News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
The article repeatedly uses the adjectives "surveillance", "spy" to refer to the balloon, even though there is no source confirming that was the device's purpose, and notably it did not send any data home during its transit over the US. Forensic analysis only revealed meteorological equipment, antennas (which according to leaks were just regular communication antennas), basic steering devices and solar panels. Notably, no firmware analysis was mentioned, which would have easily confirmed its status as a surveillance balloon.
The other three balloons downed a week later were confirmed not to be spy balloons; the Northern Illinois Bottlecap Balloon Brigade claimed one, one research institution from the US (I don't remember) claimed another. They were the kind of balloons that the Air Forces typically don't take down, but apparently just decided to in a very short timeframe.
Maybe they initially feared it was a spy balloon, discovered in a few days it wasn't, then tried to alleviate the diplomatic hit by destroying every other "unidentified" balloon in their airspace, Chinese or not. And the PR mitigation for the local population is here: the balloon must have been for surveillance. This is the only hypothesis that makes sense to me (edit: feel free to provide others or point out flaws in my reasoning).
Maybe the reason no firmware analysis was mentioned was because it was classified because it was a spy balloon.
Since they already state they "suspect it was a spy balloon" and anyone would assume they would have performed such an analysis, them mentioning either that they performed it or that the analysis revealed it was a spy balloon would not reveal any otherwise secret information. But not mentioning either seems like an indication that the analysis was performed and did not reveal anything of use. Also, it does not explain why they destroyed three regular weather balloons right after the analysis.
You're comparing a long distance balloon from China with university projects local to the US. The Chinese balloon was massive, univesity projects are generally much smaller in scale. This was also the only Chinese balloon that made it into US airspace, but it is far from the only one of these balloons that have been launched.
I hate defending anyone from that shithole instance that is Lemmygrad… however the most recent interviews from our top generals here in the states say that the balloon after assessment didn’t collect any intel, was actually off the entire time and they suspect that it wasn’t actually meant to be over the states. There’s no doubt it wasn’t a massive balloon, but the story was really over blown because someone saw it, snapped a photo, and the press and social media took off with it.
Here’s the CBS Sunday Morning video about it.
It’s not like as if we here in the states don’t also launch massive balloons, or hell massive amounts of aircraft over others airspace collecting data. Sometimes that data isn’t even for military or surveillance purposes, sometimes it’s dual purpose, and sometimes it’s all military/surveillance.
Don't let facts get in the way of outrage. This balloon story (among others) will be repeated as justification for whatever actions are taken against China in the future.
I'm not performing any comparison. The US Air Force destroyed the Chinese balloon, then analyzed it, then destroyed three non-suspicious balloons. I understand the reasons why the Chinese balloon was suspicious, and I understand the reasons the other three balloons were not. Also, one of those three balloons (presumably the one from a research institution, but I could not find any source linking identified balloons with statements made prior about them) was of a comparable size to the Chinese balloon. My point is simply that the US never takes down its own balloons, and much less in such a short time, right after analyzing a balloon that they found suspicious. If you have a better hypothesis, I'll be glad to hear it.
Just curious... if it had 'basic steering devices,' why didn't they steer it away from the U.S.?
It’s a balloon. The primary ‘steering’ is the high altitude wind stream it is in.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40638/what-we-know-about-the-high-tech-balloons-lingering-off-the-coasts-of-the-u-s-recently
If the military can do it, so can a company like SpaceX.
Either they sent it there on purpose to provocate a respone, which would at least make some sense, or it malfunctioned, which also makes sense since the balloon did not send any communications during that time.
Edit: on further thought, I think if it had broken down, they could simply have reported it. It's likely they sent a weather balloon on purpose, either to test the waters or create bad PR in the US.
Because they were too basic? E.g. out of range of the Chinese controllers.
Why would the Chinese be able to control a balloon any less or more than a satellite?