• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    232 months ago

    It’s very funny to me how much nonsense is in this article.

    What I mean by that is that the satellite photos - they look like Cuban missile crisis photos. I understand why they would mask the capability of spy tech, but I can get clearer imagery of my house from google.
    And they don’t know when the launch failure occurred? There are plenty of seismographs that would pick up a large explosion like that. Psh.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      262 months ago

      You sure you’re not comparing it to Google’s airplane footage, instead of their satellite footage?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        18
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        ….

        In two hours I have a reoccurring leadership-type meeting where finding replacement vendors for Nearmap has been a topic of discussion for a few years. (TBF, my focus is on data accessibility and interoperability. I kind of zone out for that part of the meeting.)

        I honestly don’t know why I have never considered that Google flies its imagery.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          17
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I think specifically the parts that get modern Google Earth style 3D mapping are always shot from airplanes, I looked it up a long time ago when I was wondering why I couldn’t see our new address in 3D.

          I have no sources at hand to share, but I’m sure more detailed information is easily ducked or binged or whatever you fancy.

          But you can look at Dublin, for example. Compare the light green and dark green parts: https://maps.app.goo.gl/NJn5DhpW85ym9yCa7

          I then compared it to San Francisco and New York, which are even higher resolution.
          In rural areas the resolution seems to get lower again.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            92 months ago

            Yeah - absolutely.
            I didn’t explicitly agree with you in my response, but what you’re saying makes perfect sense. I’m just… dumbfounded it did not occur to me. Having my hands in that space is literally something I do.

            If I can spare my ego just slightly - I’m sure the military has way better imaging than what was shown (but my comparison to Google maps was a bad one).

    • @BraveLittleToaster
      link
      English
      52 months ago

      I understand why they would mask the capability of spy tech

      Then why are you confused?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 months ago

        My comment said I was amused.

        What point are you trying to make, or what angle are you trying to get at?

      • @Poach
        link
        English
        12 months ago

        Are you trying to say the Google maps imagery is not commercial satellite data?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 months ago

          The comment I replied to was talking about spy tech, I was pointing out that the photos were from a commercial satellite, whose specs are likely well known.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 months ago

            Hey, and you’re right about that. It’s what I get for commenting on stuff with 4am insomnia. The photos are clearly credited to Maxar Technologies, which for some reason I know to be a satellite imaging company. (Yet I can’t remember my own zip code without thinking about it.)