Slashdot Mirror
E.U. Agrees To Launch Galileo Satellite Location System
waimate writes "The European Union today decided to go ahead with Galileo, the constellation of 30 satellites which will compete with the U.S. GPS system.
The U.S. abolished selective availability three years ago partly to make GPS more useful for all mankind, but also to dissuade other countries from developing their own navigational satellite system, and thus be dependant on the U.S. for both peaceful and military purposes. Since the demise of the Russian GLONASS system, GPS is the only game in town. Evidently recent events make Europe feel less comfortable about such things, and so they're building their own. Good thing for commercialization of space, or bad thing for world peace?"
I guess we Americans can't blame anyone for not trusting us after the whole Iraq thing. Somebody's got to police the police!
This has been in the works for many years. It has to do with American power in general, and not any specific recent actions.
It's great the worlds only sat navigation system is no longer in the hands of the US Army I guess...
I'm not Seth.
Europe is, slowly and quietly, moving towards the status of Superpower, and it is unsurprising that it is seeking independence of technical material.
Not to be cynical, but the U.S. is hardly viewed as an unbiased and trustworthy party, a fact that has got worse since the turkey shoot in Iraq.
I'm sure I'll get blasted for this, but the US really showed it's true colours in this last war. They rode roughshod over every international organisation when the consensus didn't go their way and ultimately staged an invasion rather than liberation. I think under these circumstances the world needs another option.
I just hope they do a really good technical job of it, that results in an even better system than GPS.
My rights don't need management.
So they have their own system now, excellent. Autonomy is always a good thing. Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that the U.S. is healthy as hell, but no country should be dependent on it for satellite navigation (GPS) or software (Microsoft). I just wish Japan would get its act together to avoid a U.S. economic bailout...
Perhaps at some point in the future, both satellite systems will be merged into an internationally-run outfit. Good standardized functionality as well as a symbol of building what President Clinton referred to as an "integrated global community."
The coolest voice ever.
Good thing for commercialization of space, or bad thing for world peace? And how is the EU having thier own GPS system a threat to world peace? Maybe if your a paranoid mountain hermit, and if the world to you is the USA. I for one trust the EU as peacekeepers more than just about any powerful organization out there.
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
as an European taxpayer i find disgusting this continuing tendency of certain European Governments (always the same Gang : French, Germany and Belgium) of copycatting the US instead of cooperating for the global good...
...
...
...
...
This is not even competition, it is simply a continued waste of money
Some European Politicians didn't understood yet what Alexis of Tocqueville (himself a French) found two hundred years ago and still think that Europe must, whatever it takes, be the Center of the Universe
Imagine if they had learned to cooperate : we could already be on Mars or close
but no, those Americans are the menace, and yet those Americans saved Democracy in Europe twice in the 20th Century !
Cheers from Portugal, Europe
I think the "bad thing" is that it's being seen by many as a big "Fuck you" to the US - essentially "We don't trust you cowboy arseholes, so we're building our own system, so :-P" or something ...
The Europeans are hoping to fund the system by licensing fees on the receivers, and fees for access to high-reliability positioning information for critical applications such as aviation.
The basic service will be free and comparable to GPS in accuracy and reliability.
I have my doubts about their business model. They are essentially trying to compete with a totally free service that already offers high reliablility and is increasing in accuracy with WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) and LAAS (Local Area Augmentation System) enhancemnts to the GPS system.
Will you buy a GPS receiver with no licensing fee or a Galileo receiver that does the same thing for more money?
In fact, if Galileo allows basic receivers to be produced license free, GPS manufacturers can tap into the Galileo signal (frequencies & signals are supposed to be compatible) to further increase GPS accuracy, at no cost.
I guess I don't mind watching the French et al blow lots of cash enroute to having their asses kicked in the marketplace. Let 'em have at it...
Uh, would you want to be in a car, guided by gps, which could only pin point itself within a car length of the next car on the highway?
I don't see that it does anything other than keep Europes high tech industry working and sucking Europes taxpayers dry.
Of course, when the US goes and dumps huge amounts into the military-industrial complex, doing the same bloody thing, that's "encouraging growth" and "creating jobs", both of which are generally considered good.
but what do i know, i'm just a model.
Just think for a moment about how dependant we are on GPS for a whole bunch of things now...
It is a complex system, and if computer science has taught us nothing else (and it hasn't), we know that complex systems can never be immune to failure.
If there were a totally redundant system of different design, I for one would want to require planes and ships to carry recievers for BOTH systems. Then you can check for agreement or be in much better shape if either system failed for whatever reason.
- Peter
(extra points to anyone who sees my failed attempt at a Simpsons reference)
INsigNIFICANT
>Unnecessarily duplicating a very expensive piece of infrastructure that the world needs only one instance of.
I think its common knowledge that the US uses all its muscle when it wants something, and we're not just talking military here, but trade. Perhaps the EU believes this will be a boon for them during negotiations with American corporations when discussing stickly matters. No one wants to hear, "So how many GPS devices are you using in Europe right now?" from a high-level American office holder.
On top if it, and probably the main reason for this is control. The EU is going to connect all their expensive toys to GPS and have no control over it. What if its a bad "GPS day" in that part of the world? The Americans have priveledged information on how well GPS is working.
Also, this will create a Galileo market which will help offset the cost. Sure, the Europeans could be buying GPS toys, but after this thing is working guess who will be selling the Galileo toys first and how brand/country loyalty will play out in this multi-billion(?) dollar industry.
The final argument and I think this stands on it own, is autonomy. The EU is not the US-lite. They're their own association and if they want to get off the US teat, the better. Heh, I'd love to see a poll on how Europeans feel about paying for this. I think many wouldn't mind just to be that much less attached to Uncle Sam.
Whatever happens, it could not be a bigger failure than iridium, so lets not cry "financial crisis in the EU" just yet.
So are the EU's space programs "unnecessary" too?
I think we should be glad for redundency and competition right now while most of space program is in dry dock.
The U.S. doesn't really give a damn about the rest of the world, just that part of it which crashes airplanes into our skyscrapers.
If France, sorry, the EU wants its copy of GPS, the U.S. will be ine with it. Until it's used to attack the U.S. At that point, it will cease to exist.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
Sure. Why not? Planes use autopilots that are built on inertial reckoning systems that are only able to pinpoint their position within a hundred feet!
There are practical limits to reckoning systems. If the accuracy of your reckoning system is great enough to discriminate between two points inside your vehicle, then things like the position of the antenna on your car become important. A navigation system that is too accurate can be as much of a problem as one that's not accurate enough.
Right now we (the US) are bad for world peace. Anything that will help level the world playing field is good for world stability and peace. The EU just needs to get their ducks in a row so they can truly be a world superpower.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act!" -- George Orwell (Eric Arthur Blair)
Among other things, the article notes:
The European Space Agency (ESA) said in a statement that an agreement had been reached among its member states which finalised the conditions for their participation in the project.
"The European Space Agency is now able to finalise the conditions for participation in the Galileo navigation program and to approve the Galileo joint undertaking foundation act to be soon signed by ESA and the European Union," ESA's statement said.
"Now able to finalize the conditions for participation"? Sounds to me like scheduling a meeting to discuss the meeting where they finalize the agenda items to be discussed in the main meeting.
Good luck to them, but I doubt they'll succeed.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
I appreciate that this question is intended to provoke a debate, but it seems to me to narrow that debate through its phrasing. The implication seems to be that the US are the Guardians of World Peace (TM), and that we pesky Europeans have no business sticking our noses in when it makes the Yanks feel a little less in control.
Given the assumption that any removal of absolute control of some useful technology from the US is potentially "a bad thing for world peace", can anybody possibly point us to the evidence for Iraq's possession of WsMD, given that the Guardians of World Peace (TM) used them as their sole justification for starting a war?
Or could it be that the US should have listened to what the European states (with the sorry exception of my own nation) were trying to tell them about making unjustified assumptions? Might it not be a good thing if more than one kid in the playground has control of the baseball bat?
Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
I can think of half a dozen things that both the U.S. and Europe are dependant on the goodwill of others for. Its just the way our world works. What would have been interesting, is if the EU had of spent the money for something new and usefull, or had offered to collaborate with the US so we could all have a better system.
No this is just the EU feeling it has to have something so it can be considered a player. Much like like Germany felt it needed colonies and a blue water navy at the turn of the century, or why small towns have international airports they cant afford or properly use.
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
There is no such thing as "political morality". It never existed. Never. If it exists at all, it just means "protect your own interests". Yeah, that's Machiavellian, but that's how the game has always been played, and there is no sign of it changing. The US is just is little more upfront about it's interests, that's all. Clinton pushed hard for peace in Israel because he wanted that Nobel Prize (dumbass). Bush obviously doesn't give a shit, at least it's not a priority. It's not our problem. And if it gets fixed it will likely be fixed with guns, not with negotiations. Although there might not be a lot of Palistinians left... So far, the Bush administration is putting it's money where it's mouth is. And getting shit done. Every other country/organisation is complaining, but they aren't really doing anything, either.
I think the "bad thing" is that the rest of the world hasn't been saying "fuck you" loud enough. Unfortunately my fellow countrymen and women apparently don't seem to see there is a difference between saying it to the U.S. versus saying it to the current administration.
Even worse, my fellow citizens apparently haven't paused long enough in handing over their freedoms to consider that they should be saying the same thing.
Support SETI@home
Of course, no one should _rely_ on GPS, because it can fail and drop out any time. In aviation, for example, where a high degree of fault tolerance and backup systems for everything are needed, GPS plays only a tiny role. But still, millions of people depend on it. Rescue teams use GPS-based navigation systems to get somewhere fast without getting lost, but can only fall back to paper maps if it fails because they don't have the resources to set up a backup system, et cetera et cetera. If you can't imagine a scenario in which someone in Europe needs sattelite navigation, but the US is blocking it, you must be an idiot. You're hitting straw men there. Europe did not take any actions, besides diplomatical ones, to stop US action in Iraq. The majority of people over here are still asking themselves whether it was really justified to liberate the Iraqis against their will (where are the weapons of mass destrucion, by the way?), or if it was just a PR campaign for Dubya, so it was the duty of their official representatives to give their opinion a voice. Galileo has absolutely nothing to do with interfering with US actions, it is not, and was never, intended to get in the way of US forces. The only relation to recent events is that the USA are waging wars and threatening to switch off civilian GPS every few years, so it became apparent that it's a bad idea to make onself depend on their goodwill. You're confusing politics with war mongering there. Besides, Europe doesn't raise the claim to be the _leader_ of the world. I don't think that the US would be delighted if Europe would compete for their role as world police. Besides, they're letting the whole world use GPS anyway. This only changes when they fear the system could be helping some 'rogues' to do evil things, and in this case, they don't care about Europe or anyone a bit, as we saw again recently. Expensive? Why do you care? It's not going to cost the US anything; to the contrary, Europe will probably import some parts from the US. And it's certainly not as expensive as certain US activities which arguably have less merit.
but what do i know, i'm just a model.
I'm sure I'll get blasted for this, but the US really showed it's true colours in this last war. They rode roughshod over every international organisation when the consensus didn't go their way and ultimately staged an invasion rather than liberation. I think under these circumstances the world needs another option.
What a bunch of bullshit.
The rest of the world should be embarassed that they were willing to leave Saddam in power.
The UN should be embarassed. They exist to take care of situations like this. The Gulf War was in 1994. The UN had been trying unsuccessfully to get Iraq to live up to the agreements it signed at the end of that war. They weren't doing their job.
Saddam was playing them like a violin. The U.S. was ready to do something about this whole situation years ago, after talks with Iraq failed and they weren't letting inspectors in. Then Kofi Anan went in, and somehow just took their word that they would let inspectors back in just for him. They were, of course, lying and any reasonable person could have noticed the pattern in Iraq's actions.
The UN totally fucked up the Iraq situation.
The US has managed to depose a brutal dictator, with a minmum of civilian casualties. More people would have died if Saddam had remained in office.
The US is not "stealing" Iraq's oil, nor are they claiming any territory.
You might think by now I'm a GWB supporter, but I'm not. I never really wanted this war to happen. My father was drafted his senior year of college, and I sure as hell didn't want that happening to me. I didn't trust GWB to do the right thing, and have a quick, respectible war, but....you know what?
He has. I think GWB is a tool, but I'm not going to make up bullshit reasons not to like the guy. There are plenty of real ones.
Your "invasion rather than liberation" comment is a lie. You have no proof that the US is doing anything but what's best for the Iraqi people. If that changes, you can expeect my views of this whole thing to change, but right now you're just making yourself look bad.
The Iraqi people, the US, and the World in general is better off due to the US' actions in Iraq. It's too bad some other countries couldn't see past their own petty oil interests, egos, and fears to make the world a better place.
Right now, I'm proud of what my country has done. In the past, we've had a tendency to prop up brutal dictators, in place of the original ones just so they'll do whatever we want. In both Iraq and Afghanistan, this has changed. I'm not about to go out an protest because my country is actually doing the right thing for once.
Life is too short to proofread.
I strongly suspect that systematic errors would dominate, from changes in air pressure etc that would affect both units.
This is why differential gps is more accurate - it tackles the systematic error.
"Btw, having a good GPS system is vital for fighter planes. When you come out of a steep curling dive, and are doing hundreds of km/h, just a few hundred meters above the ground, you want to know your gps position as quickly as possible. This is where the QoS stuff comes in. :)"
Even a delay of a couple of seconds can be fatal if you doing 200km/h at the wrong height
Would you care to explain that? It makes no sense to me at all. Why would GPS matter at all, in that situation? GPS is horribly inaccurate at calculating elevation, especially compared to barometric or radio altimeters. Never mind the fact that your absolute elevation isn't important - it's your relative elevation about the ground that will prevent you from smacking into it, and that's something that GPS will never be able to tell you...
What is the point of surveyors knowing the latitude and longitude to sub-centimeter accuracy? Continental drift, measured in centimeters per year, will invalidate the reading in only a few months.
One hypothetical case: On My 26, 2003, at 10:55pm EDT, this "x" on this marker was located with super-accurate GPS to be at precisely XX.xxxxx North and YY.yyyyy West. Continental drift at this location is estimated to be 2.7503 cm/year toward 289.57 degrees (approximately WNW) from true north. Calculation of the current location of this marker is left as an exercise to the reader.
Another hypothetical case: Your honor, when I bought my house ten years ago, I had the property lines surveyed to sub-centimeter accuracy with super-accurate GPS. I had it re-surveyed last month and discovered that my neighbor has moved his fence 45 cm (or 18.5 inches) onto my property. I can't figure out how he did it; he covered up all signs of the move very well. However, I have had both surveys validated and authenticated, and I want you to order him to move his fence back where it belongs.
Edward Burr
Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
Suppose the existing GPS system were controlled by France. Do you think anybody in the U.S. would say "The French won't turn on selective availability! We're dependent on each other's goodwill! We can trust them!"
I don't want to support saddam, but in the years before america fucked up the iraqi infrostructure it had sanitation, health care and a quality of life that was the envy of the whole middle east. Sadam built the country into a prosperous nation (through fairly brutal methods that cannot possibly be justified such as the gassing of the Kurds). And most importantly, it seems that Sadam was smart enough to distroy his chemical and biological weapons to save his country. Unfortunantly for him, he had too much faith in American wisdom and his country was invaded anyway.
For the protection of our troops/liberators
Any liberator that anticipates that the people they have liberated will turn against them is fairly dubious. Hell! Sadam trusted the loyalty his countrymen for years without being shot, it seems that he had more popular support than the "liberators"
Ever been in a large scale natural disaster that requires martial law
What natural disaster has happened in Iraq? What has happened in Iraq in the ten years before the war? The fact is that the only reason the "liberators" had to come in is that twelve years ago Sadam got some personal beef with the president's daddy. And one and a half years ago some totally unrelated people (mainly from Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia) commited an act of terrorism and the people of America have decided that everyone who comes from roughly the same area, follows the same religeon, or stands up to America in any way that is noticable are worthy of death. Don't give me that shit about an emergency being held back by the liberators, because the liberators are the emergency.
Fuck. Give us a break!
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
Oh, sorry - I forgot, in America those that get AIDS deserve it for being God-hating fags. Welcome to the new world order.
Leaving aside the fact that the US was acting in its own interests, as much as those of its allies, in all the events you mention :
Isn't establishing a global positioning system doing just that? Aren't competition and diversity in the marketplace good things?
My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
Having the US exist as the only major power does not mean there will be peace. I think it would be best for these European countries to work toward their own mutual benefit without outside influence because they do exist in a very tight geographical location.
While the US is not perfectly secure, the country is surrounded by water and 2 friendly nations. I can only imagine how tense it could be to live in Turkey, Serbia or even Germany right now. The European Union may prove to be the new stabilizing force in the world now that the US and USSR are not fighting over the way things should be.
In a few years we may realize the biggest threat to war is a nation that fears nothing and is sees nothing wrong with destroying other nations as long as it serves their interests.
Brennan Stehling - http://brennan.offwhite.net/blog/
Survey grade GPS doesn't always need absolute accuracy. Indeed, when it does, centimeter accuracy is not all that practical, as you point out. But usually it needs only relative accuracy. And the distortion of tectonic plates occurs much more slowly than their motion, at least if you're reasonably far from a plate interface.
So for example, your second hypothetical case is easily dismissed---because if your neighbor's fence moved 45cm, then so did the walls of your house, and the fence on the other side of your property!
You say it, brother. Every day I see the creeping evangelism of Orwellian doublespeak advancing through the ranks, where you only want privacy if you have something criminal to hide, where safety can be bought at the expense of rights, and where Big Brother *really does* know what's good for you.
The eyes of Americans glaze over, citizen by citizen, getting that glassy fanatic's look. If this continues, we will soon be the number one threat to world peace - if we aren't already there.
Why, today I heard a senator describe Canada as a 'safe haven for terrorists', demanding that something should be done to 'force' the Canadians into taking their 'duty to world peace and security' seriously. Goddamn if it didn't sound like some asshole prepping the ground work for a fucking invasion...if Americans could accept *that* then I'd say the world is well and truly screwed.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
It is amazing how one sided news can be. Ask yourself this question. Would you rely on the European GPS if it were the only game in town? Would you rely on the European GPS for your military if it were the only game in town?
I am almost willing to bet yes for the first question, but no for the second. Maybe even no for the first. But then I turn the tables and say since you might answered the questions in that fashion why should you expect that we do otherwise? Seriously! As sad as it sounds right now there is a President that has done nothing more than make the hawks of any government happy!
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
So you mean that USA could go to war with Europe?
Isn't that a bit odd for even the most conservative of republicans? Perhaps you should have a look around and you will see that the ONLY other democratic allies you have still are Europe and that we still are your best friends, regardless you US current anger on France.
I honestly starts to feel a bit threathen by US more and more aggresive use of its force - what is next? Bombing of Hamburg because they had the Al Quadia cell responsible for september 11 on their university?
Janes ran a piece a few weeks ago that said it would take nothing less than a full seal team to get into a Russian nuclear facility so why all the panic? The terrorist dont have that capability. Except for the missing suitcase nukes (as the old joke goes, there's nothing to worry about, as 95% of Soviet tactical nukes are accounted for), and reactor workers/scientists who haven't been paid for months selling plutonium on the blackmarket to keep their children from starving to death.
I guess you don't know classical Greek either, because "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" is Latin.
At least most of Europe can point to there country on a map of the earth.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
John Harrison was British, therefore there was no chance his name would have been chosen. This is Europe we're talking about.....
-- BtB
The problem with the UN isn't the theory, it's the practice. After the second world war, there were some key players that ended up becoming permanent members of the security council, which gives them more than their fair share of influence. The problem is that the balance of power has shifted since then. Is France still an important enough country to have a permanent status on the security council? Why give 5 nations permanent status? Why even *have* the security council in the first place? The UN is NOT democratic, not in the slightest. Consider, that India has 1/7 of the world's population, but only 1 vote in the general assembly, the same as, for example, New Zealand with a small fraction of the population as India Thus citizens of New Zealand have "more vote" on the UN that citzens of India, on a per-capita basis. Also keep in mind that there are no rules in the UN about how an individual country appoints it's representative.
When was the last time you voted for your country's UN rep? In most countries, the representative is an appointed position. The UN represents the *governments* of the world, not the *people* of the world. I cringe when I hear people talk of turning the UN into some global governmening body. NO, NO, NO! First turn it into a democracy, then we can talk...maybe.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Trains somehow live with this limitation. It's not like they can stop or steer around a hazard.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Compared to the prior 20 or so years yes.
Nixon pulled the US out of Vietnam.
Nixon opened up to China.
Nixon was responsible for de-escalating the cold war during the era of "detante".
Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
Explain what?
You judge an entire set of people because of the actions of one of them?
Timothy McVeigh was a Christian, Jewish extremists blew up the King David hotel, Hindu fundamentalists have killed thousands in India, Hitler was a Christian, Saddam Hussein was secular, Catholics and Protestants in NI spent years killing each other. Any religion has it's fair share of psychos - it's not just limited to Islam, they just happen to be an easy target because they look diferent and have diferent customs...
The beauty of Slashdot: be totally wrong, get modded up anyway. :)
-CausticPuppy "Of all the people I know, you're certainly one of them." -Somebody I don't know