Most of what happens on this planet is being recorded.

Well, let me be the first to admit in being wrong on this thread. I will recant previous statements I made early on in this thread that said this is impossible. From the knowledge and experience I have, it is...or rather, was. However, it seems not only possible, but already being used commercially, so obviously, one has to wonder and make logical assumptions of its use for some time in the dark, black classified world.

Following the storyline we go from this...

On November 7, 2013 Defense One reported Satellite Firms Want Rules Eased for Intel-Quality Images

U.S. intelligence agencies soon could pay drastically reduced prices for the highest resolution satellite images that only they’re allowed to purchase from commercial providers. That limited market has irked private satellite companies, which say it leaves them little incentive to innovate. Their solution: let the firms sell the images to everyone else, too.

The story evolves as Motherboard reported on January 7, 2014 that Startups Are Launching Satellites to Spy on Us From Space

For decades there have been spy satellites watching the planet from orbit, sending back information for government intelligence or scientific research. But until recently, the technology was too expensive and limited for private companies to join in the omniscient fun. Not anymore.
.....
What's even more interesting—and unnerving—is that the startups aren't just selling images; they're selling big data gleaned from high-def space surveillance. Take Skybox, for example, which recently published the video footage above. It has a vault of historical and current data collected from government satellites, aerial footage, weather centers, and now its own space-based satellites. It plans to use this data to offer customers "infinite analytics."

Imagine this: A financial firm could watch the number of cars in a retailer’s parking lot to assess how business is doing to make smarter investments. That's one of the example applications of its Earth-monitoring analytics the company gives on its website. Others include watching salt piles dwindle throughout winter, or checking in on how many and what kind of ships are in ports around the world. Skybox calls it "Earth Observation 2.0."

which progressed further into this on March 5, 2014...

Satellite Video Maps Let Anyone Spy Like the CIA

For decades, spying on the planet with Earth-orbiting satellite cameras was restricted to classified military and intelligence ops. That's becoming less and less true, thanks to the rise of companies launching commercial satellites into space to beam back HD photos and real-time video to anyone with an internet connection—or enough money to order up specific footage.

Startups like Planet Labs and Skybox have showcased some of their early imagery online, most recently a real-time video of planes landing at the Beijing airport, captured in December by Skybox's constellation of microsatellites, and recently published on Vimeo.
.....
It's a peek at the next-generation of digital cartography: moving maps, based on super-detailed continuous footage from the sky. Just think, instead of a little blue dot, your GPS app shows your actual car moving along the map as you drive. It’s pretty crazy stuff, like living inside a video game.
.....
"The idea of video from space is very new but the benefit of seeing movement and direction over many frames is amazing," Mapbox's Paul Goodman wrote on the company blog yesterday. "Seeing the aircraft headed to a specific terminal provided context to help identify it and watching cars move down a road shows directionality useful for better road classification. It’s early—but the idea of more data is really exciting."
.....
Unsurprisingly, the burgeoning technology has conjured up some Big Brother fears, and this despite the fact that government spy sats have been orbiting the planet for decades. But Planet Labs, Skybox, and a third commercial space satellite company UrtheCast—which recently affixed two satellite cameras onto the International Space Station—all say that their image resolution stops just short of capturing privacy-invading detail. Houses, but not home numbers. Cars, but not license plates. Crowds, but not individual faces.

Publicly, government intelligence agencies say the same thing—but that's a hard thing to believe.

Skybox Imaging Website and Youtube


Planet Labs Webstie

UrtheCast Website and Youtube

While Big Brother from the government is scary, it is equally so, if not more, from corporations and big business...
A discussion from the hacker forum Hope X this year.

You've Lost Privacy, Now They're Taking Anonymity Government and private entities are working to shred privacy and warehouse personal, relationship, and communications data. Once unimaginable surveillance technologies are being perfected and implemented. The most intimate details of lives are routinely and unthinkingly surrendered to data-gatherers. Is it still possible to be an anonymous whistleblower? Is it still possible to be anonymous at all? Your physical location and activities for the past ten years are known and have been logged. If you attend a church or synagogue or mosque or a demonstration or visit an abortion clinic or a "known criminal activity location" or meet with a "targeted person" or a disliked political activist, it is routinely recorded. Your finances, sexual orientation, religion, politics, habits, hobbies, and information on your friends and family are gathered, indexed, and analyzed. Facial recognition, camera analytics, license plate readers, and advances in biometrics allow you to be de-anonymized and remotely surveilled 24/7/365 by machines. Forensic linguistics, browser and machine fingerprinting, and backdoors substantially eliminate the possibility of anonymous Internet activity. Thanks to "The Internet of Things," your thermostat and electric meter report when you arrive home and your garbage can reports when you throw out evidence to be collected by the few remaining human agents. "Predictive profiling" even knows what you will do and where you will go in the future, so the data collection bots can be waiting for you. Data collection now begins at birth. And no data gathered will ever be thrown away. And none of the data gathered belongs to you or will be under your control ever again. An internationally-known private investigator and longtime HOPE speaker, Steve will describe in frightening detail how the last shreds of everyone's anonymity are being ripped away. Real world examples will be used. Surprises can be expected.

a reply to: AllSourceIntel

It takes maturity and guts to admit when you've changed your mind. Kudos to you and a great post, as well.
Robert Gates replaced Donald Rumsfeld as Sec. of Defense in 2006. In 2007, around the time Bush's administration outed Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA asset, Robert Gates said publicly that "anonymity was no longer possible…."

originally posted by: tetra50
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

It takes maturity and guts to admit when you've changed your mind. Kudos to you and a great post, as well.
Robert Gates replaced Donald Rumsfeld as Sec. of Defense in 2006. In 2007, around the time Bush's administration outed Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA asset, Robert Gates said publicly that "anonymity was no longer possible…."

Thank you. Integrity is important.

Something a lot of knew and a lot of others do not want to admit to themselves. I knew of the capabilities released from Snowden via my experiences and knew how privacy has been out the window for some time with corporations, and government, given technology these days. I havne't seen satellites like that before though...if the government had this capability I would smack them for the times it would have been handy while doing important intel on Iran, China, and Russia.

The video from HopeX I think would be good to show anyone who doesn't quite understand the scope of the problem.

a reply to: AllSourceIntel

Yes, in these times, especially, integrity is all-important.

I've never seen people pulling the ostrich routine this much on ATS before. I guess you're right and no one wants to admit or face that. I wouldn't have thought it so around here, though.

Looking at the satellites you're talking about, it becomes obvious by how advanced they are, that it's been done for quite some time, too, as they've had time to develop them amazingly…..

a reply to: Jesuslives4u

Nothing new...but thanks for reminding me at least. Got too comfortable lately

There are approx 3k "known" satelites orbiting earth as we speak. So yeah they can track on you, if they want to.

source: www.wisegeek.com...

Also if by any chance you want to know current ISS position or track it, here is the link
iss.astroviewer.net...

Still have it bookmarked for stargazing

a reply to: tetra50

Sorry, mate. You can post all the web page extracts you like, but you're never going to make this big blimp fly.

Both orbital mechanics and the principles of optics decree that it is not possible.

Try another conspiracy theory. This one's all blown out.

a reply to: tetra50

Actually, the statements of people being angry was not direct at you in anyway tetra50, it was another poster. In regard to prejudice and assumption, it was only based upon what I had read in your posts and the other persons post in question.

So, can be astonished if you like, but it would be and was not really required. I had made no personal assumptions or attacks, only statements into what I had interpreted. The posts where in regard to the OP's apparent technology.

to summarize my statements.

Google Earth, clicking on Satellite view does not give you 100% satellite produce imagery 100% of the time. It is sometimes Areal, it is sometimes Sat, and it is sometimes a combination. It says Satellite view because that is a generic term used to denote an 'overhead' view. To be pedantic it should really be called a birds eye view.

In order to get imagery at the 10s of cm resolution probably realistically around 30cm per pixel, it requires a mixture of adaptive optics, and averaging. This statement is based on the reality of ground based astronomy. It is totally possible to do this with a satellite, but robotics technology would mean it was not possible to do in the 80s.

The bandwidth requirements for a 'whole world' observation at the OP claimed resolution (sub cm) makes it extremely difficult even with todays technology. 1980s tech even if assumed to be 20 years ahead for the military, is still not likely possible. Real time capture is also thus out of the running.

Is it possible to monitor a small area of interest with the now 'reduced' resolution of 30cm per pixel, well yes it is, but with how satellites orbit it would be somewhat difficult (but not impossible) and the quality would likely be questionable to.

The point i was trying to assert is that big technical problems with the OP where outlined and ignored. And follow up logical questions too where ignored. Does technology possessed by the military of various nations outstrip consumer tech? well sure it does, pretty obvious that it does. Is it massively sci-fi as many here want to suggest? Well i don't really think that it is... thats all really.

a reply to: tetra50

I'm not sure what you're ranting about or even what your point is but clicking the 'satellite' button on google maps does not necessarily mean the image viewed is from a satellite.

Yes, that is believable. Everyone has heard of the story that spy satellites in the 1960s could monitor Earth and zoom in far enough to read the date off a penny left on the ground. In the 1960s! People need to understand how technology exponentially accelerates. Lots of people have subscribed to this view of acceleration, but often forget that the cutting-edge of this technological (r)evolution is happening in covert operations. This has been going on for a very long time.

I think it might have started back in the 1950s with alternative energy and propulsion technologies that could replace existing geopolitical infrastructure (oil, coal, nuclear etc), but it was thought by the multi-nationalist scientists working on it at that time that it needed to be developed quietly into a fully-functional model to be introduced to the global civilization at a later date. The problem had always been that there was no cohesive economic or political platform because of perpetual war and feuding, so that it would require a certain radical change to unite the world into accepting the new model.

At any rate, this technology combined with some mentioned above essentially translates to 'time travel'. I have heard many people explain this as being the reason for all of the secrecy. Philip Corso Jr. has talked at some length about these issues and many have stated that the mini-series 'Taken' is based on classified information on real technology and situations. My favorite parts have always been the underground NSA-type facilities and implant monitoring of alien-abductees (and everybody else).

Super Weapon or Savior? - Take Your Pick

It's interesting, just last week I had a fairly vivid dream of utilizing a type of 'Google Earth Time Machine' technology from the vantage point of space, zooming into different parts of Earth - and also different times/timelines. This was obviously "non-physical" technology i.e. astral, because it was just a dream, but maybe in the future, or on an alternate timeline, such technology is a virtual reality or matrix. Just sci-fi food for thought: When we cross over the event horizon from 3D to 4D+, perhaps life will be like the Holodeck on Star Trek, and we will be uploaded into 'avatar' bodies or biological robots. Who knows, but I think going through the 'Jim Sparks' alien-abduction material can offer several worthwhile hints of this future cross-over (and of covert operations involved with these technologies).

It also reminds me that the next set of books in my queue are the Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter 'Time Odyssey' series. More clues. I can likely get those as audiobooks - much faster to digest... there are just too many books I want to read.

Darn acceleration.

originally posted by: tetra50

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: tetra50

This is just downright silly. Go to Google maps, for goodness sakes, click on the satellite view of any area, and look how much detail you can see. And that's what's available to the public

Just a question,

I thought Google maps satellite view used images taken from aircraft or mostly from aircraft, are you certain that the satellite view are actual images from satellites in orbit?

Open up google maps right now. In the left hand corner there will be a small box. Over the box, with a small view until you click on it, and choose "satellite," which will give you the map in "satellite view," just as the little box promises.
tetra

That doesn't answer my question but gives me a hint that you don't know.

Just because it says satellite view doesn't mean the images you are seeing are from satellites.

a reply to: InhaleExhale
Google says, by way of explanation it is a mixture of aerial photography, and satellite. I can only assume they are telling the truth, but that may be a big assumption.

Clearly, the street view, and they have said, was/is people who work for them, or donating their time and photography of different land based sights, neighborhoods.
I apologize for the sarcasm inherent in my reply. I realize now it's a thread I shouldn't have gotten involved in, of course, a little too late.
tetra

Good to have you weighting, Corsair. I heard the same thing you did in the sixties. I'm looking for more links to back that up. I'd found some a while ago, which is why I mentioned Burroughs and IBM, as they were both involved with the Air Force and assorting military to put satellites up there to, for one thing, supposedly keep an eye on their missile installations.
tetra

a reply to: tetra50

I think the key component that is left out of the public's databases is Artificial Intelligence and quantum computing. We think our computers are pretty fast and high-tech, but I bet there are computers that are part biological by now in underground facilities round and about!

As for agendas, I would assume the ultimate inspiration was Huxley's 'Brave New World' and Orwell's '1984', but I really don't know for sure.

originally posted by: corsair00
a reply to: tetra50

I think the key component that is left out of the public's databases is Artificial Intelligence and quantum computing. We think our computers are pretty fast and high-tech, but I bet there are computers that are part biological by now in underground facilities round and about!

As for agendas, I would assume the ultimate inspiration was Huxley's 'Brave New World' and Orwell's '1984', but I really don't know for sure.

Yes, I just replied to a thread about a holographic, simulated environment….and of course, the quantum computing provision was left out in the discussion, but certainly is implied, for it's the supplier, the progenitor of that.
And yes, I agree, also about the inspiration, but I also see science fiction writer Frank Herbert's influence, as well, within what you describe. Many writer have hinted, skirted at our augmented reality, without directly addressing it. This is the great thing about "fiction," isn't it, for if what we both believe is true, any fiction then becomes possibe, even perhaps, "real," and then it calls into question how and what you participate in right here, on ATS. For there is "settled science," that doesn't take into account such augmentation, though the science used is partly how it was done, but it went beyond that, now. However our inculcation with it, exhibited by some posters in their disbelief, makes it difficult to accept how it's possible……

Even I reply to threads sometimes which would really superfluous, if I accept the reality of augmentation, and therefore much less of a reality, within those parameters…..
tetra

a reply to: tetra50

Shortly after my last post I turned on CNN, as I am studying the PsyOps and Revolution in Military Affairs, and noticed the "breaking story" of this alleged audio from a video chat that recorded the gunshots that killed Michael Brown. It stood out as rather peculiar. Have you heard it?



I find it odd and amusing that all media and online comments about this piece of audio only touch on the sound of the gunshots. Nobody is asking why the voice sounds computer-generated and doesn't stop to comment about hearing a bunch of gun shots just outside! Also, it is fairly clear what is said:

You're so pretty. You're so fine. Just going over some of your videos. How could I forget?

I am not sure what this means exactly, it's just an observation.

originally posted by: corsair00
a reply to: tetra50

Shortly after my last post I turned on CNN, as I am studying the PsyOps and Revolution in Military Affairs

As you are researching that topic, if you were not already aware, some good places for you to find information are:
DTIC
Public Intelligence
Cryptome
Global Security
Correlates of War
just to name a few. You may also want to cross reference PsyOps with "Full Spectrum Dominance" "Information Superiority/Dominance" and "information Operations (IO)" if you were not already aware.

a reply to: AllSourceIntel

Thank you kindly for the links. I don't study it in-depth, per se, but I just try to understand what is going on in the world as an outside observer, detached from being "for" or "against". I still do not know which types of information really bothers certain types of people, but from what I understand the Snowden and Cryptome stuff isn't especially appreciated.

a reply to: ErosA433

Right.

However, optics are still on the table. A lot of security cameras all around the world are connected to networks accessible by the government.

Along side the blips on the Google Earth like map of every GPS enabled cell phone, they also have security cameras identified and displaying on same 3D map... like this:



...and don't think that little camera on your cell phone is off limits, and doesn't show up on said map like the video above whenever you use it, or when the gov. wants to use it without you knowing.

This highlights a deeper problem, though, what Corsair is saying, despite his detached neutrality.
What I'm talking about is, let's say everything is recorded. Then we assume that events are happening the way they are described and portrayed, cause after all, it's recorded, right?

But this just isn't really true. There are many ways to tamper with recording anything, making it seem as though it's an actual, incontrovertible proof of the way things happened.

This takes this thread in a whole different direction, and I was striving to stay on topic, but here I must bring this up.

About a week ago, I found online the cell phone video (or one of them, I don't know that there may be more than one now) and the very next morning woke up to see pictures posted on ATS that didn't look at all like what I'd seen the day before on the cell phone video. There were details about his body that were markedly different. It was as though I went to bed to sleep, and when I awoke it was a different kid, different circumstances, to match a video of seemingly the same dead kid hastling someone in a convenience store. But this kid didn't look like the one I'd seen in the cell phone video the day before…..

This isn't the first time I have observed something like that happening: A marked change in a period of time, to fit a more, shall we say, convenient, for certain groups of people or interests, story…

Because you have a tape of events doesn't mean that's really how it went down. The tape can be altered, edited, something wholly different spliced in, etc.
tetra