The last sentence made me laugh:
> The cause of the collision is not known.
I'll give you long odds that the cause was the drone being someplace it was not supposed to be.
> The cause of the collision is not known.
I'll give you long odds that the cause was the drone being someplace it was not supposed to be.
I still wonder how this happens. The only theory I know of is that if they don't give them positive coverage then they'll never get comment form them again, but is that really sufficient for it to be so universal and why have so few papers gone adversarial on this?
https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/an-interactive-guide-to-...