White House roof edited in USGS photos

Tiny Human Ferret wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
Tiny Human Ferret writes:
Of course, since these images are captured over time, it might be
possible to determine the type of a watch, but actually reading the time
won't be possible, since it won't be the same time in any of the
sequence of captures. ;-)

You know what time intervals separate the images; just rotate them to
compensate, and the hands of the watch will be in the same place. With
suitable enhancement you'll be able to read the watch.

Where there's a will, there's a way.

Besides, if you knew what time it was when you took the images, just
photoshop the correct time onto the face of their watch!

Of course, then you'll never know if their watch was set wrong.

Sure you will. Monitor your subject's cellphone to determine what time his
next appointment is. When he leaves the house and turns his wrist to glance
at his watch (which you can catch on the satellite), observe whether he
subsequently moves slower or faster than necessary to reach his appointment.
If he moves slower than necessary, his watch is behind. If he moves faster,
his watch is ahead. After a few observations like this you will be able to
triangulate on the exact difference between his watch setting and the actual
time.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

Mxsmanic wrote:
Paul Cooper writes:
1) The atmosphere isn't stable enough to allow detailed registration
of the images

Insofar as the atmosphere is predictable and measurable in its
distorting behavior, this is not a problem.

A red gel filter is predictable and measurable in its distorting behavior.
Doesn't mean you can "undo" it after the fact.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

Mxsmanic wrote:
Tiny Human Ferret writes:


Besides, if you knew what time it was when you took the images, just
photoshop the correct time onto the face of their watch!


You know the intervals at which the photos are taken, not the current
time of day as shown on the watch.

Actually, locating the position in both space and time of something in
orbit is a rather precise science.

My point was that there's no need to read the time on someone's watch
from a satellite in space; the time is already known. Thus there's no
need for the None Such Agency to have the technology to read someone's
watch from a satellite in space, and thus no such technology has ever
been developed.

fnord


--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbon, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire"

Miguel Cruz wrote:
Tiny Human Ferret wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:

Tiny Human Ferret writes:

Of course, since these images are captured over time, it might be
possible to determine the type of a watch, but actually reading the time
won't be possible, since it won't be the same time in any of the
sequence of captures. ;-)

You know what time intervals separate the images; just rotate them to
compensate, and the hands of the watch will be in the same place. With
suitable enhancement you'll be able to read the watch.

Where there's a will, there's a way.

Besides, if you knew what time it was when you took the images, just
photoshop the correct time onto the face of their watch!

Of course, then you'll never know if their watch was set wrong.


Sure you will. Monitor your subject's cellphone to determine what time his
next appointment is. When he leaves the house and turns his wrist to glance
at his watch (which you can catch on the satellite), observe whether he
subsequently moves slower or faster than necessary to reach his appointment.
If he moves slower than necessary, his watch is behind. If he moves faster,
his watch is ahead. After a few observations like this you will be able to
triangulate on the exact difference between his watch setting and the actual
time.

Hah! Either you just outed yourself as a consultant, or put up your "for
hire" sign as a potential consultant.

Of course, you are clearly a technophile and prefer technical solutions,
most "agency" types would just sneak in with a black-bag operation and
either record the time on his watch and compare it to a
known-to-be-right watch, or they'd just set his watch to the time they
wanted it to read.

If they took the first approach, they'd probably do several black-bag
operations just to make sure that they knew exactly how fast or slow was
the drift away from "sync" on his watch. If they took the second
approach, they'd probably have to run psychological-profile updates on
all of their employees so that they could put a "hit" on whoever was
most likely to deride the satellite programs with the remark "properly
conceived technologies, when implimented correctly, are
indistinguishable from a rigged demo".

Maybe we can have a contest along the lines of various agencies
approaches to the problem of reading someone's watch via satellite in
space?

NSA: focus lots of antennas on the watch to get accurate readings on the
quartz oscillator clocks-rate of the watch, no need for a satellite
because you don't need to read the time on the face of the watch, you
already _know_ what time it is.

CIA: steal the watch, set it to the proper time, return it to the target
watch-wearer, fake the satellite images and blackmail the staff into
keeping it quiet.

DIA: doesn't care what the target's watch says, they've got their own
timetable.

FBI: what's a satellite? Time? let me radio the dispatcher. They'll get
hundreds of agents on it right away.

DHS: Our hundreds of focus groups are preparing your local leaders on
how to be more aware of their potential roles in any emergency. Maybe we
can talk them into asking this guy what time it is.

MPD: wait until the target hocks his watch, bust the pawnbroker, look at
the time on the watch and say "yah, okay, we know what time it is now
and thus we know what time it was then, and it was... then!" Misfile a
report and forget all about it.


--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbon, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire"

Miguel Cruz writes:

A red gel filter is predictable and measurable in its distorting behavior.
Doesn't mean you can "undo" it after the fact.

The distortion in the filter can be undone. The information removed by
the filter cannot be recovered. Transforming information and removing
it are two very different things.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Doug writes:

Baloney !!....the only words you can read are the ones focused on. You are
unconsciously scanning the rest of the page with short scans, which gives
the illussion that you can comprehend the whole page.

Exactly, QED.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

"Tiny Human Ferret" wrote in message
...
My point was that there's no need to read the time on someone's watch
from a satellite in space; the time is already known. Thus there's no
need for the None Such Agency to have the technology to read someone's
watch from a satellite in space, and thus no such technology has ever
been developed.

That conclusion is based on the assumption that watches, or
more precisely the features on watch faces, are the only things
of that size that anyone might possibly be interested in resolving.
This, of course, is nonsense.

Bob M.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Miguel Cruz writes:
A red gel filter is predictable and measurable in its distorting behavior.
Doesn't mean you can "undo" it after the fact.

The distortion in the filter can be undone. The information removed by
the filter cannot be recovered. Transforming information and removing
it are two very different things.

As has been explained, information is irrevocably lost in transit from the
ground to the atmosphere.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

Tiny Human Ferret wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote:
Tiny Human Ferret wrote:
Of course, then you'll never know if their watch was set wrong.

Sure you will. Monitor your subject's cellphone to determine what time his
next appointment is. When he leaves the house and turns his wrist to glance
at his watch (which you can catch on the satellite), observe whether he
subsequently moves slower or faster than necessary to reach his appointment.
If he moves slower than necessary, his watch is behind. If he moves faster,
his watch is ahead. After a few observations like this you will be able to
triangulate on the exact difference between his watch setting and the actual
time.

Hah! Either you just outed yourself as a consultant, or put up your "for
hire" sign as a potential consultant.

Of course, you are clearly a technophile and prefer technical solutions,
most "agency" types would just sneak in with a black-bag operation and
either record the time on his watch and compare it to a
known-to-be-right watch, or they'd just set his watch to the time they
wanted it to read.

If they took the first approach, they'd probably do several black-bag
operations just to make sure that they knew exactly how fast or slow was
the drift away from "sync" on his watch. If they took the second
approach, they'd probably have to run psychological-profile updates on
all of their employees so that they could put a "hit" on whoever was
most likely to deride the satellite programs with the remark "properly
conceived technologies, when implimented correctly, are
indistinguishable from a rigged demo".

Maybe we can have a contest along the lines of various agencies
approaches to the problem of reading someone's watch via satellite in
space?

NSA: focus lots of antennas on the watch to get accurate readings on the
quartz oscillator clocks-rate of the watch, no need for a satellite
because you don't need to read the time on the face of the watch, you
already _know_ what time it is.

CIA: steal the watch, set it to the proper time, return it to the target
watch-wearer, fake the satellite images and blackmail the staff into
keeping it quiet.

DIA: doesn't care what the target's watch says, they've got their own
timetable.

FBI: what's a satellite? Time? let me radio the dispatcher. They'll get
hundreds of agents on it right away.

DHS: Our hundreds of focus groups are preparing your local leaders on
how to be more aware of their potential roles in any emergency. Maybe we
can talk them into asking this guy what time it is.

MPD: wait until the target hocks his watch, bust the pawnbroker, look at
the time on the watch and say "yah, okay, we know what time it is now
and thus we know what time it was then, and it was... then!" Misfile a
report and forget all about it.

I yield. I know when I've been outdone.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

Miguel Cruz writes:

As has been explained, information is irrevocably lost in transit from the
ground to the atmosphere.

Virtually no information is _lost_, but much of it is _transformed_.
Transformations can be undone. That's what the newest ground-based
telescopes are doing, and it works from above, too.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.