Slashdot Mirror
Eye in the Sky Busts Fraudulent Farmers
Peter Kuhns writes: "Awesome article about Big Brother using USGS satellite photos to ferret out a fraudulent farming company that scammed insurance companies over lost crops. The USGS apparantly takes lots of infrared (re:remote sensing) photos of the entire nation and stores this data going back a number of years. This is a big wake up call to farmers, the government, and potentially the USGS, who could suddenly be in the business of big business." Another very cool use of USGS data is drawmap, which I discovered a few months ago.
lawyer: Your honor, recent X-Ray signals picked up by the SOHO solar observatory suggest that Earth's natural infrared emmissions reflect off the sun's surface and can be reassembled into images as you can see here in exhibit A. While we'd like to thank the scientists for their incredible work, however damaging these images are to the defendants case, I'd like to draw the courts attention to the eye witness' account of the Adjuster who claims no crops were planted.
- A.P.
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
Since probably many people on /. probably don't know how this works, I'll post a brief summary.
;^)
The aperature equation determines the resolution of a satellite (or any other imaging instrument).
X = h*lambda/(L*cos(A))
where h is the height, lambda is the wavelength of the electromagnetic signal (light, radio, etc),
L*cos(A) is the projected length of the receiver (antenna, lens aperature)...
Plugging in some numbers say...
h=1000km, (too high for a survellance satellite, but easier math)
lambda=1um (near infra-red)
L=1m (a small satellite)
With this you get 1 meter resolution (yikes), although it doesn't account for distortion, etc...
Of course one way to increase the resolution is to get closer (reduce h), use higher frequencies
(reduce wavelengths), or increase the receiving aperature (big satellites are hard to fly).
Then there's this trick to increase the resolution of satellites that combine multiple "looks" of
the same object from different positions to simulate a large aperature. This technique is
called synthetic aperature imaging.
Non-geo-stationary satellites can combine multiple "looks" at a point while they fly by to
improve the resoltion. Of course there are problems like dopper shift, atmospheric distortion,
range shifts, etc that have to get accounted for, but this is the basic idea.
The problem with a geo-stationary satellite looking at you is that they fly very high
(very large h) and the don't move relative to the point target.
Of course a more realistic account would be in Tom Clancy's Patriot games where the real-time
image could only be obtained for a short time until the low-flying fast-moving spy satellite
couldn't see the target any more over the horizon...
But I digress...
Google Category
Chris Cothrun
Curator of Chaos
Bleh!
EXACTLY. While a lot of the things Government-authorized people are allowed to do these days does bother me, I've never had a problem with the "plain view doctrine". A police officer pulling someone over at random and demanding to search the car just in case they're carrying drugs bothers me, but a police officer pulling over a car with smoke pouring out of the windows and arresting the driver on the basis that there's a planter full of marijuana plants plainly visible in the front seat next to an open, half-empty bottle of Jack Daniels doesn't really bother me at all...
100's of acres of land out in the open sounds like "plain view" to me, too.
---
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
Not to promote Mickeysoft or anything, but they have an awfully nice timekiller on the web called Terraserver. It holds a crapload of fairly-recent USGS satellite maps (1994/1996 or so) that you can zoom in on, and pick out your home town, your home street, even your house and the car in your driveway from orbit...Your entire neighborhood photographed at 1m resolution. For example, I work here...Zoom in, and you can see me waving to the satellite's camera.
Cheers,
Bowie J. Poag
Actually, there is the possibility of tasking a satellite (starting with the KH-11 series) so that it crosses over the path of what you are interested in. (Retasking satellites is only done in cases of national interest as it is expensive) From there a rotating mirror can keep the target in constant field of view as the satellite passes overhead. Additionally it is more than likely (attn: NSA, public domain info) that electro-optical based satellites can be tasked to fly in geosynchronous orbits to maintain constant observation without all of the the issues associated with image processing of data obtained at various angles of incidence. Of course if you are talking of pure video relay, there is little processing to perform other than cleaning up images looking through lots of atmosphere etc... Also it should be noted that while optimal resolution of imagery can achieve 10cm or slightly better, video resolution is much worse. (20-30 cm at best) (Attn: NSA, public domain info). If you are looking at IR video, it will be lower resolution than standard video. (50cm at best)
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I hope this isn't off topic, but a segment of the government that doesn't get much spotlight is the work the USGS does. Here's a great example. The USGS does a great job for the country (whether or not you like the big brother mentality of this article). They monitor stream flow, mineral resources, earthquake activiey, etc.
/. community will get in an uproar when NASA gets its huge budget cut, but I would make the case you should all be aware of the great work the USGS does, and maybe support their great silent works.
I use to work for the USGS and they have had their budget cut year after year. I don't think they'll do too well under the Bush administration either. One of the things they were really working on when I left them was public relations. The USGS does alot for you all, whether you know it or not. Everyone in the
If I had no sense of humor, I would long ago have committed suicide. -Ghandi
Now that I have that said...
At one point or another your property (the few of you that actually own property in the USA) was probably imaged this week. Your land is probably imaged 30 or 40 times a year (especially right now where there is maximum sun and sun angles are very high). That 30-40 doesn't count being spied on the NRO or the Russians (or whomever else). Most of the pictures are so low-res that they get what they need for time-sensitive maps (crops, diseases, erosion, land types, etc) that short of you doing something outrageously odd, you'll not be bothered.
How do you think that your precious GPS navigator got its maps? It wasn't from a State Road Inventories since they are not accurate enough. It was from being overflown.
Ever see big Xs, +s or Ls painted on the pavement? Well those are there so the overflight photos can be tied to known geographic locations and the photos can be tied together to build a mosaic.
What makes this story vaguely more intresting is that it is about satelite photos, not traditional air photos. Further the USGS took the photos but the USDA got to use them.
USDA has been overflying on crop validations since at least the 1960s (perhaps as far back as the mid-1940s). How do you think the estimates of crop production get produced? Overflights by Billy-Bob in his Piper with a classic B/W Kodak IR film (roughly 10"x10" negatives, BTW) do most of the heavy lifting then some poor photogramitrist measures whatever was of interest and poof, yet another thematic map.
You folks need some sense of how the world works. Most of this has been happening since long before you were born.
-- Multics
See also:
GEOG 415-001: Air Photo Interpretation
Air Photo Interpretation
And for you EUers, Air Photo Services.
P.S. About crop insurance... go read the USDA web site before you spout about it -- no bailouts there, oh clueless ones.
Between this publicity and cool people like Orlando Jones' character in _Evolution_ working for the USGS, I think I've found my new favorite organization.
Okay, seriously: Busting fraud is way cool in my book.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
I see a fun anarchist legend in the works...
Get black paint, and cover up the white crosses.
Get white paint, and paint random Xs, +s or Ls all over your town in random locations.
Before they know it, the USGS will be mapping Los Angeles right next to San Jose! Wish I could see those Geologists faces right now...
"Holy shit! Now THAT is some big Continental Drift!"
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
This is interesting because now we have a systematically assembled and stored database.
The question is, if the spatial resolution on these scans were good enough to detect growing lamps in your house (who knows?), would the authorities need a search warrant to look at their own data?
This raises a more general question about the use of data mining for law enforcement. With increased collection of data about where we go and what we do (credit card records, electronic toll paying devices, face recognition software, satellite images, etc.) Can (and should) the government search datasets that it owns (or others) looking for suspicious patterns? Yes, they can use these data once they suspect you, but can they use it to find new suspects?
I'm so tired and light-headed I've turned into The President Of The United States.
Jack Valenti and the MPAA are to technology as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone
I just showed this article to a soybean farmer friend of mine (5500+ acres in southwest Iowa).
Besides not being surprised that the government would spend its billion dollar defense network on spying on the little guy, he pointed out how amusing it was that all this energy is going into protecting the government's crop insurance stake while the farmer is slowly slipping into oblivion.
(And before some city fool posts an obnoxious, ignorant post about crop subsidies and all the government waste, let me point out that these guys can't stand it either - but faced with government protection of wholesale monopolies that name their price for crops in ebay fashion, that subsidy means the difference between them eeking out a pathetic survival and you having nothing on your dinner plate).
Record low crop prices, record high fuel and fertilizer prices and the whole mess about GMOs (resulting in international boycotts of US produced foods, using GMO as an excuse for nationalistic crop protection) are encouraging the die hards to get out of the business. Heck, in the state of Washington, they're considering paying apple producers to simply destroy orchards. They can't affect the wholesalers, so they'll affect you at home (while the wholesalers rake in even more dollars).
It'll backlash, certainly. Consumers are engineering the beginnings of a California energy crisis in the agriculture markets by choosing to destroy their producers. Just like the greens in CA successfully killed off electricity production, protection of ag distribution monopolies combined with other factors will ensure prohibitively expensive foods in 10-15 years.
So yes, the big guy is doing well. He's smart - greasing both parties at the same time (Microsoft's recently corrected error). He's also getting a great return on his investment, especially if the world's greatest military is now working for him by spying on the serfs in the fields.
You're going to get just what the big guy wants you to buy, at the price he names. Groceries at 40%+ of your income just around the corner...
*scoove*
p.s. If you want to do something about it, support the open source of agriculture. Go down to your local farmer's market this weekend and buy food there. Slashdotters claim to hate Microsoft, yet support the Microsoft of agriculture every time they go to the big grocery store. BUY DIRECT - better, fresher, honest food!
Why didn't the insurance company send somebody out to inspect the crops? Why wouldn't the insurance company require the farmers to at least photograph the crops and the damage?
Someone you trust is one of us.
Nope. If you look around at commercial satellite imagery companies, they seem to be struggling to get a 24 hour turn around time on still images, let alone video.
And also the GPS unit on your tractor said you were doing 40MPH in a 35MPH farm zone. Here is your ticket.
Ask Slashdot - google for stupid people.
What about the recent SCOTUS decision about using heat sensors to discover pot grows? theoretically, this could even be used for the exact same thing. This stuff gives me the creeps.
Heat sensors were being used to look inside houses while these satalites photograph what is out in the open. Legally, its called "plain sight". Anything that can been seen out in the open can be used against you. For example, the police pull over a car for running a red light. The police can not open and search the trunk to find the money the people in the car just robbed from a nearby bank (unbeknownst to the police). Now, if the loot was in the back seat and the police officer could see it though the window (in "plain sight") he could use it as evidence and arrest the people in the car for the robbery. He still can't open the trunk to find the 20 killos of coke in it (unless he received a warrant, received consent from the driver, or had evidence suggesting there were drugs in it).
It would be another story if the satalites could "see" inside building (ie: infared heat sensor).
http://www.perljam.net/misc/drawmap/www.ttc-cmc.ne t/%257Efme/drawmap.html
Every farm in Europe now has to submit an annual IACS form (Integrated Administration and Control System), listing what they are going to grow that year field-by-field; and submit new maps with it showing any changes in field boundaries (new fences etc), with the new areas measured to the nearest 100 square metres (0.01 of a hectare).
These plans are then automatically compared against the IR satellite photos of what actually gets grown. If you have planted less than you have claimed for, your entire subsidy claim is void. If it looks like you've done it intentionally, they'll nail you for fraud. (The inspectors are on results bonuses, so they don't take prisoners).
Crazy system, the C.A.P., in lots of ways; but without farm support, many of the more marginal Scottish rural areas would turn into depopulated deserts.
Uh, I think you rushed to quickly to jump on big brother and not bother to notice that these satellites are infared, not photo.
These things wouldn't be able to notice the lot locations, only the houses (since your house is climate controlled, and would show up only as a yellow dot in a red background if it was a hot day outside). It would have no idea how well your home or roof are built. It would not happen to notice whether or not you were standing outside naked waving your full monty (now a legit word... thank you, Oxford) to your neighbor.
...of course, you'd probably still go to jail, if your neighbor got too offended.
Personally, although there are big brother issues, I hope everyone realizes that there are already satellites orbiting in space that take pictures of the Earth already (you know, the ones that can pick off your license plates, and the ones that can tell that you're speeding even though they're 31 miles away). We were too busy crying for better satelite TV and cell phone availability to figure out what was going on in abusing this technology.
Although, I'm glad that these things were put to good use in this case. Being from a farming state and knowing the current farm economy (or lack thereof), I'm glad to see them stopping farm insurance claim fraud, because it's incredably easy to file for...all you gotta do is spend an hour filling out the right papers, plus an hour calling your state representative demanding justice if the claim was rejected the first time. Rarely will you get a visit from any big insurance guys unless you claim some proposterous amount of land that was damaged.
Just playing devil's advocate, but I recently read a report by some economist who's thesis was that the U.S. shouldn't even be in the farming business anymore.
He was under the impression that since so much of farming is mind-numbing, dangerous, and labour-intensive work, in a perfect (capitolist ;) society farming would naturally move to 3rd World countries if there weren't tariffs, subsidies, and other assistance (daming rivers for irrigation etc..) that made it possible to continue farming here. In other words, the average American is too well-educated (okay, don't laugh too hard...), too "fragile" (e.g. worth too much in a lawsuit if he loses an arm in a bailer or something), and too expensive (dollars per hour) to be a farmer. In addition, U.S. land is too valuable in it's alternative uses (roads, parking lots, strip malls, McMansions, etc..) to be tied up in farming.
In the report's anlysis, the future of farming in the U.S. is limited to a few huge corps who can automate much of the grunt work, a few niche, specialty, and seasonal crops (where time to market is the determining factor), and hobbiests (like me... I can't wait for my home-grown tomatoes!).
It's a harsh stream of ideas. I personally prefer to live near a 100 acres of corn than 75 acres of developments and 25 acres of Walmarts.
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
is this.....is this for REAL?
great comedy company.
I wish that were true. It was once, but no longer. The supreme court just ruled ('Atwater vs. City of Lago Vista' April 24, 2001) that an officer can arrest you even if the violation which got you pulled over is a misdemeanor with no jail time. As Sandra Day O'Conner said in that decision: "After today, the arsenal available to any officer extends to full arrest and the searches concomitant to that arrest." In other words, if they want to search your trunk all they have to do is pull you over for failure to signal a lane change or some other lame excuse then arrest you. Now they have you in handcuffs in the back of the cruser and they can legally do any damn thing they want to your car without a warrent, and anything they find can and will be used against you.
The only thing the Supremes have left to do is find a way to empower the cops to just shoot you on the spot and avoid the cost of a trial.
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
OK, fine, they're catching fraudulent farmers. But can they catch seriously disturbed farmers???