From: jagrant@emr1.emr.ca (John Grant)
Subject: Re: GPS, PC or non-PC?
Organization: Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 03:10:24 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.222018.700@guinness.idbsu.edu> jahn@guinness.idbsu.edu writes:
>Hey, I just came across an article in the Samhain 1992 edition
>of the Earth First! Journal that I thought could liven up the
>b.c. discussions beyond the issue of waterproofing tent bottoms.
>
>According to the article, on May 10th of this year two guys broke
>into the headquarters of Rockwell International and one of the guys
>managed to start 'dismantling' a satellite with an axe ... one of two
>located there, both of which were supposedly among the last few
>which are needed to make GPS and Navstar complete.  Damage estimates
>are said to approach $3 million.
>
>To quote: "Navstar is a targeting system.  Receivers are attached to
>cruise missiles, tanks, and Jeeps.  They help guide first-strike
>missiles to their targets, and infantry across unfamiliar terrain."
>
>The article quotes a former Trident missile engineer as saying -
>"Navstar takes the guess out of warfighting."
>
>Until this article it had never clearly occured to me how inter-
>related the use of GPS for backcountry orienting and military
>use for counterinsurgency operations were ... it's the same stuff,
>except that the military applications have access to more refined
>locating abilities.  There are two things that I found interesting
>about this article.  One, is that I had not heard about these guys
>destroying a satellite ... it seems like it would have been 
>news-worthy.  Second, ... it caused me to ponder whether this type
>of capability is a good thing.  I've acquired this picture of how
>different hanging out in the middle of nowhere is now ... 'they'
>can look at you with satellites, then a bunch of guys can be
>directed to your exact location .... no problem.  

	GPS receivers receive signals from satellites and then
	compute the position from this information.  How is 
	such a receiver going to direct anyone else to your position?
	It is not a transmitter (yeah ok, perhaps it can be
	detected, just like radar detectors can now be detected
	by detector-detectors, but not from large distances).
		
>Of course, and for the record, I'm certainly not advocating 
>running around axing satellites, but it does in a strange way
>link issues of using technology for matters of potential safety and 
>convenience in the outdoors with nuclear first-strike capability.
>It's a strange strange world we humans have created.  

	Like any technology, it can be used for good or for bad
	or for both.  Radios, tents, boots, gore-tex, backpacks
	cameras, tape recorders etc etc are all used by civilians
	both in and out of the backcountry and by military
	personnel.  Does this mean we should destroy the factories
	that make all of these things?
 
	To attack one particular technology as contributing to
	warfare is stupid, senseless and demonstrates no
	particular amount of intelligence.  Now if you are
	talking about guns, tanks, fighter planes, well...
	that is a different story - these are designed to
	kill, whether for offence or defence.  Interesting
	point - does the damn NRA also state that "tanks don't
	kill people - people do" ?.

	The folks who destroyed the satellite were thinking (and
	I use the term very loosely!) only of its military uses,
	forgetting (perhaps conveniently) about its use for
	non-military navigation as well as its role in search
	and rescue.  This is about the same amount of stupidity
	shown by the bleeding-heart mentally-deranged folks
	who think that it is more important to 'liberate'
	research animals than to use them in medical research
	to find cures for human suffering.

>So, Eugene, care to offer some introspective ethical ruminations
>on this?  A good thing?  
>
>Also, note that I don't know hardly anything about this stuff,
>as a matter of fact, my only sources are the above-referenced 
>article and ... this newsgroup, which, in it's own way is scary ...
>oh, ... have a nice day.
>       
>--
>Greg Jahn Boise State Univ.| "Spoils of war are spoils of war,
>/ jahn@guinness.idbsu.edu /|  says junk man, owner of the junk. 
>/ dosjahn@idbsu.bitnet    /|  Grafitti man's got something to
>/ (208)385-3891.thephone  /|  say. "   - John Trudell


-- 
John A. Grant						jagrant@emr1.emr.ca
Airborne Geophysics
Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa