A Chinese company’s publication of AI-enhanced satellite images of US bases in the Middle East is helping Iranian forces identify targets, US intelligence believes.

The ABC has been briefed on the intelligence by a source inside US defence, who says the images are endangering lives.

Chinese geospatial artificial intelligence and software company MizarVision, which the Chinese government has a small ownership stake in, has been publishing detailed satellite images with tagging data of multiple US military sites in the lead-up to, and during, the Iran war.

The imagery showcases an AI tool that identifies and tags military forces across vast areas, a capability that once required the resources of a national intelligence agency.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I do give a fuck. I’m glad they do because the only way I see for long term stability in that region, which affects my and my family’s life in multiple ways, is for the US to lose the war as badly as possible.

    • Lasherz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Short term stability for sure, but I don’t think Russia has been able to provide any more long term stability to anyone better than the US can. China maybe, but we haven’t really seen this version of China show their true colors to a nation they don’t consider part of their original borders.

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        Oh I’m considering this from the perspective of the regional reason for instability which for a while now has been Israel. For long-term stability, Israel should face mutually-assured-destruction from Iran without the promise of unlimited weapons and interceptors from US. Israel should also face existential threat from Iran if they expand in to neighbouring countries, like they’re currently doing in Lebanon. If the US-Israel military command causes significant economic pain in the US, I think the US public opinion would force the US to break from Israel, which should usher the conditions I’m envisioning - of Israel facing Iran and the region alone, and perhaps even without unlimited US weapons. Def not the only possibility, but the one I think would make things a lot less explosive over the long haul.

        E: I think China might push Iran to settle with the US in order to halt the economic destruction that would affect them too, possibly in exchange for greater economic China-Iran cooperation despite US sanctions.

    • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I think were pretty screwed either way. If they ramp down, Iran sees them as an existential threat and ramps up nuke capability, but now with less sanctions and more money. Iran with nukes makes Israel more twitchy as they see it as an existential threat.

      If USA ramps up, we’re in for a long protracted war and instability.

      So we’re screwed either way.

        • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Lol, no. The world is safer with less nukes. Allowing Israel to get nukes was a failure of the international community.

          Allowing Ukraine to face repurcussions for giving up their nukes was another failure.

          • Tolc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 hours ago

            No. Look at DPRK

            Iran must have nukes for stability and safety of the region

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        I think Israel, without unlimited weapons backing of the US (a condition I think would occur if the US loses badly) would stop casual strikes against Iran. They would know they risk a barrage of missiles that they don’t have the interceptors for. And if Iran gets the nuke, then MAD would be in effect. Israel seeing Iran as an existential threat now, not in the future would sit tight and perhaps even open a dialogue. The problem today is they consider Iran a threat in the future. And mind you they don’t consider them a threat so much to Israel today than to their plans for expansion in Lebanon, West Bank, Syria and so on.

        • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          I think it’s that they realize peak oil is over. The middle east is a geopolitical strategic position for energy, as the world is now finding out via Iran closing the SoH.

          Israel realised that that is on the wane. Along with the next generations attitude towards their relationshipnwith Israel. Israel is going hard in now as they have a larger support from the USA. I fully expect that to naturally wind down due to internal US political change and global moves away from carbon fuel.

          Sure, oil shocks would still bite, but nowhere near to the same level. It’s why the other oil production states are desperately trying to pivot to other industries. Iran has screwed that by making them unsafe. America doesn’t realize that by not protecting their allies there, in the same way they protect Israel, that they will lose them. Edit:typos

    • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      The USA already doesn’t have a win condition, but the only way for longterm stability would be something like Iran getting EU membership which isn’t on the table. The solution with the least harm would be for the USA and other NATO allies to help the Iranians overthrow the despots and cut ties with China. The worst possible outcome is like 40% of Iranians die, Israel claims land, and the IRGC stays in power, which is pretty close to your idea of the best outcome.

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        The solution with the least harm would be for the USA and other NATO allies to help the Iranians overthrow the despots and cut ties with China.

        Disagree. A democratic Iran with 90 million population, and presumably no sanctions, is a growth powerhouse that produces loads of things, among which loads of weapons. For Israel’s security apparatus, that’s a country one “bad” election away from launching a lot more weapons at them. That’s something which Israel will not let stand. Which is also why they are so obviously not going for regime change but instead for inducing a failed state that’s ungovernable, can’t organize production, won’t have sanctions lifted, would perpetually have insurgency that can be bombed at will, or in technical terms mow the lawn.

        There’s no outcome other than diminished US or Israeli power, or both, that would produce stability in the region given Israel’s ambitions and US interests in the region.

        As for the Iranian people, their only hope for better life can come from internal struggle against their gov’t over time that would be made a whole lot easier if their economic situation is made better through lifting of sanctions, or if sanctions remain - through massively increased trade with China. (Cause the more resources people have, the more they have left to organize as change does not come through magic and spontaneous revolutions are a fantasy.) If the EU is smart, they would drop their sanctions against Iran. Which is actually plausible if more shit keeps hitting the fan and their oil supply does not resume, which could force them to break ranks with the US on this.

      • Rimu@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        help the Iranians overthrow the despots

        The time to do that was before bombing hundreds of Iranian children. And civilian infrastructure. Way too late now.

        • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Are you expecting me to defend the Trump Admin? It’s never too late so long as the IRGC holds power, but yes he’s made it a lot harder for us to accomplish positive change.

          • Rimu@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            No I’m just saying you might as well give up on that dream - the regime will have more support than ever, now.

            • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              We’re discussing hypothetical outcomes, I doubt any one of the suggestions in this thread will have any real world impact but remaining silent would be stupid.

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        The solution with the least harm would be for the USA and other NATO allies to help the Iranians overthrow the despots and cut ties with China.

        Only if you don’t take into account harm for Iranians in your idea of “harm.” What you’re describing is basically what happened in Libya.

        • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Iranians were starving and being shot to death in the streets even before the war, continuing the war until the USA admits defeat will also lead to undue suffering. The only system of representing Iranian citizens is a democracy which is the furthest from their current organization.

          • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Are you not capable of learning from history? Again, you could’ve said the same thing about Libya. Does Libya in 2026 look like a thriving democracy to you? Then why do you want to do the same thing in Iran?

            • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 hours ago

              Revolution does not always result in democracy, but democracy is still the best system for protecting health and happiness of the majority of people.

              Libya now is still better off than Libya under Gaddafi.

              • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                Libya now is still better off than Libya under Gaddafi.

                What the actual fuck. Holy dear Jesus. That’s a wild take if I ever saw one.

              • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                9 hours ago

                What. The. Fuck? Libya under Gaddafi didn’t have fucking slave markets you can’t be fucking serious. Also foreign countries dropping bombs isn’t a “revolution” anymore than Soviet-backed regimes in Eastern Europe were revolutionary.

                • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 hours ago

                  There are news stories of Gaddafi’s slave trade operations since like 1996, probably earlier.