For anyone concerned about privacy, higher resolution imagery already exists and is used heavily in industry. See http://www.pictometry.com. They use airplanes.
US lifts restrictions on more detailed satellite images
31–40 of 47 posts
Re: US lifts restrictions on more detailed satellite images
#32I thought that some of the higher-res photos from google earth and competitors were taken by plane, rather than satellite. I wonder how/if the new restrictions apply to lower-flying photography?
Most of the higher-resolution photography on Google Earth and Google Maps is taken by airplanes rather than by satellites. Google calls it "satellite" view just to emphasize that it is from above, whatever the source.
Re: US lifts restrictions on more detailed satellite images
#33I don't like this. What is the business of a government in regulating the resolution of whatever form of imagery??? If it can be seen from the sky, or from the street, it's public. Planes, satellites, drones, whatever - you should be free to take pics and sell them if you want. Fortunately, digital camera didn't exist where such kind of laws had been passed, or there would have been similar stupid restrictions (imagi…
> Fortunately, digital camera didn't exist where such kind of laws had been passed, or there would have been similar stupid restrictions
Non-digital cameras did exist, and some of the laws were passed because of them. A common class of laws, colloquially called "peeping tom" laws, make it illegal to photograph people through their bedroom windows with high-powered telephoto lenses.
Re: US lifts restrictions on more detailed satellite images
#34I don't like this. What is the business of a government in regulating the resolution of whatever form of imagery??? If it can be seen from the sky, or from the street, it's public. Planes, satellites, drones, whatever - you should be free to take pics and sell them if you want. Fortunately, digital camera didn't exist where such kind of laws had been passed, or there would have been similar stupid restrictions (imagi…
I don't think I can agree with that. To a certain extent, I think this will be another one of those fronts where modern technology tries to breach fundamental and human rights. What should give you the right, just because you can fly something over someone's property, to take pictures of them and their private space. The issue is a similar one to drones. Should you be permitted to violate someone's privacy in their o…
I agree with your general point but:
> In fact, what is the difference between royalties due for commercial use of their images and that of your back yard?
The difference is that the photographer holds to copyright to any picture they take. The drone/satellite operator would have to explicitly sign the copyright over to you of the pictures of your backyard.
Re: US lifts restrictions on more detailed satellite images
#35I don't like this. What is the business of a government in regulating the resolution of whatever form of imagery??? If it can be seen from the sky, or from the street, it's public. Planes, satellites, drones, whatever - you should be free to take pics and sell them if you want. Fortunately, digital camera didn't exist where such kind of laws had been passed, or there would have been similar stupid restrictions (imagi…
As a US-based company, DigitalGlobe launch and operate their satellites at the whim of Federal regulators. With the advances in privatized spaceflight, I see this field as ripe for disruption from Chinese or Russian based competition.
Good reason to invest in satellite-killing weapons, then.
Re: US lifts restrictions on more detailed satellite images
#36For anyone concerned about privacy, higher resolution imagery already exists and is used heavily in industry. See http://www.pictometry.com . They use airplanes.
For years now Google has shown high resolution images of my own house. The rim of my garden is bright and clear, which is made of 2x4s (9 cm across).
Re: US lifts restrictions on more detailed satellite images
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks to drones and satellites, privacy no longer exists in private yards, even those with high fences lined with trees. Thanks to infrared photography, structure-penetrating radar, cell phones, etc., privacy no longer exists indoors either. This is not right.
Is there a suitable material for a lightweight "roof" you could put over your property that would block aerial photography but still allow sunlight and rain to penetrate? One could even make it shielded against electromagnetic frequencies. No more drones hacking your wifi!
Is there a suitable material for a lightweight "roof" you could put over your property
Yes, well-placed trees, plants, and some lattice material.
I once visited the roof of the Limn building on Townsend in San Francisco. It turns out there was a lush garden, nice eating areas, and an Airstream trailer, all on the roof. Absolutely none of it was visible from the ground, and you'd be lucky to make out much of anything from overhead.
Re: US lifts restrictions on more detailed satellite images
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a US-based company, DigitalGlobe launch and operate their satellites at the whim of Federal regulators. With the advances in privatized spaceflight, I see this field as ripe for disruption from Chinese or Russian based competition.
Good reason to invest in satellite-killing weapons, then.
Which in turn will lead to a booming market in ammunition, MREs, and shovels for digging bunkers.
Re: US lifts restrictions on more detailed satellite images
#39For anyone concerned about privacy, higher resolution imagery already exists and is used heavily in industry. See http://www.pictometry.com . They use airplanes.
Right. This is a win, because it allows you to get images that previously required airplanes over areas where airplanes aren't feasible or cost-effective.
Re: US lifts restrictions on more detailed satellite images
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This is not right. This is reality though. Our expectations of privacy must adjust to changes in technology.
What is allowed with technology does not dictate what is right or even legal.
It comes down to a simple concept. You change with progress or you get left behind.
Even when progress is, in your view, undesirable... our world isn't a private place anymore... our expectations of privacy will seem silly to future generations... its jus how things work. Right or wrong are abstract concepts, and the marching of time pays no attention to them.