The answer to persistent recon capability deemed as being a threat will invariably meet the notion of territoriality: what do we need to protect as a nation/a corporation of nations and perhaps, one day, a civilization*.
The notion that you can simply place yourself farther away, remote from observation or concealed is diminishing with the progress of technology (that it to be on an individual level, a corporation or a nation).
Beyond the question of space interception on solid legal basis to decorrelate peace time protection with the onset of war, what is essentially a matter of what will be the future of an organisation of nations, inevitably, the notion of active means of protection will surface**. It remains that any information has to travel to the sensor as a "data" that it has to be as a pile of electromagnetic pulsed series of wave or photon aggregates.
A basic mean of defense in the digital world confronted since long to the same problem has been encryption. Encryption, basically transforms an ordinate stream of variable into another. It would remain to nations with an acute sense of responsibility to protect the life mode of their citizen as a whole to put in place persistent or time allocated means to shield their citizen emmissivity spectrum from being collected effortlessly.
Yes, generalized digital encryption would be a must tomorrow and the question is how states will provide to that with a coherent, affordable strategy without derogating to the question of public security. Two main approaches will collide to get this result: a critical look to what necessity have items collected and the necessary dissemination down to emitter level (on cost-effect ground) of active spectrum protection (the deregulation of digital encryption to achieve overall resilience).
Then there is a more radical third stream of protection that invariably nations will be faced with: the timely modification of national airspace basic physical constant involved in spectral and electromagnetic data collection; those time will see large low frequency dephaser and other reactive jamming techniques as well as background light and radiation tempering.
Persistent staring sensors look at what "changes". And affecting what they perceive as "changing" would probably be an effective mean of protection.
Last but not least, tomorrow (today in fact), democratic states will be Confronted with the mass usage of HPMW and Infrasound on their populations, from rogue nations, a declared enemy or an organisation (think politically motivated, a corporatism or a criminal organisation). When that day will come and see a public awareness surfacing, the achievement reached against the threat of staring persistent sensor will legitimate the high cost of such Defense. It's a double ripple safe and vital investment.
* faced with another one - obviously semantically from another planet.
**beyond the mad foray of French gunslinger attitude into the far west of space
The notion that you can simply place yourself farther away, remote from observation or concealed is diminishing with the progress of technology (that it to be on an individual level, a corporation or a nation).
Beyond the question of space interception on solid legal basis to decorrelate peace time protection with the onset of war, what is essentially a matter of what will be the future of an organisation of nations, inevitably, the notion of active means of protection will surface**. It remains that any information has to travel to the sensor as a "data" that it has to be as a pile of electromagnetic pulsed series of wave or photon aggregates.
A basic mean of defense in the digital world confronted since long to the same problem has been encryption. Encryption, basically transforms an ordinate stream of variable into another. It would remain to nations with an acute sense of responsibility to protect the life mode of their citizen as a whole to put in place persistent or time allocated means to shield their citizen emmissivity spectrum from being collected effortlessly.
Yes, generalized digital encryption would be a must tomorrow and the question is how states will provide to that with a coherent, affordable strategy without derogating to the question of public security. Two main approaches will collide to get this result: a critical look to what necessity have items collected and the necessary dissemination down to emitter level (on cost-effect ground) of active spectrum protection (the deregulation of digital encryption to achieve overall resilience).
Then there is a more radical third stream of protection that invariably nations will be faced with: the timely modification of national airspace basic physical constant involved in spectral and electromagnetic data collection; those time will see large low frequency dephaser and other reactive jamming techniques as well as background light and radiation tempering.
Persistent staring sensors look at what "changes". And affecting what they perceive as "changing" would probably be an effective mean of protection.
Last but not least, tomorrow (today in fact), democratic states will be Confronted with the mass usage of HPMW and Infrasound on their populations, from rogue nations, a declared enemy or an organisation (think politically motivated, a corporatism or a criminal organisation). When that day will come and see a public awareness surfacing, the achievement reached against the threat of staring persistent sensor will legitimate the high cost of such Defense. It's a double ripple safe and vital investment.
* faced with another one - obviously semantically from another planet.
**beyond the mad foray of French gunslinger attitude into the far west of space
Last edited:
