Ars Asks: A defiant in-depth defense against dastardly drones

We’ve got one last survey, and we’d appreciate your help with it!

We've asked twice about which IT nightmares are most likely to keep you up at night, and now we're going to finish off our round of surveys with what will be the last one for a while: we want to know what you think about drones. And not just general thoughts on drones, either—we're interested in your thoughts about drones behaving badly and what can be done about them.

"Drones" in this usage refers generally to small, remotely piloted quadcopter drones with some amount of programmed autonomy—devices like DJI's overwhelmingly popular Phantom series. In addition to live remote piloting, these types of quadcopters have the ability to fly a preprogrammed route (one that might pass far beyond the radio range of the drone's remote control) and capture images and video as they do so. This makes them potentially useful for tasks like visual property surveillance—or perhaps also spying on distant neighbors if that's your thing. Meanwhile, within the US and elsewhere, courts and legislatures are taking up the question of what rights people have to defend themselves against unwanted surveillance.

As I've noted in past posts, surveys like this are intended for us to be able to take the Ars audience's temperature on certain topics so that we can write more and better stories about the things you care about. In this case, as the legislative landscape around drones changes—rapidly—we're interested in finding out more about what you folks think about the methods used to keep drones away from places where they shouldn't be. It would be super-awesome If you could find five minutes to help us out!