3 ms·

It's obscene that the US has such control over foreign infrastructure installations in the name of "security". GPS accuracy limits and ITAR/COCOM GPS export res

by wyager 10y ago

It's obscene that the US has such control over foreign infrastructure installations in the name of "security". GPS accuracy limits and ITAR/COCOM GPS export restrictions are a farce anyway; even a third-world basement laboratory could construct a GPS receiver sufficiently fast and accurate for missile controls these days. The only thing these laws accomplish is to inconvenience civilians. I know some people in the high-altitude balloon community who are frequently frustrated by scared manufacturers not wanting to run afoul or ITAR and restricting GPS units so they can't even be used for balloons. Who knows what sort of cool location-based technology we could have today if the US hadn't intentionally held back civilian GPS for decades.

Aloha 10y ago
I hate to point this out, but we (the americans) paid for it, why shouldn't we have control over it? If you don't like it, you're always welcome to build your own.
- wyager 10y ago
  Americans did not pay for Galileo. The EU paid for it. Americans did pay for GPS, which is why we should have full access to its capabilities as taxpayers.
- kuschku 10y ago
  The EU did, and the US threatened to just shoot down the EU satellites unless they get the ability to turn off GALILEO.
  - dispose13432 10y ago
    >The EU did, and the US threatened to just shoot down the EU satellites unless they get the ability to turn off GALILEO. In times of war.
    - kuschku 10y ago
      Not just in times of "war between EU and US", but in times of "war between US and anyone else". This is not something that's in any way acceptable.
- pbhjpbhj 10y ago
  .. and if we don't let you win you're taking your football and going home? Perhaps some in USA might consider benefit to humankind to be a worthy end? I think it was Franklin who pointed out that ownership of resources by a limited elite wasn't due to a natural right but was a consequence of past "violence". Your answer is the one rich people give as to why poor people don't deserve water, "I paid for that water, buy your own it you want to drink". GPS isn't a need like water, but the sentiment and ethic appears to derive from the same logic, lack of empathy, and lack of humanity. You asked why.
- krick 10y ago
  You are missing the point. It isn't about USA being able to shut GPS down for Europeans. They already can, and that's pretty natural, because it's their military system in the first place. It isn't about being able to shut Galileo down as well. It is about EU knowingly building the system (using their money) that can be used by anyone, but can be shut down without shutting down GPS (which is capable of limiting availability to USA military forces only, should they wish so), because one particular aggressive country threatened to use violence otherwise.
  - dispose13432 10y ago
    As I understand, it's not that America can call Europe and say "Shut down the GPS", it's that America wants to be able to jam GPS (which is reciprocal, BTW. Europe can go to war now and jam GPS signals). It's quite reasonable that if a third-party is supplying weapons to an enemy, it gets caught up in the cross-fire.

by wyager 10y ago

Aloha 10y ago

I hate to point this out, but we (the americans) paid for it, why shouldn't we have control over it? If you don't like it, you're always welcome to build your own.

wyager 10y ago
Americans did not pay for Galileo. The EU paid for it. Americans did pay for GPS, which is why we should have full access to its capabilities as taxpayers.
kuschku 10y ago
The EU did, and the US threatened to just shoot down the EU satellites unless they get the ability to turn off GALILEO.
- dispose13432 10y ago
  >The EU did, and the US threatened to just shoot down the EU satellites unless they get the ability to turn off GALILEO. In times of war.
  - kuschku 10y ago
    Not just in times of "war between EU and US", but in times of "war between US and anyone else". This is not something that's in any way acceptable.
pbhjpbhj 10y ago
.. and if we don't let you win you're taking your football and going home? Perhaps some in USA might consider benefit to humankind to be a worthy end? I think it was Franklin who pointed out that ownership of resources by a limited elite wasn't due to a natural right but was a consequence of past "violence". Your answer is the one rich people give as to why poor people don't deserve water, "I paid for that water, buy your own it you want to drink". GPS isn't a need like water, but the sentiment and ethic appears to derive from the same logic, lack of empathy, and lack of humanity. You asked why.
krick 10y ago
You are missing the point. It isn't about USA being able to shut GPS down for Europeans. They already can, and that's pretty natural, because it's their military system in the first place. It isn't about being able to shut Galileo down as well. It is about EU knowingly building the system (using their money) that can be used by anyone, but can be shut down without shutting down GPS (which is capable of limiting availability to USA military forces only, should they wish so), because one particular aggressive country threatened to use violence otherwise.
- dispose13432 10y ago
  As I understand, it's not that America can call Europe and say "Shut down the GPS", it's that America wants to be able to jam GPS (which is reciprocal, BTW. Europe can go to war now and jam GPS signals). It's quite reasonable that if a third-party is supplying weapons to an enemy, it gets caught up in the cross-fire.