service they will add to their other services incrementally, each place at each time. They are extremely good at allocating these kinds of experiments, etc.
...that organizing these deliveries through normal courier drivers would be easier and probably cheaper...
I'm willing to bet that in fact no, those drivers and couriers are actually a lot expensive to maintain.
... that Bezos' (and Amazon's) desire to be a disruptive influence in every market they enter is ultimately damaging to the market as a whole, but whatever.
Ah, sure. They are destroying jobs and ruining companies by the second. Their warehouses will be almost completely automated within a few years (and so on), driving down even more the costs and destroying even more jobs.
This goes back to that automation thread and economics though. It's a bigger question than "amazon".
-
Even if there is no organized political resistance against this, all it takes is a guy with a moderately powerful gun to bring one of these things down.
Sure, shooting at these things is a valid offense, you are after all destroying someone else's property, but policing this is kinda hard.
OK, I'll quit trying to be funny and address this bit of reality.
Frankly, you wouldn't even need a gun. Unless they have redundant flight systems and rotors, a slingshot and a bag of marbles would easily do the trick. No telltale shot, either. And you'd be surprised at the amount of force a slingshot can deliver.
And yes, destruction of property is illegal, but since when has that stopped people who knew they could get away with it.
-
Dennis the Menace and Balearic Slingers better not muscle in on my air piracy.
-
It will happen. It will also get old very quickly.
-
Better yet, create a smaller drone designed to plug into these and hijack the system. You'll soon have your own personal army of octocopters, along with their precious cargo.
-
That's the thing, S, they want to get rid of precisely that "human" thing riding the bycicle.
That blows.
-
Yeaaaaaahno.
-
I just not sure what would happen if the drone deliver something to the wrong address.
-
The same thing that happens when the mailman delivers the mail or a package to the wrong address.
-
Well, at least around here, the couriers require you to sign a confirmation that you received the package. If you don't (because it isn't for you), they'll usually apologize go off looking for the proper address. While I suppose you could stick such a piece of paper to a drone, I don't know how you'd convince it that you address isn't the correct one.
-
Now I'm picturing this one redneck mayor out in Montana (or somewhere) who made the news by enacting an ordinance making it "legal" to shoot down drones over the town limits. He must be licking his chops at this.
-
I will now attempt to address the drones.
"Hello drones, my name is Scourge. How are you? I am fine."
I will now attempt to address the issues with the drones.
"Hello issues, my name is Scourge, and these are drones."
I will now attempt to talk about the issues that have been brought up, regarding drone delivery.
Point 1 - people will shoot them down.
I imagine that they'll be programmed to fly at a certain altitude, say 200-300 ft (100 m) above the ground to be sure to miss all obstacles, until they get to the correct coordinates, then just descend to the landing site. It'd be hard to hit a moving object at that range for the best of marksmen, impossible for your standard guy with a slingshot. Plus, discharging a firearm in a densely populated area is a recipe for getting the cops on you.
Point 2 - The range is too short to effectively serve enough people.
Amazon warehouses tend to be either in or very close to population centers. The market is already right next to the source.
Point 3 - They aren't accurate enough for this sort of thing, how will they get to the correct house?
A smartphone will probably be required to place a drone order. Just walk out to a good landing zone, hit the "right here" button on the order screen, and the drone just uses the GPS coordinates that your phone will send. GPS is generally accurate to within a few feet, so it should be fine. And I'm sure the drone will have sensors/cameras so that it won't try to fly through trees or power lines or something while coming in for a landing. I don't think the option for drone strike will even be available if you don't have a phone you can use for GPS - see below.
Point 4 - How will people know what's available for drone strike?
I imagine it'll be just another shipping option when you check out: Standard, Expedited, Prime, Prime Express, Drone Strike. Click drone and follow the directions.
Point 5 - How will your stuff not get stolen?
You were at the landing site when you placed the order, and you know it'll arrive within 30 minutes. There will be a tracker that sends updates to your phone with real-time status, so you know when to go back outside to pick it up. Drone lands, when you get your phone within 5 or so feet, the drone records that you were there, and leaves your parcel. If it gets shot down or the parcel stolen while it's waiting for you, it's your fault for not being at the landing zone when it arrived.
Point 6 - Too expensive to be viable
At first, yeah drones are expensive. And you'll need maintenance facilities and workers to keep them flying. But it'll still probably be cheaper in the long run than hiring bicycle couriers instead. (Though I'd love to see Amazon bike couriers zipping around, that seems fun).
This was fun! It's interesting thinking of stuff like this, it's a cool thought experiment for now.
-
Point 1 - people will shoot them down.
I imagine that they'll be programmed to fly at a certain altitude, say 200-300 ft (100 m) above the ground to be sure to miss all obstacles, until they get to the correct coordinates, then just descend to the landing site. It'd be hard to hit a moving object at that range for the best of marksmen, impossible for your standard guy with a slingshot. Plus, discharging a firearm in a densely populated area is a recipe for getting the cops on you.
These things are very small and very light. Just grabbing one as it lands is the simplest thing ever. Also, a flight ceiling of 100m is pretty hard to achieve; there's a lot of battery power you need in order to get the drone up there, then to the target, then back again. Not sure if the energy density is there yet.
Point 2 - The range is too short to effectively serve enough people.
Amazon warehouses tend to be either in or very close to population centers. The market is already right next to the source.
Did you see the map I posted above? It shows pretty clearly where those warehouses are, which for the most part is near the big cities, not in them. Reason being that real estate for warehouses in those cities is goddamn expensive; Amazons recipe for success was to use cheap warehouses combined with sweetheart deals with postal delivery companies to get stuff delivered fast. Building or renting new warehouses in cities isn't going to be cheap.
Point 3 - They aren't accurate enough for this sort of thing, how will they get to the correct house?
A smartphone will probably be required to place a drone order. Just walk out to a good landing zone, hit the "right here" button on the order screen, and the drone just uses the GPS coordinates that your phone will send. GPS is generally accurate to within a few feet, so it should be fine. And I'm sure the drone will have sensors/cameras so that it won't try to fly through trees or power lines or something while coming in for a landing. I don't think the option for drone strike will even be available if you don't have a phone you can use for GPS - see below.
This point was never raised.
Point 4 - How will people know what's available for drone strike?
I imagine it'll be just another shipping option when you check out: Standard, Expedited, Prime, Prime Express, Drone Strike. Click drone and follow the directions.
Neither was this.
Point 5 - How will your stuff not get stolen?
You were at the landing site when you placed the order, and you know it'll arrive within 30 minutes. There will be a tracker that sends updates to your phone with real-time status, so you know when to go back outside to pick it up. Drone lands, when you get your phone within 5 or so feet, the drone records that you were there, and leaves your parcel. If it gets shot down or the parcel stolen while it's waiting for you, it's your fault for not being at the landing zone when it arrived.
Yeah, it's totally your fault that that drone was intercepted en route.
Point 6 - Too expensive to be viable
At first, yeah drones are expensive. And you'll need maintenance facilities and workers to keep them flying. But it'll still probably be cheaper in the long run than hiring bicycle couriers instead. (Though I'd love to see Amazon bike couriers zipping around, that seems fun).
Good to know.
-
Reply 1: Didn't realize that that kind of altitude was so expensive to get to, that will definitely complicate things.
Reply 2: Right you are! But they're still close enough, right?
Reply 3: And I was sure somebody brought up the problem with the thing successfully getting to your house, or at least that's a potential problem I came up with.
Reply 4: That's definitely something I just came up with, but it sounded valid!
Reply 5: If it's intercepted en route, then yeah it's not your fault; but if you're not there to grab it yourself when it lands, you have no excuse because you know exactly where and when it would be arriving.
-
I just not sure what would happen if the drone deliver something to the wrong address.
My PS3 was delivered by Amazon to the wrong address somehow. And the woman went out of her way to find me and get it to me. She didn't know it was a PS3 though, since it was just in a brown box. Lovely meeting her.
You don't have to sign for Amazon stuff here. And if you're not in, they might leave the box somewhere they think it will be safe and drop a note through the letterbox telling you where it was put.
Only time it's ever happened. Way to go Amazon, deliver by far the most expensive thing I've ever bought from you to the wrong Address. Big thumbs up for you! :yes: :rolleyes:
-
Only time it's ever happened. Way to go Amazon, deliver by far the most expensive thing I've ever bought from you to the wrong Address. Big thumbs up for you! :yes: :rolleyes:
Technically, that's the fault of your local postal/parcel delivery service. Unless AZ didn't bother to spring for signature confirmation, which they probably should have if it's available.
EDIT: Actually, that's one of the problems that Amazon would like to eliminate by cutting out the middleman delivery companies in this way.
-
But it's a problem they can't eliminate with this technology. The proposed drones just do not have the lift capacity to carry something as large as a PS3; And you can bet that drones large enough for that would be waaaayyy too expensive.
Amazon isn't looking to replace the bulk of its delivery infrastructure just yet. Just the pieces that are flashy.
Also, these problems really are outliers. There are millions of deliveries by Amazon every week, sheer statistics means that some will get ****ed up.
-
Only time it's ever happened. Way to go Amazon, deliver by far the most expensive thing I've ever bought from you to the wrong Address. Big thumbs up for you! :yes: :rolleyes:
Technically, that's the fault of your local postal/parcel delivery service. Unless AZ didn't bother to spring for signature confirmation, which they probably should have if it's available.
EDIT: Actually, that's one of the problems that Amazon would like to eliminate by cutting out the middleman delivery companies in this way.
I've never had to sign for anything delivered from Amazon. At least I don't think I have. Certainly that woman didn't have to sign for my PS3 anyway, and deliveries have been left outside.
-
Related comic, by PVP http://www.pvponline.com/comic/2013/12/03/last-minute-shopping
(http://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/pvponlinenew/img/comic/2013/12/pvp20131203.jpg)
-
The idea of people shooting the drones down is very funny to me.
Unless it's for fun, you're not likely to be able to steal anything of any value. Even if you don't end up putting a bullet into the goods being carried, the goods will fall to Earth and likely be destroyed.
-
Am I the only one that thinks this is really cool? The fact that they think they can do this autonomously, logistics aside, must mean that they've solved some pretty great technological problems.
-
Scourge, on the altitude issue, while 200-300 feet would make for a mighty difficult slingshot hit, a novice with a properly-sighted low-calibre rifle should be able to hit something the size of a drone with not a whit of difficulty.
I'm by no means an expert with a rifle, and I can repeatedly put rounds through the center can in a pyramid of pop cans with a .22 at a range of 200 feet with no difficulty, and my family .22 has iron sights (no telescopic sighting).
100 yards is nothing for a rifle; your average 12-gauge shotgun should have an effective range of 50 yards or so (which can be increased). About the only things a 300 distance is a challenge for in terms of weaponry are bows, handguns, and slingshots =)
Just saying the vandalism potential here is pretty huge. Illegal, but huge.
-
Keep in mind, we're talking moving targets here. It's by no means easy to hit a small, moving drone high in the sky. Shooting cans from a bench is a whole different thing than AA gunnery. Not to mention support becomes problematic, you have to hold a rifle at an awkward angle which makes precise shots difficult. You might have one or two good shots if it's going directly overhead, but that's it. For such things, you'd normally use a shotgun (much like for skeet or bird hunting), but if they fly fast and high, that could prove problematic, too. Oh, and even that would be easily mitigated by making the drone fly a randomized zigzag pattern. There's a reason AA guns have ROFs in thousands of rounds per minute, a fast moving, maneuvering target is very hard to hit.
-
Oh, and even that would be easily mitigated by making the drone fly a randomized zigzag pattern.
You do know that drones, especially ones that have to carry cargo, do not have unlimited energy available for evasive maneuvers, right?
-
Not to mention the extra maintenance costs associated with the increased stress and activity.
-
Well, at least around here, the couriers require you to sign a confirmation that you received the package. If you don't (because it isn't for you), they'll usually apologize go off looking for the proper address. While I suppose you could stick such a piece of paper to a drone, I don't know how you'd convince it that you address isn't the correct one.
The drone can have a communication device on it, similar to a phone.
Point 2 - The range is too short to effectively serve enough people.
Amazon warehouses tend to be either in or very close to population centers. The market is already right next to the source.
Charging outposts?
-
Better yet, create a smaller drone designed to plug into these and hijack the system. You'll soon have your own personal army of octocopters, along with their precious cargo.
Already done.
http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/12/flying-hacker-contraption-hunts-other-drones-turns-them-into-zombies/
-
Oh, and even that would be easily mitigated by making the drone fly a randomized zigzag pattern.
You do know that drones, especially ones that have to carry cargo, do not have unlimited energy available for evasive maneuvers, right?
Not unlimited, but a simple zigzag pattern shouldn't be that much of a drag on a small drone. This ain't rocketry, where a few kilograms or an odd oscillation can mean the difference between a stable orbit and falling back to Earth. They would probably be built with plenty of fuel/charge to spare anyway. It'd be enough for the sideways movements to span about 1-3 widths of a drone to make hitting it very, very hard without a dedicated AA gun. Any yes, it would probably look as if it drunk more than it's share. :)
-
Not Amazon. Whoever the package carrier was.
-
How do these drones know where to land, and how do they make their presence known when they do? It can't knock on your door, can it? Is it just going to drop your package and leave? If you're not there, anyone could come in and steal it.
-
How do these drones know where to land, and how do they make their presence known when they do? It can't knock on your door, can it? Is it just going to drop your package and leave? If you're not there, anyone could come in and steal it.
Well, the idea is that you're going to use this to get deliveries right to your GPS coordinates, so hopefully you will be there to grab it directly from the drone or so.
Wouldn't be any point to this whole exercise if they would just act as really ****ty couriers.
-
How do these drones know where to land, and how do they make their presence known when they do? It can't knock on your door, can it? Is it just going to drop your package and leave? If you're not there, anyone could come in and steal it.
Well, the idea is that you're going to use this to get deliveries right to your GPS coordinates, so hopefully you will be there to grab it directly from the drone or so.
Wouldn't be any point to this whole exercise if they would just act as really ****ty couriers.
Right, thanks.
-
Is it just going to drop your package and leave? If you're not there, anyone could come in and steal it.
It seems to be working for UPS.
-
Is it just going to drop your package and leave? If you're not there, anyone could come in and steal it.
It seems to be working for UPS.
Do they use drones? Or are you talking about real people? A real person can hide something away, and tell you where it is.
-
Do they use drones? Or are you talking about real people? A real person can hide something away, and tell you where it is.
They are talking about real people. And no, a postal worker (Regardless of which service provider) who just "hides" packages is grossly negligent.
Here's a story: Couple months back, I bought a PS3 via Amazon. Delivery was via DHL. The idiot who made the delivery, upon not finding anyone at our home, decided it would be a marvellous idea to hide the package ... in the waste paper bin outside my home.
Now, everything went just fine, I got the package and all, but there are so many things that could have gone wrong. Protocol for this is to first see if any neighbor is available to take the package. If that's not possible for whatever reason, the package is taken back to the nearest post office so that the recipient can get it himself.
By dumping this package in the bin, there was a severe risk of it getting stolen. There are a lot of kids in this street, lots of people goign by, one of them would just have to witness this and see a shiny big Amazon package in the bin. Or, radical thought, what would have happened if these bins were emptied on that day?
Messing with mail is a pretty big offence in most jurisdictions. Ensuring secure delivery is one of the reasons why we pay companies like DHL and UPS for their services.
Part of that is that the deliverer HAS to have positive confirmation that the package has been safely delivered to the recipient or a proxy. "Just hide it"? No, thank you.
-
that just doesn't happen here. occasionally packages will need to be signed for. i guess that's set by the shipper. the private delivery companies will leave a package on your doorstep. hell half the time they don't even knock/ring the doorbell if signature isn't required. it will only be held at the post office for pickup if it was actually delivered through the USPS. it seems though that the private shippers do have keys to our mailboxes, because packages small enough will be put in there. or maybe they hand it off to the local post office if they know it's small enough.
-
Do they use drones? Or are you talking about real people? A real person can hide something away, and tell you where it is.
They are talking about real people. And no, a postal worker (Regardless of which service provider) who just "hides" packages is grossly negligent.
Here's a story: Couple months back, I bought a PS3 via Amazon. Delivery was via DHL. The idiot who made the delivery, upon not finding anyone at our home, decided it would be a marvellous idea to hide the package ... in the waste paper bin outside my home.
Now, everything went just fine, I got the package and all, but there are so many things that could have gone wrong. Protocol for this is to first see if any neighbor is available to take the package. If that's not possible for whatever reason, the package is taken back to the nearest post office so that the recipient can get it himself.
By dumping this package in the bin, there was a severe risk of it getting stolen. There are a lot of kids in this street, lots of people goign by, one of them would just have to witness this and see a shiny big Amazon package in the bin. Or, radical thought, what would have happened if these bins were emptied on that day?
Messing with mail is a pretty big offence in most jurisdictions. Ensuring secure delivery is one of the reasons why we pay companies like DHL and UPS for their services.
Part of that is that the deliverer HAS to have positive confirmation that the package has been safely delivered to the recipient or a proxy. "Just hide it"? No, thank you.
So you had problems with your PS3 delivery as well, eh? At least they took it the right address! :)
I prefer them to hide it I think than have to go to the trouble of going out and getting it. Though in my experience, they've been intelligent about where it's been put.
that just doesn't happen here. occasionally packages will need to be signed for. i guess that's set by the shipper. the private delivery companies will leave a package on your doorstep. hell half the time they don't even knock/ring the doorbell if signature isn't required. it will only be held at the post office for pickup if it was actually delivered through the USPS. it seems though that the private shippers do have keys to our mailboxes, because packages small enough will be put in there. or maybe they hand it off to the local post office if they know it's small enough.
Ugh, where do you live?
I guess it's more about the people delivering the goods than the policy of hiding things. Though I'm sure some people won't like this no matter how well hidden a package has been.
-
Every delivery company I've worked with will only acquire a signature if the sender has requested the service (unless UPS or FedEx to a business address, where it's included). Signature confirmation is expensive (at least $1 extra to postage), and so most senders will just ignore it, especially for low-cost purchases. Yes, they definitely should spring for it with something like a PS3, but some sellers just don't care that much.
In situations where a signature is not required, it's often up to the delivery person him/herself (or policy) to decide whether to leave the parcel on a doorstep or return it to the delivery office. Since it's often more work for all involved to take it back to the office, most carriers will just leave it if they don't have a very good reason not to (like creepers watching for lost parcels and stuff). And 99% of the time, that works just fine. And the other 1% is not significant enough to anybody but the buyer to really worry about. Sucks to be that buyer though, cause insurance is a PAIN.
-
Is it just going to drop your package and leave? If you're not there, anyone could come in and steal it.
It seems to be working for UPS.
Do they use drones? Or are you talking about real people? A real person can hide something away, and tell you where it is.
No, they just tend to drop the package at my door and leave. No matter the cost of the item. For instance, a complete and working computer in a computer-case shaped box.
Although I will admit that they do ring the doorbell about 20% of the time.
FedEx and USPS don't do this. Although FedEx tends to stick the 'you were gone sticker' on my door without bothering to check and see if I was actually there.
Postal service ****ing sucks over here.
-
Here's a story: Couple months back, I bought a PS3 via Amazon. Delivery was via DHL. The idiot who made the delivery, upon not finding anyone at our home, decided it would be a marvellous idea to hide the package ... in the waste paper bin outside my home.
Now, everything went just fine, I got the package and all, but there are so many things that could have gone wrong. Protocol for this is to first see if any neighbor is available to take the package. If that's not possible for whatever reason, the package is taken back to the nearest post office so that the recipient can get it himself.
By dumping this package in the bin, there was a severe risk of it getting stolen. There are a lot of kids in this street, lots of people goign by, one of them would just have to witness this and see a shiny big Amazon package in the bin. Or, radical thought, what would have happened if these bins were emptied on that day?
So, how tempted were you to keep the PS3 and then report that it didn't arrive "to teach them a lesson"? :p
-
Something interesting here, so someone with the right idea can actually ninja your shipments
http://news.discovery.com/tech/robotics/drone-hijacks-others-in-air-makes-them-zombies-131205.htm#mkcpgn=fbdsc17
-
The best is after you've accrued enough of Amazon's VTOLs and get some heavy lift capacity you can modify them to steal other peoples' stuff. Send them across town and make off with grills, garden gnomes and lawn furniture.
-
Something interesting here, so someone with the right idea can actually ninja your shipments
http://news.discovery.com/tech/robotics/drone-hijacks-others-in-air-makes-them-zombies-131205.htm#mkcpgn=fbdsc17
That's only for Parrot drones, you know, the toy drones that can barely hold itself aloft, much less any 5lb packages.
It does however, show that it's a good idea to encrypt the blasted control channels. Bluetooth would be a good choice for short range (like within 1 city block) but they'll need a proper suite of devices to ensure long range safety.
-
Here's a story: Couple months back, I bought a PS3 via Amazon. Delivery was via DHL. The idiot who made the delivery, upon not finding anyone at our home, decided it would be a marvellous idea to hide the package ... in the waste paper bin outside my home.
Now, everything went just fine, I got the package and all, but there are so many things that could have gone wrong. Protocol for this is to first see if any neighbor is available to take the package. If that's not possible for whatever reason, the package is taken back to the nearest post office so that the recipient can get it himself.
By dumping this package in the bin, there was a severe risk of it getting stolen. There are a lot of kids in this street, lots of people goign by, one of them would just have to witness this and see a shiny big Amazon package in the bin. Or, radical thought, what would have happened if these bins were emptied on that day?
So, how tempted were you to keep the PS3 and then report that it didn't arrive "to teach them a lesson"? :p
Honestly? Not very. The hassle involved in setting up insurance claims etc just wasn't worth it.
-
Morality due to laziness! The most effective kind. :p