10 ms·

in our coming future of things like star shield the government won’t need gps or phones to track us. Enough satellites in space to have high res images of all h

in our coming future of things like star shield the government won’t need gps or phones to track us. Enough satellites in space to have high res images of all high population areas and real time ai tracking of all objects. Lol crying emoji

doodlebugging 4y ago
If you don't build the technology then it can't be used against you. If you do build it then you need to build in effective controls so that you can limit or minimize these types of undesirable impacts. None of these things - AI, software to remotely track users, etc needs to exist. We were doing fine without it and the potential for abuse is so high that there should be a pause on adoption until stakeholders, including ordinary citizens, have an opportunity to legislate concrete protections for privacy.
- vkou 4y ago
  > None of these things - AI, software to remotely track users, etc needs to exist. Overfishing doesn't need to exist either, but unfortunately we live in a world where it does.
  - doodlebugging 4y ago
    This is true and we have to have processes in place to understand who is responsible for the fishery destruction and to prohibit their activities, levying penalties and jail time for the most egregious violators.
    - notahacker 4y ago
      We have processes in place, although a Louisiana court just ruled the main one unconstitutional, mainly on privacy grounds...
      - doodlebugging 4y ago
        Louisiana. Pretty funny. I'm sure given the history of politics in the state that keeping things private is a high priority. Don't feed the prosecutors unless they're your kin and in that case, invite them for some gumbo.
- dzhiurgis 4y ago
  Amazing. Private businesses have been tracking everyone for decades, but when it's gov trying to solve life-threatening problems - it suddenly becomes privacy issue.
kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
Satellite imagery can't achieve resolutions needed to identify people. It is physically impossible. Especially so when slewed at an angle necessary to see faces.
- getcrunk 4y ago
  Sure, but it’s still enough to uniquely track them. You can math identities separately.
- randyrand 4y ago
  Are you sure it’s physically unlawful? I thought it you have a camera the size of a small country you can increase resolution quite a bit more.
  - notahacker 4y ago
    The spatial resolution of the current state of the art satellite images have pixels the size of a person's head. They're taking photos from a very, very long way away. And even if they resolved that particular problem, most people would struggle to recognise most other people by looking only at the top of their head and shoulders from almost directly above...
- autoexec 4y ago
  > Satellite imagery can't achieve resolutions needed to identify people. It is physically impossible. Are you sure? They were talking about commercial satellites seeing dinner plates in back in 2014 (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/latest-commercial-satellite-can-see-dinner-plate-space-1-180952357/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/latest-commercial-...) and seeing cell phones from space in 2015 (https://www.businessinsider.com/satellite-image-resolution-keeps-improving-2015-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/satellite-image-resolution-k...) and AI could help turn even blurry faces into clear images (https://trinity.duke.edu/news/artificial-intelligence-makes-blurry-faces-look-more-60-times-sharper https://trinity.duke.edu/news/artificial-intelligence-makes-...) I suspect that if the ability to identify people doesn't already exist in military satellites, it will very very soon.
F00Fbug 4y ago
It's not necessarily about tracking the boats - that's just a byproduct of collecting all this data. NOAA is mainly interested in near-realtime fish harvest stats so they can regulate fishing permits and quotas. You can't see that with a camera!
dzhiurgis 4y ago
First synthetic aperture satellite was launched in 1978 and was able to image things day and night. Sentinel-1's data isn't real time but it is publicly accessible and has been up for nearly a decade.

doodlebugging 4y ago

If you don't build the technology then it can't be used against you. If you do build it then you need to build in effective controls so that you can limit or minimize these types of undesirable impacts. None of these things - AI, software to remotely track users, etc needs to exist. We were doing fine without it and the potential for abuse is so high that there should be a pause on adoption until stakeholders, including ordinary citizens, have an opportunity to legislate concrete protections for privacy.

vkou 4y ago
> None of these things - AI, software to remotely track users, etc needs to exist. Overfishing doesn't need to exist either, but unfortunately we live in a world where it does.
- doodlebugging 4y ago
  This is true and we have to have processes in place to understand who is responsible for the fishery destruction and to prohibit their activities, levying penalties and jail time for the most egregious violators.
  - notahacker 4y ago
    We have processes in place, although a Louisiana court just ruled the main one unconstitutional, mainly on privacy grounds...
    - doodlebugging 4y ago
      Louisiana. Pretty funny. I'm sure given the history of politics in the state that keeping things private is a high priority. Don't feed the prosecutors unless they're your kin and in that case, invite them for some gumbo.
dzhiurgis 4y ago
Amazing. Private businesses have been tracking everyone for decades, but when it's gov trying to solve life-threatening problems - it suddenly becomes privacy issue.

kevin_thibedeau 4y ago

Satellite imagery can't achieve resolutions needed to identify people. It is physically impossible. Especially so when slewed at an angle necessary to see faces.

getcrunk 4y ago
Sure, but it’s still enough to uniquely track them. You can math identities separately.
randyrand 4y ago
Are you sure it’s physically unlawful? I thought it you have a camera the size of a small country you can increase resolution quite a bit more.
- notahacker 4y ago
  The spatial resolution of the current state of the art satellite images have pixels the size of a person's head. They're taking photos from a very, very long way away. And even if they resolved that particular problem, most people would struggle to recognise most other people by looking only at the top of their head and shoulders from almost directly above...
autoexec 4y ago
> Satellite imagery can't achieve resolutions needed to identify people. It is physically impossible. Are you sure? They were talking about commercial satellites seeing dinner plates in back in 2014 (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/latest-commercial-satellite-can-see-dinner-plate-space-1-180952357/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/latest-commercial-...) and seeing cell phones from space in 2015 (https://www.businessinsider.com/satellite-image-resolution-keeps-improving-2015-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/satellite-image-resolution-k...) and AI could help turn even blurry faces into clear images (https://trinity.duke.edu/news/artificial-intelligence-makes-blurry-faces-look-more-60-times-sharper https://trinity.duke.edu/news/artificial-intelligence-makes-...) I suspect that if the ability to identify people doesn't already exist in military satellites, it will very very soon.

F00Fbug 4y ago

It's not necessarily about tracking the boats - that's just a byproduct of collecting all this data. NOAA is mainly interested in near-realtime fish harvest stats so they can regulate fishing permits and quotas. You can't see that with a camera!

dzhiurgis 4y ago

First synthetic aperture satellite was launched in 1978 and was able to image things day and night. Sentinel-1's data isn't real time but it is publicly accessible and has been up for nearly a decade.