What is Digg?119 Comments
- SlackerCSB, on 10/12/2007, -14/+101No, it's THEIR right.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+32There have been lasers powerful enough to do this for a LONG time... universities have long had to be careful when doing outdoor experiments with lasers, using oversized backdrops to prevent their lasers from harming any satellites.
While i can sympathize with the chinese wanting to keep people from spying on them (i wouldnt want the chinese spying on me), what theyre doing is only going to force the rest of the world down the road towards space militarization. - jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23They probably did it just so they could make more work for themselves building us new ones.
- crpietschmann, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22How many Chinese made parts are inside our spy satellites that we use to spy on China?
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -8/+26They're trying to destroy Google Earth!
Btw, read up on "parasitic satellites." You can launch a whole bunch of them into space and they'd take down anything flying around up there. Very simple devices that are likely already in at least one country's inventory.
There goes my DirecTV! Bloody Communists! - neophenix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17I believe directv, and satellites of that sort (XM/Sirius, etc) are all in geosync orbit, so they would not be over china to begin with.
- rosebot, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19If you're gonna be racist, at least get it right.
Title says Chinese, not Japanese. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -12/+25If they've signed on to any "no-space-based-weapons" treaties then they'd be "in the wrong."
- Lososaurus, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17If you complain to me that I shined a laser pointer in your eye for spying through my window, I'll ask you, 'what the ***** were you doing spying through my window?'
- afex, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15@lostboy
i worked @ a naval def. contractor, and let me tell you - the cheapest part gets the job.
and guess where they make the cheapest parts? - zeptobyte, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18They didn't blow anything up. They used a laser to blind it. They didn't actually do any damage.
- growler1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13The difference between when they shoot theirs and we shoot ours:
We play Pink Floyd. - daldredge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Because no other countries have such birds in space...
- Lane, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13its not their right to hide themselves its their privilege that the US take interest. ^^
- OandA, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11 @h00paj00
Are you refering to the laser as being space based? Because then I don't see how that would violate the no space based weapons since this laser is ground based. Unless I missed something. Also can it really be classified as a weapon if it all it does is blind the satellite? Anyway I think they're well within their right to do it. - ShrimpCrackers, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13No its not their right. The problem is that China considers all the space above their country to be part of their territory, reaching up into space ad infinitum, much like the time their Defence Minister said that all waters 1000 miles away from their shores, is part of their territory. God forbid they get a bit testy one day and decide to shoot down the ISS or the Space Shuttle. A bit excessive yes.
- DonPMitchell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10First of all, according to treaty, a nation does not own outer space above their territory. Shooting down a satellite while it happens to be 200 km above China is like sinking a ship that happens to be 200 km off their shore.
Secondly, satellite recon is an important stabilizing and peace-keeping force in the world. It is dangerous to not know if another super power is building a new weapons system or massing troups on their border.
Oh..sorry ShrimpCrackers...like you said. - JeffD, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10@h00paj00 RTFA
"acknowledge[d] China has the ability to blind U.S. satellites, thanks to a powerful ground-based laser."
Ground based. As in they're on the ground, not in space. Hence, no violation of any anti space weaponry treaties. - plaunie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Probably a lot.
All components designed for the military have to be made in the US. But, if they're dual use (IE the designers picked an off the shelf board or something... All bets are off. - EricAnderton, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10"Components. American components, Russian Components, ALL MADE IN TAIWAN!"
- webcrumb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I propose the creation of a giant space disco ball... I will call it the Disco Star, and it will have a giant funk beam that will annihilate the squareness of any planet in its path. Baby.
- sailor, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Put mirrors on the surface of the satellite...can't be called a weapon, but would bounce the laser right back at them.....disco ball in space...burn baby burn...Lp
- gruvsf, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11good point. I am sure that we can respond kindly by putting up more satellites up there so that they'll need even more lasers, preferably the US-made kind
- XSforMe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"American Defence contractors would source anything from a hostile foreign country."
Damn... no +Funny mod in here. - vuke69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5A cold war between China and the US would do neither of us any good. We need their stuff, and they need our money. I don't care if there is a huge trade imbalance between us. The more money we send them, the better.
Let me explain...
The seeds of change have are already starting to sprout in China. The middle class is growing exponentially, and people are becoming more educated about the world outside of China. And they have discovered one critical thing, they like money, and they like freedom. In 20 years China will be USA v2.0 (whatever that means) I envision (and hope for) a peaceful transfer of power, or even closer to an evolution, from communism, to a more open, democratic type system (probably with strong socialist roots though, nature of the beast). They are smart, they will learn from our mistakes. But I'm sure by now they understand that the tighter the grip, the more will slip through your fingers. Because they will have also learned from the attempts of the Soviets to change to a more open system of government. And how they not only landed on their face, but bounced a couple of times, then managed to kick themselves in the face while still bleeding profusely from the mouth and nose. So they will learn. And they WILL become the most powerful economic force on the planet. Hoping they will be a democracy, is probably asking too much. But as long as they are "good guys" (fair to their citizens, play nice in the sandbox, etc.), that's enough for me.
Ancient Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times"
Interesting times indeed... - Snarfy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Thousands of man hours and millions of dollars, defeated by... a mirror.
- Zeuser, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Hey, at least they didn't shoot down a U-2 flying overhead. Remember 1956?
It's perfectly within China's right to blind a satelite over their territory. Wanna bet the U.S. does the same?
China is pro-US so long as Americans keep buying their crappy products. - kwilliam71, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12So, how far above the planet do nations have a right to? And what if the satellite was above Hawaii looking over at them from an angle (in theory)? Do they still have a right to blow it up? Does this mean they can blow up the ISS and/or the shuttle just for looking in their direction? It seems this action poses more questions then to aticle suggests. The other scary question is, who China could sell this technology to.
- bobothn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4i thought china and iran were buddies (both getting support from russia)
I might be wrong. - BIllyBobFett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You can't have a SPY satellite that goes over a single place because spy satellites want to be close to the earth, and a geostationary orbit is very far away from the earth (35,786 km versus as low as 150 km for a normal orbit, obviously a huge difference if you want to take pictures). At a low orbit, you have to orbit faster, so you can't be geostationary.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Everyone needs to turn on their sarcasm detector.
- bfoot, on 10/12/2007, -12/+15"While i can sympathize with the chinese wanting to keep people from spying on them (i wouldnt want the chinese spying on me), what theyre doing is only going to force the rest of the world down the road towards space militarization."
No, it is the US spy satelite that is going to force the rest of the world down the road towards space militarization, not the other way around. - orangetiki, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Gee, why not just turn the Hubble into one gigantic magnetic rail gun? All you need is one massive hunk of space junk, magnets, a few fins for steering the metal hunk, and some gps technology. Probably would have more power then a nuke, and without the radiation like mess.
- j3one, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8visual proof from the article...
http://www.defensetech.org/images/starfire-optical-range-laser3.jpg
Marked as inaccurate. The site and article are BS. While there may be truth to all or none of what they say, they are not a legit site.
we need a marked as BS button.. seriously. - kwilliam71, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10I was just trying to stimulate some thought here... I'm sure "blowing up" satellites isn't too far down the road if they're blinding them today.
- chris86, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3What you just said was total crap and sounds like a solution that would be on Star Trek.
- BIllyBobFett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3And you'd need a huge source of power for the railgun, and a design for a railgun that doesn't wear out quickly, and a way to balance out the recoil.
- alphex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2its not the light, its the heat delivered by the photons.
That being said, you don't need a laser powerful enough to blow a hole in the orbital, just one powerful enough to blind it. - mookieXL, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"how hard would it be for the U.S. Satellites to send a sign that piggybacks from the laser beam itself back to the station and disruptes or destroys said laser station. I'm sure the U.S. is looking into those possibilites"
That technology already exists. It's called mirror. - dstz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Poor world forced to space militarization because of China. We would never ever have thought of doing so, otherwise.
- vuke69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Change would need to come from within, and on a massive scale. A couple hundred college students wont cut it. And hopefully change will come peacefully. A revolution in China, would be bad for the whole world.
If some random *stan has a revolution, chances are the world will barely notice. If China has a revolution, it could criple the world economy for decades. Not to mention the massive potential for loss of life. A particulary ugly revolution in china could see hundreds of millions dead. Talk about a disturbance in the force... - BIllyBobFett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Mirrors aren't really a solution. First, you can't put a mirror over the camera of course, and second, a laser can still destroy a mirrored surface: not all of the light is reflected back, and the light that's not reflected heats up the mirror until it doesn't reflect any more, and then you're back where you started, except you had to pay for the cost of launching the mirror.
- OrangeTide, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4One problem is that you can't put a spy satellite up that only goes over the middle east. you put that puppy in a polar orbit and it will eventually pass over every country on earth.
And nothing the US could say would make China believe that we aren't spying on them. (because we almost certainly are).
I think likely this will just result in an arms race of counter measures. but I would hope that the US and China could cooperate on some spy equipment to keep an eye on countries like Iran. Maybe cooperation would relieve tension between China and the US.
I don't see why China is so touchy though, they get most of our money. China wouldn't have traffic problems if it wasn't for the US, their citizens are able to afford cars and gasoline because of the profits made off trade with the US. If I ran China I would spend money on pulling in more trade and manipulating the currency to China's benefit rather than building lasers to blind satellites. Likely most Chinese would agree. Peaceful prosperity should be China's goal. - OrangeTide, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4It's an embarrassment that a freedom loving country like the US would even trade with China. I wish there was some standard level of human rights that had to be followed for countries to participate in free trade. Although such things are funny because China publishes reports on the US's human rights violations, in response to the US doing the same. (although the US's publications aren't really politically motivated, they are more meant to be used for internal reference)
But in the defense of some of the commenter, if the China was spying on the US we would likely perform similar countermeasures. I think when people say they can sympathize with China, they really mean they understand the motives clearly and don't have an ethical problem with blinding a foreign nation's spy satellites. - hollowex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2“Evidence exists that China is improving its situational awareness in space, which will give it the ability to track and identify most satellites. Such capability will allow for the deconfliction of Chinese satellites, and would also be required for offensive actions. At least one of the satellite attack systems appears to be a groundbased laser designed to damage or blind imaging satellites.” - ARC
http://www.ahole.org/ChinaReport2006.pdf
go there for the official government document - antron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Nationalism will bring us victory!"
- Russell102, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Look like we are back to the SR-71. Or a total new spy plane that flyies even faster
- strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3We already have that. And we've actually disabled one of our old satellites in a test with one of ours. Not just blinded one temporarily.
- rpdillon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Umm, how do you know? By that picture? That pictuure is of Starfire Optical Range, in the US. And I'm pretty sure that's what it looks like when we use the range to track satellites.
I did a quick search:
http://images.google.com/images?q=starfire+optical+range&hl=en&btnG=Search+Images
Further, DefenseTech is the blog for Military.com. Just check:
http://www.military.com/blog/defensetech
is the same page as defensetech.org.
Besides, if you bothered to read thr whole article, there is a note at the end talking about the implausibility of China having this tech quite yet. - neozeed, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Let's all go to the closes Chinese ambassadors office (Walmart) and donate to the cause!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 118 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 