I understand that is what is usually used, but I was asking for the actual details which was scanty in the article. Is this what they did or are they still looking into the forensics?
To be devils advocate here we also have to promote healthy eating, getting screened for cancer, or smoking PSAs. Just because something might be classified as "superior" doesn't mean that it will always self promote or be accessible.
That's not exactly how it works. The satellite operator will be taking paid orders to scan over specific areas of the earth, about 4km in width or so.
So you have to have a pretty good idea where the carrier is, and then you get an image delivered with some latency as the satellite will need to pass over a ground station that downlinks the data.
So it isn't free (although umbra has a CC BY 4.0 license for their data, much more permissive than other providers. Nor is it easy to search huge amounts of the ocean for the carrier.
What most entities probably do is tip and cue, which is use a sensor with coarser resolution to get an approximate location and then use a sensor with finer resolution to look closer.
This has been brought up by a collective, in response to Ubisoft removing an online-only racing game from players libraries after purchase when they shut it down.
Yes, but each language splits reality up differently, and with different implications.
I've noticed several native German speakers, when using English, would say things like "I spilled coffee on my table and now he is wet" — I don't think they were asserting that the table was objectively male, just because it was grammatically male.
From my understanding it comes from a law passed that allows unlimited access by state intelligence services in China to any firms customer data.
"The most controversial sections of the law include Article 7 which potentially compels businesses registered or operating in the People's Republic of China to hand over information to Chinese intelligence agencies such as the MSS and to conceal the fact that they do so." [1]
The same laws apply to American companies for American data requested by American agencies, is that better? And likely Norwegian too, but I don't know the specifics there.
Actually, the Chinese government holding my data is probably better than my own government holding and using it to incriminate me. I'm pretty sure China doesn't share the data they're collecting with their adversaries or even allies.
Which like yeah, but the US doesn't exactly come out smelling like a rose here. The whole EU-US transatlantic data transfer spat surrounding Facebook was because of PRISM which EU courts ruled gave the US the same level of access.
If you're in the US you could make an argument that it's fine because it's your own government -- which I don't really buy because China can't arrest you over here -- but to everyone else US tech and business should be just as toxic as China if that's the real motivation.
The CLOUD act has provisions that allow a company to challenge a warrant if the target is not a US person and obtaining the data would violate local laws.
I have found ground.news [1] decent, it limits the AI to creating quick summaries and assessing which side of the political spectrum news articles and organisations fall. The rest is up to the reader.
There is a buch of forensic methods around this.
reply