3 ms·

> prevent giving away information to other countries who don't have it already Pretty easy for a nation-state to launch a surveillance satellite with much bett

• bitcurious 9y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_orbital_launches_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_orbital_laun... This is a list of nations that have managed to put something in orbit. It contains 10 nations, and the ESA. The vast majority of nations do not have the capability.
  • TeMPOraL 9y ago
    That's a list of nations capable of launching stuff on their own. Compare with this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite#First_satellites_of_countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite#First_satellites_of_... Non-space-capable countries do routinely put their payload on the rockets of countries with launch capability (though I guess then it can't be an obvious spy satellite).
• some_random 9y ago
  I suppose nation-states aren't the only ones who'd like information on US military bases/infrastructure/"nationalsecurityinterests", but I honestly think it's irrelevant. If we were discussing serious imaging systems then sure, but it's pretty clear that a webcam isn't going to give anyone any meaningful information.
  • grigjd3 9y ago
    The point is that you don't hand out the license trivially. Yes, spacex is just discussing this in the context of a glorified webcam, but webcasts aren't their only business. Such a license needs to consider the whole business. Now the NOAA perhaps should consider a type of limited license, but they can't assume the only imagery technology spacex is interested in is webcams.