SPRING 1998-- - HOME

BIG BROTHER TAKES TO THE SKIES

While publicity and hype has gone to the communications satellites (Motorola's "Iridium" network for cellular, U.S. Satellite Broadcasting for cable, etc.), some less publicized satellites are being launched into orbit for more sinister reasons -- to take pictures of the terrain and citizens of the United States.

An article in Investor's Business ("Another Satellite Business Tries to Get on the Map," November 11, 1997) is straight out of George Orwell's 1984. We're not talking about ordinary long distance, low resolution pictures -- but digitalized photographs "with the most precise resolution to ever be put into orbit." These low-orbit satellites travel at a range of 400 miles from the surface of the planet, and "can detail an object as small as one-meter wide." That, my friend, is high resolution indeed. Twenty years ago, the best CIA satellites could only detail an object measuring three meters long.

While most of the companies in this picture-taking business aren't making any money at it yet, some stock-market analysts predict a billion-dollar business within the next few years. There are already about 50 of these "remote-sensing" satellites in orbit, and most of them are owned by governments. The economic benefits of such satellites are (1) helping farmers know which crops need more water or pesticides, (2) facilitating the sale of properties by real estate brokers, (3) aiding assessing insurance claims by tornado victims, and (4) providing this service to various police departments.

Who is the biggest player in this wanna-be spy network? A Colorado-based company called Space Imaging (half-owned by Lockheed Martin and Raytheon Corporation)! They are not only concerned with launching these satellites, but with interpreting what these photographs mean. Brian Webster, Space Imaging's Director of Marketing, says, "That's where we see the biggest segment of our business -- in the information derived and disseminated from the imagery." Space Imaging's next two launches are scheduled for March and September of 1998.

Two other companies that yearn for trench coats are planning to launch "remote-sensing" satellites of their own next year. Like Space Imaging's devices, they have one-meter resolution capabilities. They're called Orbinage (a subsidiary of Orbital Sciences Corp., located in -- note the irony! -- Dulles, Virginia!) and Earthwatch (owned by Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp. of Muncie, Indiana). Depending on the needs of the people or agencies buying them, these photographs will cost anywhere from $5 to $150 per square mile. Taking into account that it currently costs in the neighborhood of $250 for police to photograph a square mile of terrain from an aircraft, it's obvious who'll be Space Imaging's chief customer in the future.

It's not a laughing matter. The satellites are quite real, and their uses will invade everybody's privacy. They will be used and abused by the police agencies. Hell, they're using them already. But what they're doing with them now is nothing compared to what they'll be doing with them in the future. This spying type of satellite is a business in its infancy,.Ask yourself what new technology or gadget has ever come out that the police didn't go out and get? I defy you to name one! It's the nature of little boys (or grown men playing little boy games) to have the latest gizmo from Mattel to lend credence to the illusion of whatever role they're playing. If these agencies will go out and buy a damn tank to crash through somebody's living room, can anyone seriously believe they won't want access to a satellite? Again, we're not talking about the fuzzy pictures that showed the missile silos in Cuba circa 1962, but high-resolution digital photographs that can highlight the spots on your beagle! Growing a plant or two of ghanja in your back yard? Busted! Make no mistake about it. That will be their initial justification for using it. They'll say they're only scanning for particular shades of green in your vegetable gardens to crack down on drug cultivations. And if you think the technology will end with random still shots, you're underestimating the capabilities of what digital satellites can do and how rapidly the technological gains are advancing.

Remember a few years ago when all you could transmit over your computer was a still photograph, and how extremely choppy were the first attempts at video conferencing? Now we are very close to real-time, continuous transmissions. Technologically speaking, there's no reason why those digital satellites can't transmit video-camera-quality movies of what's going on in your patio as hubby grills hamburgers. Would it be more expensive? Yes, but since when did the price ever stop the police from acquiring the latest doodad? And like all emerging technologies, the price always goes down when a service or technology goes into mass production. The more it's used, the less it costs. And the day will come when any given spot in America will be instantly accessible to police surveillance. Will anyone object? I doubt it. Does anyone object to all the closed-circuit TV cameras in the banks, 7-11s, malls, or shopping centers? Slowly but surely, we're becoming anesthetized to being filmed, photographed, and watched. Did anyone besides me notice how many reels of security camera footage were available for review in the Oklahoma City bombing? There were hundreds! Cameras are everywhere. So why not in the sky? If we don't mind the ones we can see, why mind the ones 400 miles above the surface? Why? Because what goes on in the privacy of your own property, in your home and in your yard, is nobody's business but your own. Or at least that's the way it used to be.

One has to wonder at some of the so-called "advances" we're making and how they are being used by people in power. Cell phones? There's not a phone conversation that can't be intercepted. Although Cycomm International, Motorola, and several others have encryption cards that can scramble and stop most prying hackers (read: criminals trying to steal your cell phone or credit card number), they do absolutely nothing to stop state, local, or federal police agencies. Why? Because in the United States, at least, they don't allow any encryption software to be marketed without first providing law agencies with the encryption keys. That goes for telecommunication companies as well as computer software companies.

And speaking of computers -- and Internet in particular -- most people don't know that the operating system of all Microsoft products has a "bug" in it that allows your hits on any web site to be tracked to your own PC. Once again, while this technology was devised by advertising agencies to record the number of hits their web sites receive, it also allows Big Brother to see what kind of political, sexual, or social interests you have that may be useful to him. And once again, any encryption software you may use is totally ineffectual at keeping the government from knowing what web site you've visited, and what you did or didn't say or download there. Anonymity? There's no such thing anymore.

And while the insurance companies are abusing the genetic testing that may identify you as possessing some hereditary disease (or the possibility of your possessing a gene that may or may not mutate into a hereditary disease), this is only the beginning of where genetic sequencing will be leading us. For example, a gene has been identified that's believed to lead to "aggressive" behavior? If that would identify who'll be the next maniac who climbs into a bell tower with a high-powered rifle, one could argue that that's not such a bad thing. But what exactly is "aggressive" behavior? I suspect we could easily interchange competitive behavior with aggressive behavior. Do we want a homicidal or assaultive people erased from the face of the earth -- even if it takes some genetic reengineering? Probably. But do we want it at the expense of eliminating ambition, competitiveness, and the entrepreneurial spirit that is the foundation of our innovation? That seems to be a pretty steep price. And don't think that once companies like Human Genome Sciences successfully identify and chart every gene in the human body, they won't eventually be used -- and abused -- by people in authority!

History is replete with examples of precisely this kind of manipulation. In the current transitional phase, fingerprint scans on our credit cards, retinal scans at the ATMs, eyes in the skies, ears on our telephones, tracks on our computer screens, and the sequencing of our very genes mean not only the end of our anonymity, but the end of our individuality. It's not enough to know who we are, what we do, and where we go, but who we're likely to be, where we're subject to go, and what we're capable of doing. We're on the bridge of the 21st century all right, and it's taking us directly to 1984.

--Randy Gometz writes from prison at Florence, Colorado

Spring 1998-- N.C.Xpress -- Archives -- Electrons to the Editor