3 ms·

I can’t help but wonder about the privacy implications of tech like this. I’m no fishing vessel, but I’m not that much smaller than some fishing vessels. Certai

by lumb63 3y ago

I can’t help but wonder about the privacy implications of tech like this. I’m no fishing vessel, but I’m not that much smaller than some fishing vessels. Certainly my car is of comparable size. How long is it before humans can be tracked in, or out of, their cars, by anyone with a sufficiently adept satellite? That question also implies it isn’t already happening.

bjornbsm 3y ago
As it is in Norway this is an ongoing debate - where the smaller fishing vessels have been exempt from having the mandatory AIS equipment, citing privacy as some of the reasons. In the government portal for showing AIS data they do not show data of ships that is below 45m length to preserve their privacy. However larger fishing vessels have large crews depending on the mode of fishing, so it becomes less a case of tracking single persons (and maybe in the fishermen more a case of tracking commercial competitors).
wetmore 3y ago
Pretty sure this can already happen.
dharmab 3y ago
Companies like Persistent Surveillance Systems (https://www.pss-1.com/ https://www.pss-1.com/) have already been doing that since 2004. Disclosure: I work for a satellite imagery company. As far as I know, our data is not usable for the level of tracking described in your comment. However, I likely have a personal bias towards data transparency. Opinions expressed are my own.
ianburrell 3y ago
It is really expensive to have satellites that can visually track a human. The Keyhole spy satellites are the size of Hubble (not coincidentally) and can resolve 3in. The much cheaper and smaller Planet Labs SkySat have resolution of 12in and could track a car. The issue is that would need constellation covering the whole Earth. That is doable, but not needed for observation so nobody has done it. Ships have an empty background and can be tracked intermittently while people and cars require continuous tracking. Drones would be better, but would still need a huge number to provide continuous tracking. CCTV cameras would be easiest but limited in area. Finally, tracking cell phones is doable, and easier to do with satellites.

by lumb63 3y ago

bjornbsm 3y ago

As it is in Norway this is an ongoing debate - where the smaller fishing vessels have been exempt from having the mandatory AIS equipment, citing privacy as some of the reasons. In the government portal for showing AIS data they do not show data of ships that is below 45m length to preserve their privacy. However larger fishing vessels have large crews depending on the mode of fishing, so it becomes less a case of tracking single persons (and maybe in the fishermen more a case of tracking commercial competitors).

wetmore 3y ago

Pretty sure this can already happen.

dharmab 3y ago

Companies like Persistent Surveillance Systems (https://www.pss-1.com/ https://www.pss-1.com/) have already been doing that since 2004. Disclosure: I work for a satellite imagery company. As far as I know, our data is not usable for the level of tracking described in your comment. However, I likely have a personal bias towards data transparency. Opinions expressed are my own.

ianburrell 3y ago

It is really expensive to have satellites that can visually track a human. The Keyhole spy satellites are the size of Hubble (not coincidentally) and can resolve 3in. The much cheaper and smaller Planet Labs SkySat have resolution of 12in and could track a car. The issue is that would need constellation covering the whole Earth. That is doable, but not needed for observation so nobody has done it. Ships have an empty background and can be tracked intermittently while people and cars require continuous tracking. Drones would be better, but would still need a huge number to provide continuous tracking. CCTV cameras would be easiest but limited in area. Finally, tracking cell phones is doable, and easier to do with satellites.