8 ms·

I hold the understanding that its possible to view a license plate from space. I suggest you keep to that view in mind as well.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jacquesm 7y ago
Viewing a license place it not the same as reading it.
- rocky1138 7y ago
  Yes, but if there is video instead of a still frame, it may be possible to put together what the characters on the plate are.
  - jacquesm 7y ago
    Not with that resolution (7cm / pixel).
    - mrob 7y ago
      We know what can be written on license plates, and we know that license plates don't change over short times, so it's possible to determine which characters best match the sequence of frames even if no individual frame is readable. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-resolution_imaging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-resolution_imaging
vinaypai 7y ago
The resolution of this satellite is about 5-7 cm per pixel which is about the limit of what's possible with the 2.4m mirror it uses. You'd need a mirror at least 10x as large to read license plates, and that's if they were pointing upward.
- alkonaut 7y ago
  There are certainly no 20-30m telescopes in space (Also, imagine how annoyed astronomers would be if they found out the biggest most advanced space telescope in history was in space and pointing down...). I do wonder what would be possible to resolve using multiple 2.4m scopes to create a larger synthetic aperture? Resolving text on a license plate which would be at a very oblique angle (so more atmosphere) is probably not worth trying.
  - brians 7y ago
    You don’t need multiple to get improvement in one dimension: it’s moving. For something that will hold very still, you can wait for the next pass and synthesize.
  - BurningFrog 7y ago
    > * imagine how annoyed astronomers would be if they found out the biggest most advanced space telescope in history was in space and pointing down* Well, rumor is that Hubble was just a repurposed spy telescope, so astronomers probably should be annoyed :)
    - chiefalchemist 7y ago
      Annoyed? Sure. Surprised? Only the naive would be.
      - alkonaut 7y ago
        If there was a 3-5m spy satellite I wouldn't be surprised, but if there was a 20-30m spy satellite (I.e. a project likely larger in scale and complexity than the ISS) then I'd be surprised.
    - aedocw 7y ago
      But we followed the making of hubble long before it launched. Why would anyone believe such a silly rumor when the development of the telescope was in the open?
throwawaywego 7y ago
I'm of the understanding that this was not a single image, but a composite image, taking by different satellites, planes, and/or drones. The US could have build test facilities in their deserts, have a 3-D model available for proper reconstruction, and then learn to stitch and skew back all imagery into a single composite image. There may even be some "filling in" or "sharpening" of pixels or textures that could not be observed, but are guessed from their context. In the framework of composite imagery, it would indeed be possible to zoom in, until you get to camera's capturing road traffic (maybe the license plate was not observed in the moment the main photo was taken, but was remembered from an observation by traffic camera 30 minutes ago and stitched back onto the object: composite imagery through time). Finally, you could use multiple non-image sources for the composition. If three (ground) sensors capture the noise, heat, or vibrations from a train on a train track, you can now triangulate and draw the location of that train on space photos at a timestamp of your choosing.
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  Why do you believe it's a composite image? > the license plate was not observed in the moment the main photo was taken I believe there's a limit on resolution of a space satellite. If you're suggesting the traffic cam reads the plate, how are you going to connect the coloured blob that is the car with an image taken by a traffic cam at a different time in a country that doesn't give you access to its traffic cams?
  - throwawaywego 7y ago
    > Why do you believe it's a composite image? Because it is common to reconstruct a signal by taking multiple measurements, instead of a single sample. The field of compressed sensing broke ground on effective sampling. If (some) error is random noise, then you can remove this by majority vote. It is ineffective not to re-use that high-resolution secret drone fly-over footage, when composing satellite imagery at a later date. Inpainting, upscaling, de-oldifying, automatic coloring, 3D modeling, composition (see black hole photo process) etc. have become common usage in the ML community, and so I have reason to assume these techniques are also used to enhance and improve the resolution and unobserved guesstimates of satellite imagery. > how are you going to connect the coloured blob that is the car with an image taken by a traffic cam at a different time in a country that doesn't give you access to its traffic cams? Install road-side pointing camera's inside rented housing / contracted freedom fighter homes? Hack the traffic cams? Didn't the NSA track mobiles in foreign countries by installing similar beacons / hacking sensors in bigger cities? That would theoretically allow them to view through the car roof and "see" who is in the backseat. > The spy agency is said to be tracking the movements of “at least hundreds of millions of devices” in what amounts to a staggeringly powerful surveillance tool. It means the NSA can, through mobile phones, track individuals anywhere they travel – including into private homes – or retrace previously traveled journeys. > The NSA provided some input into the report, with one senior collection manager, granted permission to speak to the newspaper, admitting the agency is “getting vast volumes” of location data from around the planet by tapping into cables that connect mobile networks globally. > According to the Post, the NSA is applying sophisticated mathematical techniques to map cell phone owners’ relationships, overlapping their patterns of movement with thousands or millions of other users who cross their paths.
benburleson 7y ago
This is anecdotal, and no idea how real it is, but my dad flew reconnaissance for the USAF in the 70s and claimed to have the capability to read license plates way back then from very high altitude (no idea what qualified as very high altitude, but assumed they were not easily detected from the ground).
- isatty 7y ago
  I believe the SR-71 had cameras that could resolve even more detail than license plates. Edit: seems that I’m wrong. 6” ground resolution
- drivebycomment 7y ago
  Let's do some napkin math. A quick websearch suggests spy sats orbit around 200-800km, while U2 flies at 20km. Let's say you can use the same camera system on both. Then 10cm resolution at 200km orbit means 1cm at 20km, which would be enough to read a license plate.
  - Phlarp 7y ago
    You can't put a 2.4m mirror on a U2.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

jacquesm 7y ago

Viewing a license place it not the same as reading it.

rocky1138 7y ago
Yes, but if there is video instead of a still frame, it may be possible to put together what the characters on the plate are.
- jacquesm 7y ago
  Not with that resolution (7cm / pixel).
  - mrob 7y ago
    We know what can be written on license plates, and we know that license plates don't change over short times, so it's possible to determine which characters best match the sequence of frames even if no individual frame is readable. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-resolution_imaging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-resolution_imaging

vinaypai 7y ago

The resolution of this satellite is about 5-7 cm per pixel which is about the limit of what's possible with the 2.4m mirror it uses. You'd need a mirror at least 10x as large to read license plates, and that's if they were pointing upward.

alkonaut 7y ago
There are certainly no 20-30m telescopes in space (Also, imagine how annoyed astronomers would be if they found out the biggest most advanced space telescope in history was in space and pointing down...). I do wonder what would be possible to resolve using multiple 2.4m scopes to create a larger synthetic aperture? Resolving text on a license plate which would be at a very oblique angle (so more atmosphere) is probably not worth trying.
- brians 7y ago
  You don’t need multiple to get improvement in one dimension: it’s moving. For something that will hold very still, you can wait for the next pass and synthesize.
- BurningFrog 7y ago
  > * imagine how annoyed astronomers would be if they found out the biggest most advanced space telescope in history was in space and pointing down* Well, rumor is that Hubble was just a repurposed spy telescope, so astronomers probably should be annoyed :)
  - chiefalchemist 7y ago
    Annoyed? Sure. Surprised? Only the naive would be.
    - alkonaut 7y ago
      If there was a 3-5m spy satellite I wouldn't be surprised, but if there was a 20-30m spy satellite (I.e. a project likely larger in scale and complexity than the ISS) then I'd be surprised.
  - aedocw 7y ago
    But we followed the making of hubble long before it launched. Why would anyone believe such a silly rumor when the development of the telescope was in the open?

throwawaywego 7y ago

I'm of the understanding that this was not a single image, but a composite image, taking by different satellites, planes, and/or drones. The US could have build test facilities in their deserts, have a 3-D model available for proper reconstruction, and then learn to stitch and skew back all imagery into a single composite image. There may even be some "filling in" or "sharpening" of pixels or textures that could not be observed, but are guessed from their context. In the framework of composite imagery, it would indeed be possible to zoom in, until you get to camera's capturing road traffic (maybe the license plate was not observed in the moment the main photo was taken, but was remembered from an observation by traffic camera 30 minutes ago and stitched back onto the object: composite imagery through time). Finally, you could use multiple non-image sources for the composition. If three (ground) sensors capture the noise, heat, or vibrations from a train on a train track, you can now triangulate and draw the location of that train on space photos at a timestamp of your choosing.

tempguy9999 7y ago
Why do you believe it's a composite image? > the license plate was not observed in the moment the main photo was taken I believe there's a limit on resolution of a space satellite. If you're suggesting the traffic cam reads the plate, how are you going to connect the coloured blob that is the car with an image taken by a traffic cam at a different time in a country that doesn't give you access to its traffic cams?
- throwawaywego 7y ago
  > Why do you believe it's a composite image? Because it is common to reconstruct a signal by taking multiple measurements, instead of a single sample. The field of compressed sensing broke ground on effective sampling. If (some) error is random noise, then you can remove this by majority vote. It is ineffective not to re-use that high-resolution secret drone fly-over footage, when composing satellite imagery at a later date. Inpainting, upscaling, de-oldifying, automatic coloring, 3D modeling, composition (see black hole photo process) etc. have become common usage in the ML community, and so I have reason to assume these techniques are also used to enhance and improve the resolution and unobserved guesstimates of satellite imagery. > how are you going to connect the coloured blob that is the car with an image taken by a traffic cam at a different time in a country that doesn't give you access to its traffic cams? Install road-side pointing camera's inside rented housing / contracted freedom fighter homes? Hack the traffic cams? Didn't the NSA track mobiles in foreign countries by installing similar beacons / hacking sensors in bigger cities? That would theoretically allow them to view through the car roof and "see" who is in the backseat. > The spy agency is said to be tracking the movements of “at least hundreds of millions of devices” in what amounts to a staggeringly powerful surveillance tool. It means the NSA can, through mobile phones, track individuals anywhere they travel – including into private homes – or retrace previously traveled journeys. > The NSA provided some input into the report, with one senior collection manager, granted permission to speak to the newspaper, admitting the agency is “getting vast volumes” of location data from around the planet by tapping into cables that connect mobile networks globally. > According to the Post, the NSA is applying sophisticated mathematical techniques to map cell phone owners’ relationships, overlapping their patterns of movement with thousands or millions of other users who cross their paths.

benburleson 7y ago

This is anecdotal, and no idea how real it is, but my dad flew reconnaissance for the USAF in the 70s and claimed to have the capability to read license plates way back then from very high altitude (no idea what qualified as very high altitude, but assumed they were not easily detected from the ground).

isatty 7y ago
I believe the SR-71 had cameras that could resolve even more detail than license plates. Edit: seems that I’m wrong. 6” ground resolution
drivebycomment 7y ago
Let's do some napkin math. A quick websearch suggests spy sats orbit around 200-800km, while U2 flies at 20km. Let's say you can use the same camera system on both. Then 10cm resolution at 200km orbit means 1cm at 20km, which would be enough to read a license plate.
- Phlarp 7y ago
  You can't put a 2.4m mirror on a U2.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]