• vvv@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    8 months ago

    Surveillance is a usecase for communication. I can’t think of a communications technology that hasn’t been (ab)used for surveillance… Books even! Historically people have been prosecuted due to the books they possess! Should our target of ire be the entity building the network? Or the entity wanting to use it for surveillance? The vibe I’m getting from this thread is that folks would prefer the US government, via NASA or otherwise, have control of the whole thing instead.

    • Zron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      8 months ago

      You have no idea how a spy satellite works, do you?

      They take pictures.

      With really, really fancy cameras.

      Cameras that are very carefully, and secretly, designed to be very good at their jobs.

      No, you can’t just let some third party decide to use your fancy spy satellite, that means they now know what your satellite can and can’t do, which means they can hide things from it, which means it’s now just a very expensive lump in orbit.

      And need I remind you that SpaceX is not some magical self funded space ferry service. They’re a US Government contractor, that’s where most of their money comes from. The satellites are made by other contractors. There’s not a government satellite factory somewhere in the desert, they pay companies like Boeing and Honeywell to make them the parts for the satellite, and then SpaceX gets money to launch it.

      When the government pays for something, the contractor is legally required to keep their mouth shut about it, hand over the keys, and be available if it breaks. The contractor cannot just decide to let someone else play with the government’s toys, that’s called espionage.