Slashdot Mirror


US Military Blocks Data On Incoming Meteors

Hugh Pickens writes "Nature reports that the US military has abruptly ended an informal arrangement that allowed scientists access to data on incoming meteors from classified surveillance satellites, dealing a blow to the astronomers and planetary scientists who used the information to track space rocks. 'These systems are extremely useful,' says astronomer Peter Brown, at the University of Western Ontario. 'I think the scientific community benefited enormously.' Meteor data came from the Defense Support Program (DSP) satellite network consisting of infrared satellites in geosynchronous orbit to monitor the globe for missile launches or atmospheric nuclear blasts, forming the principal component of the United States' ballistic missile early-warning system. The satellites' effectiveness was demonstrated during Desert Storm, when DSP detected the launch of Iraqi Scud missiles and provided warning to civilian populations and coalition forces in Israel and Saudi Arabia. As a side benefit, the satellites could also precisely detect the time, position, altitude and brightness of meteors as they entered Earth's atmosphere, information the military didn't consider particularly useful, or classified. 'It was being dropped on the floor,' says former Air Force captain Brian Weeden. Although the reason for ending the arrangement remains unclear, Weeden notes that it coincides with the launch of a new generation of surveillance satellites and speculates that the Pentagon may not want details of the new satellites' capabilities to be made public, or it may simply lack the expensive software needed to handle classified and declassified data simultaneously. 'The decision may have been made that it was perhaps too difficult to disclose just these data.'"

172 comments

  1. Chicken Little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would too, do you want people running around like Chicken Little?

    1. Re:Chicken Little by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 2, Funny

      Only if Arrowsmith provides the background music.

      --
      "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
    2. Re:Chicken Little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1 Spelling?

    3. Re:Chicken Little by castironpigeon · · Score: 1
      --
      mmmm...forbidden donut
    4. Re:Chicken Little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably better than Aerosmith =P

    5. Re:Chicken Little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  2. "Blocks"? by R2.0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From TFS, the military stopped giving out unclassified information that was a byproduct of a military function - a windfall.

    "Blocks" means that the information would flow but for the military's action.

    The editors (snicker) should have used "stops" - more ambiguous and yet more accurate at the same time. But I guess that wouldn't generate the clicks, now would it?

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    1. Re:"Blocks"? by nametaken · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed.

      It's a shame, and obviously we don't know exactly what the situation is, but if speculation is correct... should I really be upset that the military doesn't want to allow the world to black-box the capabilities of its missile detection systems? Especially with a wacky bastard in Korea lobbing his test missiles in our direction?

    2. Re:"Blocks"? by SquirrelsUnite · · Score: 1

      Kudos to everyone in the program who provided this information so far. They had no obligation, they couldn't hope to get recognized for their work either.

    3. Re:"Blocks"? by Luyseyal · · Score: 3, Informative

      In all fairness, the article's subheading is "Satellite information on incoming meteors is blocked."

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    4. Re:"Blocks"? by ntijerino · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I totally agree with the parent poster. It should have read something like 'no longer shares openly.' From what I can tell, the US military was under no obligation to share the data. It isn't like the military is jamming communications channels, or otherwise blocking data that would naturally be available.

      --
      Stick that in your compiler and debug it!
    5. Re:"Blocks"? by MoonBuggy · · Score: 1

      To add another voice of agreement: for all the times I've seen "national security" thrown about in order to censor something that has nothing to do with the subject, this is one of the first times I would say that it absolutely could be a matter pertaining to the security of the nation (and in this case they didn't even use the term!). It is a shame, but it's also very much understandable.

    6. Re:"Blocks"? by camperdave · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Although the reason for ending the arrangement remains unclear, Weeden notes that it coincides with the launch of a new generation of surveillance satellites and speculates that the Pentagon may not want details of the new satellites' capabilities to be made public, or it may simply lack the expensive software needed to handle classified and declassified data simultaneously.

      My guess is that it is an oversight on the part of whoever ordered the software.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    7. Re:"Blocks"? by Bakkster · · Score: 1

      More importantly, this is one of the few times that I have heard of unclassified data obtained by a classified program being distributed. Seems odd that there is a reliance or expectation for this data, considering it originates with a classified satellite system, let alone which is directly related to national security.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    8. Re:"Blocks"? by Hadlock · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think "the situation" is that we have a US Navy destroyer tailing a North Korean freighter potentially carrying illegal missiles to a rouge military dictatorship, and North Korea has threatened to fire it's long range missiles (which they've recently been testing, along with detonating a nuclear bomb underground, all in the last 30-60 days) if we board or attempt to intercept. North Korea is looking for a fight, and it's not at all surprising that the US military has turned off the tap for public viewing of a missile tracking system.
       
      They selectively "detuned" civilian GPS during the gulf war. It's not at all shocking that they've cut off public access recently. If the Bush administration allowed this, then it's likely Obama will open the taps once the situation is resolved.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    9. Re:"Blocks"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems odd that there is a reliance or expectation for this data, considering it originates with a classified satellite system, let alone which is directly related to national security.

      Generally speaking, if I am paying for something, I feel entitled to the results or products it produces.

      Unfortunately thats not how the government works. I get to foot the bill but I have no say in the product lifecycle.

    10. Re:"Blocks"? by Khomar · · Score: 1

      Funny about North Korea, but I wonder if it could be the other way around. With everyone expecting a missile attack from North Korea, who would be able to say whether a strike on American soil actually originated from there? With outside access to this kind of information being limited, we would have to trust our government and a few other nations with such capability that the North Koreans did, in fact, attack us. Also, don't forget that FEMA is planning major exercises around the country in late July.

      Many may say that I am being too conspiratorial in this, but are there not many examples of our country doing similar things throughout history to start a war?

      "I've hired you to start a war. It is a prestigious line of work with a long and glorious tradition." Vicini, "The Princess Bride"

      --

      I believe in de-evolution. God made the world perfect, man fell, and its been going downhill ever since!

    11. Re:"Blocks"? by 51Cats · · Score: 1

      I remember the first gamma ray bursts were detected by military satellites and they released that information to the public.

    12. Re:"Blocks"? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With everyone expecting a missile attack from North Korea, who would be able to say whether a strike on American soil actually originated from there?

      The Russians and Chinese, probably the British and French, possibly others.

      What, you think the USA is the only country with spy satellites watching for launches?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    13. Re:"Blocks"? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that researchers have been tracking these orbits for quite a while and would already know of potential close calls that could hit the earth with a relatively accurate time line.

      It's more likely that the satellites have been re purposed for a short period of time to monitor the situation with North Korea or to allow other sats to do that. Sure, we got other birds in the air but with more of them looking in specific spots, more can be seen earlier.

    14. Re:"Blocks"? by j79zlr · · Score: 1

      Seems odd that there is a reliance or expectation for this data, considering it originates with a classified satellite system, let alone which is directly related to national security.

      Generally speaking, if I am paying for something, I feel entitled to the results or products it produces.

      Unfortunately thats not how the government works. I get to foot the bill but I have no say in the product lifecycle.

      Just wait til it is your health care and not classified satellite information that you have no say in.

      --
      I'm not not licking toads.
    15. Re:"Blocks"? by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      You may be paying for your government, but "We the sheeple" have little say
      in how it is run you will find if you look at some of legislation coming out of DC
      over the last 8 years.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    16. Re:"Blocks"? by SilverJets · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Good try but if you read the article you would see that scientists accessing this data were told earlier this year. The US wasn't tailing a North Korean freighter then and could not have anticipated doing so at this time. So while the US military may wish to no longer disclose the capabilities of its satellites to Joe Public, it is not a result of the current situation near Korea.

    17. Re:"Blocks"? by mkramer · · Score: 3, Informative

      Oversight? Hardly. It's damned expensive to produce unclassified content from a classified source.

      By default, it is assumed ALL data generated by a classified source is classified. To unclassify any of that information requires a highly-tested, bulletproof-design of software that can be shown that in the process of declassifying any part of the data, it is impossible that something classified accidently got in there.

      It's much cheaper to just leave everything classified at the same level as the piece of hardware/algorithms that produced it.

    18. Re:"Blocks"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If the Bush administration allowed this, then it's likely Obama will open the taps once the situation is resolved.

      You've got it backwards. The Obama administration turned off the taps because it represents yet another "failed policy of the last 8 years".
      If it does get turned on, it will only be done so quietly, so that nobody notices that Obama's policies are the same as Bush's
      (see also: Gitmo, torture, opposition to gay marriage, etc.)

    19. Re:"Blocks"? by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      opposition to gay marriage

      [citation needed] Way to slip that one in there. I haven't heard him say one thing against gay marraige yet. Everything I've heard/read said that he's done everything he can within his powers to improve gay rights. Presidents can only sign things into law, not vote for them. Contact your congressman if you have an axe to grind. They write/vote on actual laws. Gay marriage is definitely on the agenda, but right now I think nationalized health care is a higher priority. We still have 3.5 years to sort out gay rights.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    20. Re:"Blocks"? by 32771 · · Score: 1

      Could it be that it takes resources to track or deliver data on rocks and that they have better uses for their time all of a sudden?
      The world had enough time to black box the capabilities already as it seems.

      There just has to be some other sort of leak. Maybe plugging potential holes takes effort too.

      --
      Je me souviens.
    21. Re:"Blocks"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your an idiot. Re-read article, re-read your post.

      Re-think.

      P.S. hint this has nothing to do with detecting object in space.

    22. Re:"Blocks"? by barneco · · Score: 1

      What is astonishing is that we were lucky enough to detect the first gamma ray busts...what are the odds of that?

    23. Re:"Blocks"? by 32771 · · Score: 1

      With enough data on the fireballs you could possibly detect the position of the satellites. Nowadays there are way more cameras directed towards the sky than some couple of years ago. If the scientists provide data to the public maybe there is some channel open for the public to figure out where the satellites are or look.

      Or maybe it is just as the scientists said:

      "Weeden speculates that the Pentagon may not want details of the new satellites' capabilities to be made public, or it may simply lack the expensive software needed to handle classified and declassified data simultaneously. "The decision may have been made that it was perhaps too difficult to disclose just these data," he says."

      Or maybe they want to rather be safe than sorry.

      --
      Je me souviens.
    24. Re:"Blocks"? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Meh! I still think it's a case of "Oops, didn't think of that" rather than "We'd like to, but we can't afford the software to filter it. Sorry."

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    25. Re:"Blocks"? by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      The seismometer network used to detect nuclear weapons testing were what gave scientists the data to first hypothesize tectonic plate movement. I doubt the foreign nuclear test information wasn't classified. Military sharing of information has been going on for 50 years.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    26. Re:"Blocks"? by Grismar · · Score: 1

      Really now, the only benefit the Koreans could have from this data still being public (assuming it would be live) is detecting launches of US missiles against them. I hope I'm right in assuming such a launch would only take place as a countermeasure or possibly retaliation (let's hope they're a bit smarter than that) and in either case, wouldn't you want early warning crowdsourced as well as from the military? Frankly I don't see how anyone could have much of a strategic benefit from keeping this information in the dark, unless they planned on striking first... Well deniability of knowledge of the facts after the fact for political gain perhaps, but that seems a stretch.

    27. Re:"Blocks"? by jc42 · · Score: 1

      From what I can tell, the US military was under no obligation to share the data.

      Yes they are. If you've been listening, you've heard over and over that the military is there to protect the population. That's the standard justification for their existence. Fact is that Mother Nature is lobbing big rocks at us, and occasionally one of them hits the planet. Damage can and does come from "foreign" threats that aren't other humans.

      If the military has the tools to collect data on big rocks in space, and doesn't share the information with the civilian population, they are failing badly in their claimed job of protecting us. They don't even have to do most of the job in this case. Just making the data available to civilian scientists and engineers would be sufficient. We can take it from there, handle evacuations, etc. (Or maybe we can, despite the Bush gang's attempts to hobble FEMA and other relief agencies by appointing technically incompetent political hacks as administrators. ;-)

      If the DoD has information about incoming rocks, and one of them hits a population center or other critical area, they'll have a lot of answering to do. Knowing and keeping us ignorant is an inexcusable violation of their duty to protect the population against outside danger.

      Myself, I intend to make use of this story the next time someone justifies things like the giant military budget as necessary to protect us from foreign threats. It's also a good example of how military secrecy can be a direct threat to their own civilian population.

      (Actually, it's fairly clear that a lot of military people understand all this. I'd guess that a lot of them aren't particularly happy with this story. But part of their training is learning when to keep their mouths shut.)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    28. Re:"Blocks"? by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      Generally speaking, if I am paying for something, I feel entitled to the results or products it produces.

      If you're paying for it, then you're a US citizen. Which means you have a first class military to protect you and your property. You are getting the results and products. Then there is the internet and computer you used to post this. It may occasionally take time, but you do get the benefits from it.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    29. Re:"Blocks"? by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      You're the guy who misplaced the decimal point in "Office Space", aren't you?

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    30. Re:"Blocks"? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Or a wacky bastard in the USA lobbing his real missiles into Iraq. Oh, wait! ^^

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    31. Re:"Blocks"? by Matje · · Score: 1

      It is unlikely North Korea is looking for a fight. They don't stand a chance and are very well aware of that. Up until now they've used their nuclear program to leverage negotations with the US, nothing else. There's no point in them starting a nuclear war (or any other type of armed conflict for that matter) since they are sure to lose.

      You could compare North Korea to an well-versed spoiled kid: enough of a distraction to annoy you and get you to do stuff, but too little of a threat to actually take any serious action on. Let 'em be and worry about Pakistan instead.

    32. Re:"Blocks"? by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your post is clear and lucid, except for the fact that it is wholly and completely wrong. The satellites in question look for infrared signatures on the Earth. They only detect meteors when they've already hit the atmosphere, by which time it's a bit late to do anything about them.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    33. Re:"Blocks"? by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      They seem to be a big enough distraction to Japan that they're considering changing their constitution to have a standing army. Japan is (I believe) the third largest economy (pop. 128 million - about 1/3rd the size of the US and twice the size of England) in the world and N. Korea keeps shooting "test" missiles in their direction. With a million-man standing army it's not a country we want to have a ground war with and not a country Japan or S. Korea wants to have a missile ping pong match with.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    34. Re:"Blocks"? by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Please stop using the term "crowdsource" and all variations thereof.
       
      Yours Truly,
       
      The Intarwebs

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    35. Re:"Blocks"? by grahamd0 · · Score: 1

      Generally speaking, if I am paying for something, I feel entitled to the results or products it produces.

      Unfortunately thats not how the government works. I get to foot the bill but I have no say in the product lifecycle.

      If you buy lumber, you don't expect mulch for free.

      I'd love for them to find a way to keep giving out this data, but it's a byproduct of a defense project. If you feel safe from a foreign military force then you're getting what you paid for.

    36. Re:"Blocks"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frankly I don't see how anyone could have much of a strategic benefit from keeping this information in the dark, unless they planned on striking first...

      It could potentially allow an aggressive nuclear state to estimate the sensitivity of the satellite's equipment, the positions of the satellites or the number of satellites.

      Let's remember, this information is coming from a classified program. That's a lot of data for a program you'd prefer your enemies not even knew existed.

    37. Re:"Blocks"? by grahamd0 · · Score: 1

      Also, don't forget that FEMA is planning major exercises around the country in late July.

      Indeed. The curious can read about it here: https://www.fema.gov/media/fact_sheets/nle09.shtm

      FEMA conducts exercises all the time. The Federal Emergency Management Agency wouldn't be very effective if they never practiced managing emergencies.

      Many may say that I am being too conspiratorial in this, but are there not many examples of our country doing similar things throughout history to start a war?

      Are there?

    38. Re:"Blocks"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they could spare the effort, it'd be nice if they smeared the data down to the resolution that the earlier generation of satellites achieved, and released that.

    39. Re:"Blocks"? by Boomerang+Fish · · Score: 1

      While I don't have a real problem with the fact that a classified system that provides data is being further restricted, other, useful research will be hindered by this.

      Maybe the researchers were warned that this was a perk that could go away at any time, maybe not... they should have been at any rate; however, my question (and, no, I didn't read the article, so if it's spelled out I apologize in advance, for what good that may do...)is what kind of lead time were the researches given for the cessation of data sharing?

      Since it has become an important source of information, common decency argues that they should be warned and given time to come up with an alternative. Maybe the researchers (and institutions funding them) would conclude that the costs of arranging to use or build other satellites is prohibitive (let's be honest, it probably is) but they should have the time to figure out the cost of the loss against the costs of other options.

      Which would likely mean a change in appropriations from congress which would mean more taxes, but come on... Think of the Children, man!

      (And for the record, I wouldn't mind my taxes so much if I knew more of it went into research and science. I want the most powerful military and the best scientific data available for my tax dollars... everything else should be reviewed with a fine toothed comb and 90% of it should probably be thrown out.)

      --
      I drank what?

    40. Re:"Blocks"? by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      No, but I assume the Iranian elections were scheduled well in advance.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    41. Re:"Blocks"? by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      If you had been listening, you would realise that by the time this particular network detects a rock, it's already hitting the atmosphere. It was set up to detect ballistic missiles, not incoming asteroids. There would be minimal time to warn or alert any potential landing zone.

    42. Re:"Blocks"? by smokin_juan · · Score: 1

      That "first class" military couldn't find a few commercial airliners. Aren't you glad to be paying top dollar for this broken bullshit.

    43. Re:"Blocks"? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Quit being a moron.
      The person I replied to was replying to someone indicating that without public access like before with this system, a meteor could hit the US and North Korea could be blamed for it. There will be enough tracking information to rule that out. After all, that's what was discontinued right? -the releasing of information on objects in space?

      Or am I somehow misreading his statement "With outside access to this kind of information being limited, we would have to trust our government and a few other nations with such capability that the North Koreans did, in fact, attack us."? Cause the only outside access we had was space objects right?

    44. Re:"Blocks"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you.

    45. Re:"Blocks"? by the_other_chewey · · Score: 1

      ...we have a US Navy destroyer tailing a North Korean freighter potentially carrying illegal missiles to a rouge military dictatorship...

      Yeah, I too would much prefer them to go to pink democracies or chartreuse constitutional monarchies.

  3. Tinfoil isn't just for Jiffy Pop anymore by Torodung · · Score: 5, Funny

    I assume this means the mothership is now on final approach, and we don't want those scientists causing a panic.

    I, for one, welcome our new alien overlords. Advanced warning is only useful if you are against them. Join us.

    --
    Toro

    1. Re:Tinfoil isn't just for Jiffy Pop anymore by rcamans · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Anyone ever see the movie "Independence Day"? "V?" "The Day The Earth Stood Still"? "War of the Worlds"?

      --
      wake up and hold your nose
    2. Re:Tinfoil isn't just for Jiffy Pop anymore by uxbn_kuribo · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, no one ever saw those movies.

      --
      No portion of this post may be rebroadcast without the express, written consent of Major League Baseball.
    3. Re:Tinfoil isn't just for Jiffy Pop anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which one was "V?"

    4. Re:Tinfoil isn't just for Jiffy Pop anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this news comes out here just after I saw part one of that movie on ABC named "Impact". Well, this is just great. Now I will need something thicker than tinfoil on my head.

      And yes, I AM an Anonymous _Coward_!

      AAIIIEEE!

    5. Re:Tinfoil isn't just for Jiffy Pop anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The one after 'IV'.

  4. Expensive software? by mossr · · Score: 0, Troll

    void process_information(s_information* info) {
        if (info) {
            if (info.is_classified)
                process_secretly(info)
            else
                process_publicly(info)
        }
    }

    Can I have my millions now for "the expensive software needed to handle classified and declassified data simultaneously"?

    --
    The PowerPC includes for this purpose two instructions called SYNC and EIEIO.
    1. Re:Expensive software? by Octorian · · Score: 4, Funny

      You forgot the thousands of pages of architecture, systems engineering, regulations, requirements, and certification documents that support said code :-)

    2. Re:Expensive software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Congratulations, you just failed your NSA cert because you attempted to mix classified and non-classified processing in the same processor. If you want to handle classified data, a processor can only handle classified data, you cannot mix and match. In devices that are forced to mix and match (edge devices, like encryptors typically) you have to build your device in two halves and minimize the contact between the halves (typically they will be in separate metal boxes inside of the device, with a single wire connecting them. That single wire will eat up pages and pages of documentation when you try to get your device certified explaining how there is no possible way to leak information out of it (even in cases like slamming the crypto with bad traffic on the red side to cause it to slow down in some pattern that could be identified on the black side).

      Your failure in design just cost your company a million dollars and several man-years of effort.

    3. Re:Expensive software? by rhathar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure, sure, I'll just need one more quick function from you. Please write something to determine whether the high speed ballistic object that just showed up on the satellite is a missile, plane, or meteor.

      Remember that size, temperature and speed will be variable within each type. Also, once you've identified the type of object, please determine classification. Accuracy of this product must be 100%.

      --
      http://www.chaotickingdoms.com
    4. Re:Expensive software? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Even worse two MiBs will meet him in the carpark and shoot him dead with a laser pistol.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    5. Re:Expensive software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Sure, sure, I'll just need one more quick function from you. Please write something to determine whether the high speed ballistic object that just showed up on the satellite is a missile, plane, or meteor.

      if( coming_from_outer_space(object) ){
          object.type = TYPE_METEOR;
      } else {
          object.type = TYPE_UNKNOWN;
      }

      Remember that size, temperature and speed will be variable within each type. Also, once you've identified the type of object, please determine classification. Accuracy of this product must be 100%.

      if( object.type=TYPE_METEOR ) {
          object.isClassified = false;
      } else {
          object.isClassified = true;
      }

      Accuracy must NOT be 100%, as long as no classified information is incorrectly handled as public data. If (some) public data is incorectly handled as classified, there should be no problem.

    6. Re:Expensive software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this moderated interesting? Meteors have a fairly simple trajectory that should be easily distinguishable from the trajectory of rockets, planes, or any other objects launched from earth.

      And accuracy must not be 100%, as long as no classified information leaks (i.e. sometimes wrongly hiding non-classified data would no be a problem)

    7. Re:Expensive software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Said function would only be needed for a real-time system. The meteor data was being gleaned from old data.

    8. Re:Expensive software? by Kotoku · · Score: 1

      Congratulations, you just failed your NSA cert because you attempted to mix classified and non-classified processing in the same processor. If you want to handle classified data, a processor can only handle classified data, you cannot mix and match. In devices that are forced to mix and match (edge devices, like encryptors typically) you have to build your device in two halves and minimize the contact between the halves (typically they will be in separate metal boxes inside of the device, with a single wire connecting them. That single wire will eat up pages and pages of documentation when you try to get your device certified explaining how there is no possible way to leak information out of it (even in cases like slamming the crypto with bad traffic on the red side to cause it to slow down in some pattern that could be identified on the black side). Does this mean I'm fired? Your failure in design just cost your company a million dollars and several man-years of effort.

      Does this mean I'm fired?

    9. Re:Expensive software? by Xeriar · · Score: 1

      A meteor will not have a speed less than 11 kps outside of a capture orbit (not likely). No terrestrial-sourced object is going to reach that sort of speed with the expectation that it is going to land again.

    10. Re:Expensive software? by sdpuppy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Your failure in design just cost your company a million dollars and several man-years of effort.

      Does this mean I'm fired?

      Nah, you've fulfilled government criteria for promotion.

      Unless you object, you will be bumped up a level your salary will now increase by 1.5x.

    11. Re:Expensive software? by sdpuppy · · Score: 1

      Remember that size, temperature and speed will be variable within each type.

      Mod this post up - interesting.

      My girlfriend told me that just the other day (although I think she was sparing my feelings)

    12. Re:Expensive software? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I had a girl tell me something similar once. I proved to her that it doesn't matter near as much as she thought.

      Here is what you do, get a bunch of old Maxim mags, actually read the articles, get some playboys, hustler, and barely 18 mags- don't concentrate too much on the articles. Attempt to skip online porn because it will have the opposite effect and either make you impotent or premature.

      Now, after a while of this, think of some corny plan to where she is the center of attention, use the force with what you have learned, and remember, each woman is unique and often changes to this uniqueness happen during the course of a relationship. The goal is to start off treating a whore like a queen then a queen like a whore. By the time your done, she will be telling her friends that it isn't the size of the pen, it's all in how you write your name.

      BTW, if you meet her friends, sister, or in some close families her mother and they blush slightly when you first speak to them, you will know she was bragging about you. Sometimes they will roll over and start calling these people right after sex to talk about it, if this happens act embarrassed as if it's something that just clicked between the two of you. When you ready to move on to another girl, just grab her sister or friend that she talks to all the time and get caught.

    13. Re:Expensive software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "or it may simply lack the expensive software needed to handle classified and declassified data simultaneously"

      So even the military can't afford licenses for Vista anymore.

      Vista is secure I'm sure I read it on Microsoft's website somewhere.

  5. Good news everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Meteors are coming, everyone panic.

    1. Re:Good news everyone by R2.0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Meteors are coming, everyone panic.

      It should be noted that the system looks "down", not "up" - it only sees meteors after they've hit the atmosphere.

      So if one big enough to cause substantial damage arrives, the message will be more like "MeteBOOOM!" followed by a lot of static.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    2. Re:Good news everyone by SquirrelsUnite · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up please before the "OMG they let the asteroids kill us" folks arrive. This isn't about tracking Near Earth Objects.

  6. Too expensive for the US military??? by tjstork · · Score: 1, Interesting

    That's crazy talk.

    Generals! Let me help you out. Me and right wing buddies will start posting stories about how the USA is dropping its guard against meteors, and potentially large asteroid strikes, and we'll create a groundswell of support for getting this thing turned back on. If the lefties can come up with some stuff about how good it is to have this government program, then, I'm sure we can form a bipartisan consensus to get you the funding you need.

    --
    This is my sig.
  7. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is "restor[ing] science to its rightful place"?

    What are they trying to cover up?

  8. I know why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...something the size of Texas is headed our way and they don't want us to know yet.

    1. Re:I know why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One Texas is bad enough, but two? My apologies to both meteor-riding and non-meteor-riding Texans.

    2. Re:I know why... by bhiestand · · Score: 1

      Don't apologize to them; they're already Texans.

      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
  9. I have a solution by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

    alter table SatelliteInfo add IsClassified bit not null default 1

    Then update the rows for the non-Classified ones.

    But seriously, "Expensive software"? Isn't most of this stuff custom-built anyway?

    1. Re:I have a solution by Skye16 · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's not the point. The point is if we can tell you what meteors are landing and where, it doesn't take an extensive amount of data for you to be able to pinpoint where those military satellites are in the sky. It doesn't take a lot for you to then calculate when you can be doing shit outside, and when you need to be under cover.

      The data they may be collecting may end up being unclassified, but the means they're using to collect it are likely classified fairly highly. Usually this information is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States#Sensitive_Compartmented_Information_.28SCI.29_and_Special_Access_Programs_.28SAP.29

      It makes sense. If it were possible to determine the capabilities of your sensors (whether we're talking from a satellite or a human informant) by putting together the bits and pieces of their unclassified information, you've effectively leaked highly classified information to well funded and highly motivated foreign entities.

      [opinion]At the end of the day, somebody is going to find out about your sensor and it's capabilities. You just do everything you can to make sure it's well past the usefulness of said sensor, so far beyond that the understanding of this information nets the "opponent" nothing[/opinion].

      As for writing software that would obfuscate this information enough that it wouldn't give away the methods of gathering it - sure, it sounds simple, and on a case by case basis, I'm sure you could do it. But can you do it for every single scenario even remotely conceivably imagined under the sun, for potentially large quantities of information, with guaranteed 0% failure rate?

      If so, I'm sure someone would like to hire you!

    2. Re:I have a solution by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Satelites ain't actually invisible and they are also kinda hard to hide. What keeps me from watching the sky and telling when they pass overhead? Shouldn't take more than a few days and a halfway decent telescope to find out what's up. No pun intended.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:I have a solution by Skye16 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The question is "is that space debris? is that a commercial satellite? is that even WORKING?"

      On top of that, I imagine they paint the things with a paint so that the don't reflect much light (just hypothesizing here, but I know I'd do it if I were them), to make it hard to see. Also, what about during the day?

      If you figure every piece of space debris is watching you, you probably won't be doing much outside, ever.

      The point is, someone is trying to put together information about sensor capabilities from the unclassified data (hell, maybe even we do it to other countries, and that's why we know to protect it ourselves), and that's why the DoD decided being able to pass that shit around wasn't worth it in comparison to possibly compromising the loss of capability.

    4. Re:I have a solution by phoenix.bam! · · Score: 1

      These sats are in geosynchronous orbit. In fact if the satellite launch detection system had a dark window where it wasn't getting coverage then it would be completely useless.

    5. Re:I have a solution by Skye16 · · Score: 1

      Not at all. You keep them moving, and you make sure there are enough that you have no dark window. However, angle is still important.

    6. Re:I have a solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To pass classified data to unclassified requires a specially accredited system known as a "guard". The data is checked according to sets of rules, which means that the guard has to be able to parse the data fully.

    7. Re:I have a solution by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      The question is "is that space debris? is that a commercial satellite? is that even WORKING?"

      Well it's no moon!

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    8. Re:I have a solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "paint the things with a paint so that the don't reflect much light"

      I highly doubt it, getting rid of heat is a big problem for satellites, and space 'stuff' in general. They don't coat all that stuff with highly reflective gold foil to make them look pretty, they do it to reflect as much of the incoming solar radiation as possible.

      A satellite painted black would quickly fry itself.

    9. Re:I have a solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no such question. The launch dates, orbits and the purpose of all commercial satellites are known, and announced well in advance by the launching parties; The purpose of the rest of the shit isn't known, but the launch dates and orbit data are announced nevertheless, for obvious reasons. Every launch is tracked by many parties, and data is available in several public databases (google them).

      Moreover, space debris doesn't look anything like a satellite, nor does it travel all by itself. It is pretty easy to look at a satellite with a home-built telescope and see a man in a space suit on the ISS.

      There is only one reason why this is happening, and it is lack of funds. You just can't afford that shit anymore.

    10. Re:I have a solution by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      It's possible to angle the lenses on the sattelites so that they don't look straight down. This makes it more difficult to tell where they are looking. It is possible to repoint a satellite, but this takes fuel and when the satelite gets near the end of the fuel, it is required to de-orbit. Constantly repointing the satellite takes fuel. Also, knowing where/when the meteors are that are found makes it possible to tell what may have been caught be the satellites. Knowing what the watchers know, even if you don't necessarily know what they don't know, is still of use.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    11. Re:I have a solution by TheTurtlesMoves · · Score: 1

      Amateurs can take photos from small telescopes... slightly more professional methods are not inaccessible either.

      --
      The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
    12. Re:I have a solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On top of that, I imagine they paint the things with a paint so that the don't reflect much light (just hypothesizing here, but I know I'd do it if I were them), to make it hard to see.

      Enjoy your melted electronics... where do you think all that heat goes?

  10. Temporary by Demonantis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They are most likely worried that the pictures might infer classified information or they think it had happened with the older system. Maybe you are able to map the positions of the satellites using the pictures. Its only a matter of time before things like that are figured out. The military will then likely declassify the information.

    1. Re:Temporary by Dr_Ken · · Score: 1

      The previous cynicism expressed in many previous posts notwithstanding the Pentagon probably doesn't want to reveal its sources and capabilities in this area for now, what with the NoKos, Iranians and everyone else out there trying to develop or acquire ballistic missiles.

      --
      "If you want to know what happens to you when you die, go look at some dead stuff."
    2. Re:Temporary by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      Well of course it leaked information. After all, all an evil dictator would need to do is launch a missile, then wait to see if the launch showed up in the meteor report or if his country was turned into a glassy bowl. If the latter, try a different way of launching a missile.

      On a more serious note, if you had a separate meteor detection system, you COULD identify the locations and such of the satellites by comparing your data. For instance, my satellite at location x picked up the explosion at time t.0000003, and the US satellite picked it up at t.0000006 making it .0000003 light seconds farther from the site. Or my satellite at location z is picking up meteorites that the US satellites are not, indicating that location z is probably not observed by the US satellite and therefore a good place to launch from.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    3. Re:Temporary by Plunky · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the fairly recently demonstrated satellite killing ability on the part of the Chinese.. seems that keeping the location of new satellites secret for as long as possible would be a nice idea.

  11. The info become classified by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Funny

    after the government started a new secret weapon program collecting adamantium meteors.

    1. Re:The info become classified by kenp2002 · · Score: 1

      You know that really pissed me off in the movie. Being an old comic guy, the whole deal was Adamantium was an attempt at Vibranium. It just ruined the whole damn movie up until the adamantium bullet which took the movie from aweful to just plain brain rotting stupid.

      How the hell can you screw up Wolverine?

      --
      -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    2. Re:The info become classified by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      How the hell can you screw up Wolverine?

      You answered yourself: an adamantium bullet.

      If that ruined the movie for anyone: you're welcome.

    3. Re:The info become classified by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      after the government started a new secret weapon program collecting adamantium meteors.

      Well, at least we know the meteors weren't square.

  12. two words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "north korea"

  13. Message to scientists: by RobVB · · Score: 0, Troll

    Get your own damn satellites.

    --
    I'd rather you rationally disagree than irrationally agree.
    1. Re:Message to scientists: by PPH · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Reply from scientists: Get your own damned neutrino detectors.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Message to scientists: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The scientists have been told that before and didn't listen.

    3. Re:Message to scientists: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get your own damn satellites.

      We paid for them.

      "Classified" is too often abused, that includes things that perhaps should automatically belong to the General Public. Public funds used to pay for things that end up privately patented or copyrighted is also another form of stealing from the public.

      Besides, if you have to hide it then you must be doing something wrong is a fairer assumption on a government then it is on a free person.

    4. Re:Message to scientists: by Bakkster · · Score: 1

      Get your own damn satellites.

      We paid for them.

      "Classified" is too often abused, that includes things that perhaps should automatically belong to the General Public. Public funds used to pay for things that end up privately patented or copyrighted is also another form of stealing from the public.

      Besides, if you have to hide it then you must be doing something wrong is a fairer assumption on a government then it is on a free person.

      Are you arguing that the satellites that detect foreign missile launches and nuclear tests aren't actually related to national security, and their results should be publicly available to other nations?

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
  14. Simple Reason: by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...they are hiding the Transformer invasion from us.
       

    1. Re:Simple Reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or the new satellites are worse than the old ones. (or even a complete failure)

    2. Re:Simple Reason: by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      ...they are hiding the Transformer invasion from us.

      God damn studio NDAs. Everything has to be a perfectly coordinated media campaign with those bastards.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  15. Large UFO fleet of is going to visit us soon.. by moon3 · · Score: 1

    This is obviously deliberate, those scientists might get alarmed by the strange data when Dalmatians enter orbit, especially motherships.

    /s

    1. Re:Large UFO fleet of is going to visit us soon.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Walt Disney was an alien, I knew it!

  16. Planet X by ayahner · · Score: 1

    This is just one of many attempts at covering up the pending PlanetX disaster of 2012. http://www.december212012.com/media_push.htm

    1. Re:Planet X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These satellites are looking *down*. They don't see things coming, they see the effects when they hit. So no, they won't see your imaginary planet X coming.

    2. Re:Planet X by ezwip · · Score: 0

      I agree with this statement.

      --
      "I guess I'm gonna fade into Bolivian."
    3. Re:Planet X by Hatta · · Score: 1

      You're kidding right? Man, Dec 22, 2012 is going to be a funny day.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  17. North Korea by i_ate_god · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I would think the problem is that North Korea is supposedly going to be sending a missile over to Hawaii. Perhaps meteor monitoring was simply a bad use of the satellites' time as the US military is gearing up to track North Korea's launch.

    Doesn't seem too far fetched to me...

    --
    I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
    1. Re:North Korea by phoenix.bam! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Pretty sure the meteor information is actually just waste data. False positives that the military has to detect and catalog whether they are given out the information or not.

    2. Re:North Korea by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

      So Dear Leader Kim must be behind this - no one else would be so intent on wasting the military's resources. Of course that means the North Koreans aren't as advanced as we thought, as they are merely throwing rocks at us.

    3. Re:North Korea by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      I left comments on various sites, including this one and some of my comments have been disappearing.

      Isn't it an awfully big coincidence that the destruction of US dollar and these fears of NK nuclear bombs and missiles are happening at exactly the same time? I wouldn't put it past the US government to do with NK what they did with Iraq: create a lie and push it to start a war so that US could have its fleet in Asia. There they could 'protect the world from crazy NK' in return for the largest debt owner of US (Japan) forgiving most of it and creating enough threat for China not to try and call US on its debt (not switching from US dollar to some other currency, say gold.) I absolutely believe that US government, the real government - banks, insurance companies, credit companies, military contractors are totally capable of starting a war even a nuclear war to protect their currency and wealth.

      A US destroyer was sent to NK shores, isn't that convenient, a single destroyer. They have cruiser missiles on destroyers now, don't they? The 'news' that NK was going to launch a missile at Hawaii came from Japan, and at about the same time Japanese Finance Minister Kaoru Yosano delivered a speech saying that Japan's confidence in US Treasuries and the US dollar "is absolutely unshakable", he also said "I have faith in the U.S. dollar's status as a reserve currency." So Japan props up the USD and at the same time supplies 'intel' that NK is preparing a strike on US territory? You make me LOL so hard.

      Anyone remembers how Vietnam started? US fabricated bombing of its ship on the 4th of August 1964. In 2005 data came out from the US gov't that there was no bombing, but the Vietnam war started anyway. How did Iraq start? Saddam decided to switch from USD to Euro as main currency of payment for Oil. US has the largest military for a reason - to protect its interests, and right now its interests are protecting its currency. NK 'going nuclear' is a ruse, the real news are: US dollar is dying.

    4. Re:North Korea by Stickerboy · · Score: 1

      >I left comments on various sites, including this one and some of my comments have been disappearing.

      Probably because your tinfoil conspiracies have more holes than my 10 year old jeans.

      >Isn't it an awfully big coincidence that the destruction of US dollar and these fears of NK nuclear bombs and missiles are happening at exactly the same time? I wouldn't put it past the US government to do with NK what they did with Iraq: create a lie and push it to start a war so that US could have its fleet in Asia. There they could 'protect the world from crazy NK' in return for the largest debt owner of US (Japan) forgiving most of it and creating enough threat for China not to try and call US on its debt (not switching from US dollar to some other currency, say gold.) I absolutely believe that US government, the real government - banks, insurance companies, credit companies, military contractors are totally capable of starting a war even a nuclear war to protect their currency and wealth.

      Except that Japan and China have even more to lose from calling in the United States' debts than the United States itself. Did you bother to see what happened to the world economy when the financial crisis hit the United States? China and Japan both have export-driven manufacturing bases, with their biggest and most profitable market being the US. It makes no economic sense for them to turn off the faucet by which the United States buys up their goods (and, employs a large chunk of their citizens). Also, as long as they hold the debt, they maintain leverage over the United States that would disappear if they called their debts in.

      >A US destroyer was sent to NK shores, isn't that convenient, a single destroyer. They have cruiser missiles on destroyers now, don't they? The 'news' that NK was going to launch a missile at Hawaii came from Japan, and at about the same time Japanese Finance Minister Kaoru Yosano delivered a speech saying that Japan's confidence in US Treasuries and the US dollar "is absolutely unshakable", he also said "I have faith in the U.S. dollar's status as a reserve currency." So Japan props up the USD and at the same time supplies 'intel' that NK is preparing a strike on US territory? You make me LOL so hard.

      Your knowledge of military systems is sadly lacking. There are no missiles mounted on a United States destroyer that has anywhere near the range to reach Hawaii from North Korea. Please check widely available sources on military capability before making retarded statements like that. Also, Russian, European, and probably Chinese intelligence satellites would be able to tell where a missile launch was coming from - a North Korean land-based ballistic missile, or a sea-based missile launch.

      The other sites where your comments were disappearing apparently had a lower limit on the intelligence of the posts allowed. Did you make the cut?

      --
      Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
    5. Re:North Korea by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Except that Japan and China have even more to lose from calling in the United States' debts than the United States itself. Did you bother to see what happened to the world economy when the financial crisis hit the United States? China and Japan both have export-driven manufacturing bases, with their biggest and most profitable market being the US. It makes no economic sense for them to turn off the faucet by which the United States buys up their goods (and, employs a large chunk of their citizens). Also, as long as they hold the debt, they maintain leverage over the United States that would disappear if they called their debts in.

      - yeah, yeah, US exports the green and China and Japan export their goods because what, China and Japan cannot consume their own goods that they produce? They are lead to believe this, but they are waking up and realizing that this is not the case.

      US has 4% of total population and China has 20%. China is an emerging market and US is a saturated one. China sees job growth while US sees record jobless rates. China is manufacturing things that people buy and US is manufacturing paper that people want to get rid of at this point. Sure, delude yourself thinking that China cannot switch from exporting all of their stuff to consuming it, but watch this happen. Iraq already has shown that US will absolutely start a war when its dollar is threatened, now Asia will show it once more.

      Your knowledge of military systems is sadly lacking. There are no missiles mounted on a United States destroyer that has anywhere near the range to reach Hawaii from North Korea.

      - yes, and you know that it is so in this particular case and you know exactly what is happening on any destroyer.

      In any case it is not necessary for a missile to reach Hawaii, it is not necessary for a missile to originate from NK. All that needs to happen is for the news stations to start passing this as news, and who the hell in the US cares about what Russkies or anyone else says exactly? Wars start when people who stand to profit from them decide it is time to start wars, not because of anything else. You can mock my intelligence all you wish, but when US government wanted to start a war in Vietnam they did not wait for someone to bomb their military ship, they just said that their ship was bombed.

  18. Coast to Coast? by hwyhobo · · Score: 4, Funny

    the reason for ending the arrangement remains unclear

    So, this entire thread is essentially just a bait for idle speculation and conspiracy theories. Art Bell would be proud.

    --
    End anonymous moderation and posting on /.
    1. Re:Coast to Coast? by not-my-real-name · · Score: 1

      the reason for ending the arrangement remains unclear

      So, this entire thread is essentially just a bait for idle speculation and conspiracy theories. Art Bell would be proud.

      Welcome to Slashdot. Enjoy your stay.

      --
      un-ALTERED reproduction and dissimination of this IMPORTANT information is ENCOURAGED
  19. Or it could be by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 1

    that we are preparing for a strike, counterstrike situation w/ N. Korea or Iran.

    --
    How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
  20. Security Risk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If the military believed that, given the meteor information, a black hat could deduce not only the capabilities of the satellites, but their actual orbits, that would certainly give them cause to discontinue the program.

  21. Except... by SCPRedMage · · Score: 1

    ...that, since the satellites are looking TOWARDS Earth and not AWAY from it, it'll only see objects that are actually IN Earth's atmosphere, which is FAR too late to actually GUARD anything.

    --
    My sig can beat up your sig.
    1. Re:Except... by tjstork · · Score: 1

      ...that, since the satellites are looking TOWARDS Earth and not AWAY from it, it'll only see objects that are actually IN Earth's atmosphere, which is FAR too late to actually GUARD anything.

      You don't understand... this is politics. Obviously, we need more satellites.

      --
      This is my sig.
  22. Outbound Meteors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More importantly, are they going to block the information on the outbound meteors?

  23. Obligatory X-Files quote by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Funny

    CHIEF KORETZ: Sir, I have flash traffic at 24-18. Repeated calls for ID go unanswered. And it's not in the orbital or suborbital inventory.

    MALE OFFICER #2: 24-18. Isn't that where...

    CHIEF KORETZ: Same exact spot, sir. Although I am reading a much larger craft his time.

    MALE OFFICER #2: Meteor, Ms. Koretz.

    CHIEF KORETZ: A much larger meteor, sir. Hold on a second. (Putting hand to earpiece) We have a confirm. Whitmarsh Air Force Base is tracking...

    MALE OFFICER #2: Where is it?

    CHIEF KORETZ: Well, sir. The - meteor - seems to be hovering over a small town in Eastern Wisconsin.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
    1. Re:Obligatory X-Files quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CHIEF KORETZ: Well, sir. The - meteor - seems to be hovering over a small town in Eastern Wisconsin.

      God, please let it be Little Chute.

  24. My vote: Retasking by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it is probable that the military has re-assigned the satellites so that more are looking in the direction of North Korea and possibly Iran. It would make a lot of sense to point the satellites in that direction and keep it secret.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    1. Re:My vote: Retasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have any clue how difficult and expensive it is to move satellites? Or how much time it takes off their effective mission length?

    2. Re:My vote: Retasking by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

      Good point. If scientists suddenly noticed that there has been a 50% drop in meteors entering the atmosphere over Russia, and a 50% increase in meteors entering the atmosphere over North Korea, it would be a pretty damn big clue that the military had moved some assets around.

    3. Re:My vote: Retasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geosynchronous orbit means each satellite remains over a specific place on the earth's surface. The geosynchronous satellites over, say, the USA can't be re-assigned to look at NK.

  25. Perhaps the wait is over... by Scragglykat · · Score: 1

    ... Military satellites stop transmitting information about incoming meteor and space objects... Alien craft move in around the planet, setting up positions over major cities and military bases... Are they friend? Are they foe?... Duke Nukem Forever... the Live Action Game!!!

  26. Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who said it shared that info between processors?

    If a classified-allowed process exists, it can have non-classified data on it too. It then SENDS this unclassified data to a processor that only works on unclassified data.

    Or is this "multi-processor" thingy a bit hard for you?

    1. Re:Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you merely underestimate the paranoid.

    2. Re:Not really by mkramer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Once touched by a classified process, the non-classified data becomes classified, until you painstakingly prove that it is not.

  27. And when you see where it goes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can *track back* and *see where it came from*.

    This then tells you that there are several things off in that direction and it'd be a good idea to check there with *outward pointing* satellites.

    You see how this works now?

    Good.

    Now, even better, if there are a lot of BIG meteorites, you know there are likely to be a lot MORE big metorites where they came from.

    See how simple this is?

  28. Direct all your complaints by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    to the Monsanto Corporation. /Moon Whaler

  29. aliens and enemies? by wesw02 · · Score: 1

    It seems likely to me that our enemies have teamed up with aliens to defeat us. The military must being trying to hide it for our own good.

  30. Congrats! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the awful headline making me read a story that was neither negative, nor audacious.

  31. Invaders! by danwesnor · · Score: 1

    Obviously they heard the Decepticons are coming and they don't want them to know the the capabilities of our space surveillance system.

  32. Clarification by T+Murphy · · Score: 4, Informative

    The satellites were picking up data on meteors as they hit the atmosphere. This has nothing to do with the search for large objects that may or may not hit the earth.

    This is technically made clear by the use of the word meteor, as opposed to asteroid, but I only remembered that as I type this so I expect I am not the only one that could have used a clarifying sentence in the summary.

    1. Re:Clarification by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      Well the mention of ballistic missiles sort of gave it away I thought.

  33. Multilevel Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... it may simply lack the expensive software needed to handle classified and declassified data simultaneously.

    Sounds reasonable to me.
    MLS systems are extremely difficult to get right, extremely difficult to accredit, and extremely difficult to maintain.
    In general, they're a PITA.
    My life would be so much better without them.

  34. Dumb question incoming. by Sebilrazen · · Score: 1

    Given that we, and the world, know that meteors striking the atmosphere cause these infrared satellites to go off, what stops a rogue nation from figuring out when the Perseids or Leonids would be impacting above their country and using that as a launch window? I mean, what's an extra blip in all that noise?

    --
    "There are no facts, only interpretations." --Friedrich Nietzsche.
    1. Re:Dumb question incoming. by ginbot462 · · Score: 1

      It would probably be the difficulty in making that good-enough signature at the right time and place (and correct duration and trajectory).

      And if you could do that, why not just conceal the launch/thrust signature entirely?

      --
      Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
  35. Terrible bug by tibman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    if( object.type=TYPE_METEOR ) {
            object.isClassified = false;
    } else {
            object.isClassified = true;
    }

    You just declassified EVERYTHING, including nuclear missiles.

    --
    http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    1. Re:Terrible bug by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Leave him alone, he works for Diebold.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Terrible bug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never place a variable on the left hand inside a conditional or a control flow statement.

      if (i == SOME_CONSTANT){ // BAD

      if (SOME_CONSTANT == i){ // GOOD

      I use this even in languages like Java where it's illegal to be an assignment.

  36. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bullshit. Misusing "classified" is a felony, a go to federal pound me in the ass penitentiary sort of felony. Of the many things the federal government abuses, classifying information is a rare exception. Authority to classify informatino resides at very high civilian levels (not in the military) and we are specifically prohibited from hiding embarassing information under the classification system.
    Many of us in the military are uncomfortable with the president's decision to classify pictures from Abu Graib. Legally, the pictures are likely to do "grave harm" to the United States, which is a requisite to classifying them. However, it's dubious whether that will withstand a FOIA request and follow-on lawsuit.

  37. Re:I hope a meteor hits this planet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If things weren't bad enough, now I'm a troll too. :(

  38. Lacks the expensive software? by MindPhlux · · Score: 1

    Come on, if the government has the software to sift through fathomless amounts of e-mail traffic and random data, only accessing it when it was intended for a party for which they have a fully cleared warrant, then surely they have the expensive software and know how to give us the locations of a few meteors?

  39. wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And next week some country (insert n-korea, Iran etc...) apparently and without any reason attacked something or some country wich only the militairy can prove and there u go.. a valid reason to go to war again..

    duh... wake up people

  40. Bush's Fault? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bush's Fault?

  41. SBIRS by captainbeardo · · Score: 1

    SBIRS, can't kill it, can't make it live.

    I'm guessing that a defense contract that's 4 times it's initial budget and 10 years late doesn't have the time to worry about filtering out the non-classified data to give to scientists. IR data is very very noisy so it's pretty difficult to separate out the parts you care about vs the noise.

  42. Canada by Bigby · · Score: 1

    Why does a Canadian professor expect free access to the byproduct of an organization funded by the American taxpayers?

  43. Information, secrets, intelligence world... by valinor89 · · Score: 1

    Not that I'm an Intelligence expert, nor I'm from the USA, but I allways tought that it is better to control the information that you give than to simply stop giving it. I mean, I can give them the info that I want and then controlling the situation becouse I CAN know what they know and act acordingly and even possibly make them act the way I want. Now they (USA) just don't have any idea about what the others ( the usual suspects ) might know and they (USA) can't influence the other countries (the usual suspects) in theyr weapons devolopment. What happens if the other country (your favourite evil empire, kingdom, country...) just goes overkill and excedes the USS spy tech, who knows?, USA is not what used to be, becouse they (the usual suspects) don't think (information control) that they know that les advanced tech would suffice? Kind of mind blowing isn't it?

  44. Flying Object Hilarity by dlfretz · · Score: 1

    That's no moon. It's a ...

  45. War in space? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I first heard about this from Richard C. Hoagland on the Wed. June 10, 2009 Coast to Coast show -
    http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2009/06/10
    where Hoagland claims that there is a space war going on among the ETs, and that the military blocked further acquisition of meteor data to prevent the public learning of this space war.

    Of course, I believe none of it ... I just provide it for your amusement, and that you can glean some nuggets of information from questionable sources.

  46. Or... by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    Or...it could be we finally are going to have a crashing asteroid hit our planet, as everybody has been to the movies has seen already.
    This is it, the end is coming, the end is coming....quick, where is my umbrella?

  47. we're all going to die by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they just don't want us to know about the giant meteor

  48. The dumber and more embarassing. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The dumber and more embarrassing the various bits of conspiracy nonsense in evidence, the bigger and more remarkable the secret being covered up by the dissemination of said ridiculous bits of conspiracy nonsense. . .

    The best way to make people look the other way is to make them cringe.

    Psyche 1 oh 1.

    -FL

  49. reasons why by jbdigriz · · Score: 1

    Or it could be that the military does not wish to give the civilian bureaucrats over at DHS/NAO (National Applications Office) any excuse to wrest further control over military satellites from the DOD. As conditioned as we are to give facile short shrift to the military establishment's motives in these kinds of secret matters, it may be that this is very definitely the lesser of two evils. The loss to science, or even to national security, is regrettable. Perhaps, esp. in light of the latter, this data is at least being archived for possible scientific analysis at some future date.

    I don't guess you can get any more circumspect than that.

  50. blocking data by neonsignal · · Score: 1

    Wow, that's some firewall. Is this like some sort of asteroid based network?

  51. Burlington News trumps anything Pederast AB voiced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to the information from BURLINGTONNEWS.NET, as recent as 1999 it has been common knowledge in leading intelligence positions of the Reptilian Race to hybridize with humans. This is better documented by David Ike where he has written about certain behaviours in world leaders that are only explainable on a scientific perspective; consider the fact that the only similarities so-far between a snake or lizard's brain to a human brain is the lower region known as the Archon center which defines all primitive feelings. A human has additional structure on-top of this that allows for a more complex conscience that is only attainable when abating the primitives.

  52. It's ok bro'. It makes you a more balanced person. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been around Slashdot and I see no end.
    All shall HTML submit again and again.
    Slashcode has broken me, my only friend--oh.

    On this server all shall troll and hack!
    On this server we're all learnin' cracks!
    On this server--on this server,
    all shall fly Redhat!
    There's no goin' Mac. :propz to all my dead homiez:
    No apologies to Zakk "goatse" Wylde.