[maxbond]

Maybe. Is that a good explanation for some grainy footage? Is it a better explanation than, "the drone technology most of us are familiar with is a vignette of a much larger space of technological possibility; without the need to accommodate human frailty, strange and wonderful configurations of aircraft are possible, so much so that they may baffle even experienced airman? And like any strange and wonderful technology in this world, it's first used to spy, and in a decade will be used to serve ads."

[isityouyesitsme]

Please cote the spot where I suggested anything that even remotely looks like I took a position.

All I mean to say is that circular logic based on upholding one's views of reality do not bring any clarity to the situation.

The same situation seems to happen countless times in the history of empirical science and mathematics. There are incontrovertible facts, until some new information controverts them.

[maxbond]

That's fine, but you asked a question and I responded to it. Whether you hold a position, that's not really my business, I believe you when you say you don't.

[maxbond]

I'm seeing now that it was a proposition not a question (I read it as "Is it" rather than "It is"), my mistake there. But I would've responded in the same way regardless, so substitute this with, "you proposed something and I responded to it."