News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Drone Hobbyists Angered by Congress Ending the Aerial Wil... by smacktoward on Thursday September 27, 2018 @03:29PM (#18087809)
> does anyone have the name of the bill or the full text that I may go read for myself?

Frustratingly the story doesn't specify a bill number, which makes it harder than it should be to track down the actual text.

I found some discussion of it on the AMA's Government Relations blog (see https://amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/2018/09/26/faa-reau...) -- but confusingly, they cite the relevant bill as "H.R. 302," which if you look it up on Congress.gov is actually a bill titled the "Sports Medicine Licensure Clarity Act of 2017" (see https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/302/...) which has nothing at all to do with UAVs.

I then searched Congress.gov for the bill title they gave, the "FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018", and found H.R. 4, which appears to be the actual bill in question. The UAV-specific part of the bill is Title 2, Subtitle B ("Unmanned Aircraft Systems"), which can be jumped to directly here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4/te...

Re:Drone Hobbyists Angered by Congress Ending the Aerial Wil... by fermienrico on Thursday September 27, 2018 @03:38PM (#18087867)
Why isn't it normal for journalists to cite their sources? Heck, we do here on HN for supporting our arguments.
Re:Drone Hobbyists Angered by Congress Ending the Aerial Wil... by colejohnson66 on Thursday September 27, 2018 @07:54PM (#18089892)
Because most people don’t verify the sources, so including them seems pointless to some people
Re:Drone Hobbyists Angered by Congress Ending the Aerial Wil... by fermienrico on Thursday September 27, 2018 @08:32PM (#18090071)
I think that is a totally separate concern. Just because I don't research about every single reference in a scientific publication should not be a signal for its omission.