I've enjoyed Mark Rober's videos for a while now. They are fun, touch on accessible topics, and have decent production value. But this recent video isn't sitting right with me
The video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrGENEXocJU
In it, he talks about a few techniques for how to take down "bad guy drones", the problems with each, and then shows off the drone tech by Anduril as a solution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anduril_Industries
Anduril aims to sell the U.S. Department of Defense technology, including artificial intelligence and robotics. Anduril's major products include unmanned aerial systems (UAS), counter-UAS (CUAS), semi-portable autonomous surveillance systems, and networked command and control software.
In the video, the Anduril product is a heavy drone that uses kinetic energy to destroy other drones (by flying into them). Quoting the person in the video:
imagine a children's bowling ball thrown at twice as fast as a major league baseball fastball, that's what it's like getting hit by Anvil
This technology is scary for obvious reasons, especially in the wrong hands. What I also don't like is how Mark Rober's content is aimed at children, and this video includes a large segment advertising the children's products he is selling. Despite that, he is promoting military technology with serious ethical implications.
There's even a section in the video where they show off the Roadrunner, compare it against the patriot missiles, and loosely tie it in to defending against drones. While the Anvil could be used to hurt people, at least it is designed for small flying drones. The Roadrunner is not:
The Roadrunner is a 6 ft (1.8 m)-long twin turbojet-powered delta-winged craft capable of high subsonic speeds and extreme maneuverability. Company officials describe it as somewhere between an autonomous drone and a reusable missile. The basic version can be fitted with modular payloads such as intelligence and reconnaissance sensors. The Roadrunner-M has an explosive warhead to intercept UAS, cruise missiles, and manned aircraft.
I haven't watched any of his videos since the second glitter bomb video. He was looking for people setting up glitter bombs as a trap and sent one to to someone who never had the intention to do ao. As consequence he sent some embarrassing postcards to the person's neighbors and claims to have submitted the address to Scientology recruitment.
https://youtu.be/a_TSR_v07m0?si=P7jdUMD8MwKqsCcJ
10:18 timestamp.
Maybe it's distasteful, but I didn't see anything majorly wrong with what he did there. Someone stole something he worked quite a bit on, so he pranked the guy.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/a_TSR_v07m0?si=P7jdUMD8MwKqsCcJ
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I'm seeing this as not "just a prank". If you read a bit about Scientology and their practices you might realize that this is potentially existential for the guy. And given the audience I wouldn't want to have Scientology established as an organization you use for a prank. If he really was that bitter about it he should have sued the guy or - what a crazy thought - just let him be.
If you remember the details (and how to structure a coherent sentence) please post again!
I'm not a native speaker, but you can easily just watch the primary source (the second glitter bomb video) and you will definitely spot the part I refer to.
Edit: I have rewritten my original comment to make it easier to understand. I hope it worked.
Ah, sorry for being a dick. Much clearer now.