[germinalphrase]

“ Seriously the EU and US need to step up and establish or at least fund companies that can compete with DJI and other sanctioned entities.”

Establishing legible regulations, yes - but why should taxpayers fund drone companies? What is the public benefit in doing so?

[mschuster91]

> What is the public benefit in doing so?

At the moment, DJI's R&D is likely heavily subsidized by Chinese military funds. The result of that is that DJI can offer its products vastly cheaper than domestic (or allied nations') companies can.

Therefore, the public benefit of subsidies, tariffs and sanctions would be:

- not assisting China's military development by providing funds (from drone sales) and operational data from the drones. Even the flight logs provide immense amounts of real world data about the environment and the behavior - e.g. the Mini 3 Pro's camera based object tracking. That's crazy good AI at work there, gotta admit that.

- providing domestic and allied nations' companies with the opportunity to do business without being subject to Chinese price dumping, thus keeping wealth inside the allied space and outside of the CCPs cash reserves

- consumers have their privacy rights respected

[brokenmachine]

>consumers have their privacy rights respected

Haha, no.

[magic_hamster]

The public is already funding drone research, but it's all in defense and military.

[dannyw]

For the same reasons taxpayers fund semiconductor fabs (CHIPS Act): local supply chains for critical infrastructure.

[RobotToaster]

In an ideal world it would fund a non-profit to develop open source software and hardware for the good of all.

In reality it will just end up funding a contractor with good lobbyists.

[brewdad]

Taxpayers already fund them in the form of military spending. Now we need to encourage companies to trickle their decade old tech into the consumer space.

[varispeed]

The thing is companies in the EU can't use slave workers and there is no access to cheap resources that are mined without regulations and so on. But, big corporations are allowed to sidestep that by manufacturing in countries that don't care about that and so having huge competitive advantage over potential European manufacturers.

For some reason the EU is not seeking level playing field with China.

Opening tax payer funding for corporations willing to manufacture in the EU is an open season for corruption and display of hypocrisy.

[coldtea]

>The thing is companies in the EU can't use slave workers and there is no access to cheap resources that are mined without regulations and so on

Sure they can. In the 1940s they did it to several million people (a large part Jews). Up until the mid-20th century they stole resources and took advantage of human capital directly in occupied lands ("colonies"). Now they do it through outsourcing work to sweatshops, child mines, and such, in Asia, Africa, and so on. They also do whatever they can to keep those "unregulated mines" and cheap resources flowing, by by the traditional way of meddling in their ex-colonies, toppling governments, and so on.