Re: Spy Satellite Resolution

["Brendan McKenna" <brendan@oc3s-emh1.army.mil>]

: 
:  Mark W. Eichin wrote:
: 
: > number like "1 foot resolution" -- and then did some processing on a
: > photograph to demonstrate what that meant. 
: > 
: > The picture used was a rear view of a VW Bug, with a copy of Isvestia
: > resting on the upper edge of the trunk. Basically, you could tell
: > there was something sitting there, but you couldn't read the headlines
: 
: A previous poster suggested 1 inch with the latest technology on a clear 
: day. In any case this has grave implications for the privacy in outdoor 
: activities like under-the-sky-copulation. A simple protection is 
: available: a heat source to produce chaotic air turbulence. A campfire?
: 

Oh come on!  Who cares who you're screwing outside?  Do you honestly think 
that any of us here is doing anything that warrants that kind of scrutiny by
the intelligence community?  Just because something is possible doesn't make
it cheap and easy to use.  Besides, on with that sort of angular resolution,
the area of the image is also reduced, so they'd have to be pretty interested
in you in particular, and have a real good idea of where to look for you when
the satellite was overhead.  Besides, do you really think that your activities
are so important that the NRO would be willing to devote the time and money
necessary to find you and photograph you (or any other member of this list)
with their precious resources?  It's not like the sky is blanketed with these
satellites to the point where anyone in the US would have to worry about
what they were doing outdoors.....

Of course, perhaps the comments were meant facetiously, and I've meerly
overreacted here -- wouldn't be the first time.


							Brendan