3 ms·
I'm probably overly cynical but I think it highly unlikely any of the publicly viewable 'military installation' mapping would be accurate or up to date. Basic
by olivermarks 8y ago
I'm probably overly cynical but I think it highly unlikely any of the publicly viewable 'military installation' mapping would be accurate or up to date.
Basic military strategy requires maps for planning - why share location details with your potential enemies?
- MaxLeiter 8y agoThe vast majority of our enemies have satellites of their own for high resolution images that we can’t stop them from taking, right?
- olivermarks 8y agoof course and so do we. My point was about publicly viewable online maps
- nradov 8y agoThe concern was mainly over terrorists, who don't have their own satellites and have to rely on commercial imagery.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- erentz 8y agoI seem to recall in the early days of Google Earth this was common. Famously IIRC the Naval Observatory in DC was a very obvious blurred out circle. (I believe the VP lives there?) But in more recent times it’s become harder to find these. Personally I don’t see why it would be that surprising in the early days that military would ask for sensitive sites to be removed. It’s not to defend against Russian or Chinese threats. But states or groups that do not have their own satellite imaging. As satellite imaginng has become so common and accessible they seem to have re-evaluated the risk.