4 ms·

The US owns the earth now? What a croc of shit.

HenryBemis 9y ago
Hey, (almost) everyone on Star Trek speaks english, with an American accent (apart this perfect human being called Jean Luc Piccard!!)(or with slight Russian accent). Even the Ferenghi! That should have made it clear for you :)
- ComputerGuru 9y ago
  They actually don’t. It’s explained in several TNG episodes as being a facade created by the “universal translator” plot device.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > It’s explained in several TNG episodes And TOS, for that matter.
- jcranmer 9y ago
  Actually, the accent is more Polish than Russian (or so I've heard).
notahacker 9y ago
No, the US regulates US-based companies, just like in any other field. This includes making the ability to conduct large scale surveillance of the earth's surface subject to license.
- tantalor 9y ago
  > large scale 1080p wide-angle is not quite large scale in terms of space imagery
  - JustSomeNobody 8y ago
    What about 4K? 8K? What about a big honking lens strapped to the side? If the agency requires everyone to get a license, they can filter out the people doing shady stuff. Granted there's not many people sending rockets into LEO.
    - jstanley 8y ago
      It's probably not very effective at all at stopping people doing shady stuff. The people doing shady stuff are either the US government (who will give themselves permission) or other country's governments (who won't even ask permission). So what exactly does it prevent?
- zeveb 8y ago
  > No, the US regulates US-based companies, just like in any other field. This includes making the ability to conduct large scale surveillance of the earth's surface subject to license. I wonder how that comports with this limitation on the U.S.: ‘Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press …’ Seems pretty cut-and-dried to me that if they launched the camera, they have a right to publish the photos.
  - ubernostrum 8y ago
    Why don't you try your theory about it being impossible to prohibit photos/videos by wandering into a military facility with a camera and explaining to the angry men with guns that they can't legally interfere with you? I'll wait for you to report back on how that goes.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - notahacker 8y ago
    I don't think many people would argue collection of multispectral and radar images of the earth from space for commercial distribution was what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they talked about freedom of speech. Legal restrictions on photography, particularly commercial photography, came before satellites. Weird how HN spends most of its time complaining about digital panopticons, CCTV etc and then is up in arms about the basic principle of regulating companies increasingly moving towards selling the ability to discreetly take images or video of any area at any time. (I can see the logic in excepting low res SpaceX launch videos from that and doubt they'd have had any problems at all if they'd applied for a license in time, but you draft regulations for the rules not the exceptions, especially when there's only a handful of companies to license)

Hey, (almost) everyone on Star Trek speaks english, with an American accent (apart this perfect human being called Jean Luc Piccard!!)(or with slight Russian accent). Even the Ferenghi! That should have made it clear for you :)

ComputerGuru 9y ago
They actually don’t. It’s explained in several TNG episodes as being a facade created by the “universal translator” plot device.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > It’s explained in several TNG episodes And TOS, for that matter.
jcranmer 9y ago
Actually, the accent is more Polish than Russian (or so I've heard).

notahacker 9y ago

No, the US regulates US-based companies, just like in any other field. This includes making the ability to conduct large scale surveillance of the earth's surface subject to license.

tantalor 9y ago
> large scale 1080p wide-angle is not quite large scale in terms of space imagery
- JustSomeNobody 8y ago
  What about 4K? 8K? What about a big honking lens strapped to the side? If the agency requires everyone to get a license, they can filter out the people doing shady stuff. Granted there's not many people sending rockets into LEO.
  - jstanley 8y ago
    It's probably not very effective at all at stopping people doing shady stuff. The people doing shady stuff are either the US government (who will give themselves permission) or other country's governments (who won't even ask permission). So what exactly does it prevent?
zeveb 8y ago
> No, the US regulates US-based companies, just like in any other field. This includes making the ability to conduct large scale surveillance of the earth's surface subject to license. I wonder how that comports with this limitation on the U.S.: ‘Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press …’ Seems pretty cut-and-dried to me that if they launched the camera, they have a right to publish the photos.
- ubernostrum 8y ago
  Why don't you try your theory about it being impossible to prohibit photos/videos by wandering into a military facility with a camera and explaining to the angry men with guns that they can't legally interfere with you? I'll wait for you to report back on how that goes.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- notahacker 8y ago
  I don't think many people would argue collection of multispectral and radar images of the earth from space for commercial distribution was what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they talked about freedom of speech. Legal restrictions on photography, particularly commercial photography, came before satellites. Weird how HN spends most of its time complaining about digital panopticons, CCTV etc and then is up in arms about the basic principle of regulating companies increasingly moving towards selling the ability to discreetly take images or video of any area at any time. (I can see the logic in excepting low res SpaceX launch videos from that and doubt they'd have had any problems at all if they'd applied for a license in time, but you draft regulations for the rules not the exceptions, especially when there's only a handful of companies to license)