3 ms·

That was problematic too. Making such surveillance imagery even more easily obtainable is even worse, especially considering the power of gathering multiple set

by divvyy 4y ago

That was problematic too. Making such surveillance imagery even more easily obtainable is even worse, especially considering the power of gathering multiple sets of data and correlating the findings. It doesn't have to be a single photo, a stalker could purchase multiple photos of multiple locations of interest on a regular basis. In terms of potential harm, it's like the difference between a handgun and nuclear bomb.

crazygringo 4y ago
I don't really see how this is such a serious problem. Again, there isn't a right to privacy from the air. And if someone wants to stalk you, it's far more cost-effective to hire someone to follow you physically. This doesn't change that. And just to be clear, I'm obviously not condoning stalking. Just saying this is a pretty bad tool for it. So I don't see anything "nuclear" about this whatsoever. (Also to be clear, the highest resolution available is half-meter. All you can do is basically figure out whether a car is present somewhere and its approximate color maybe. It's hard to establish the presence of a human at all, and you certainly can't tell who they are or read a license plate or anything even close to that.)
GasTrader 4y ago
Hello,SkyFI founder and majority share holder. Satellite imagery as a stalking tool is more science fiction/ fantasy for a number of reasons. 1. Resolution just isn't sharp enough and never will be to discern individual persons identity. 2. Latency, it takes time to upload an order the order. Satellite has to pass iber a groundstation to receive command,then be in pistion to take photo then pass iver ground station to download. Then go to post processing, QC then delivery. While latency may improve ot would ne uneconomic and practically useless due to 1. 3. Clouds. Unfotunately clouds appear and would make persistent surveillance even if you had the resolution(you don't) unlikely. It's much easier and cheaper and infinitely more effective to use tags,ad tech on mobile phones and plain on PI for that type of stalking. I hope this clarifies your concerns

by divvyy 4y ago

crazygringo 4y ago

I don't really see how this is such a serious problem. Again, there isn't a right to privacy from the air. And if someone wants to stalk you, it's far more cost-effective to hire someone to follow you physically. This doesn't change that. And just to be clear, I'm obviously not condoning stalking. Just saying this is a pretty bad tool for it. So I don't see anything "nuclear" about this whatsoever. (Also to be clear, the highest resolution available is half-meter. All you can do is basically figure out whether a car is present somewhere and its approximate color maybe. It's hard to establish the presence of a human at all, and you certainly can't tell who they are or read a license plate or anything even close to that.)

GasTrader 4y ago

Hello,SkyFI founder and majority share holder. Satellite imagery as a stalking tool is more science fiction/ fantasy for a number of reasons. 1. Resolution just isn't sharp enough and never will be to discern individual persons identity. 2. Latency, it takes time to upload an order the order. Satellite has to pass iber a groundstation to receive command,then be in pistion to take photo then pass iver ground station to download. Then go to post processing, QC then delivery. While latency may improve ot would ne uneconomic and practically useless due to 1. 3. Clouds. Unfotunately clouds appear and would make persistent surveillance even if you had the resolution(you don't) unlikely. It's much easier and cheaper and infinitely more effective to use tags,ad tech on mobile phones and plain on PI for that type of stalking. I hope this clarifies your concerns