[mopsi]

There's no need to speculate. Even with 1960s tech and no physical access, the US military somehow managed to produce really good maps of the USSR, superior to those that were available to the public. So ironically, the intentional inaccuracy of USSR-made maps affected domestic users the most.

In 2024, with satellites producing imagery in ~10 cm resolution, the most important factor determining the quality of maps is probably the amount of money available for analyzing satellite imagery into maps, and you definitely can't hide militarily important features like roads, railways, bridges and buildings.

[planede]

The images might have ~10cm resolution, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there can't be larger scale systematic offsets and other distortions for larger tiles.

I recently learned that satellite images are often corrected to match known maps.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVemGumEEgo

[_xnmw]

Sure, but there's a limited amount of information available from a satellite image. It's hard to tell what's going on inside a building, for example.

[dumpsterdiver]

This is why I believe the policy of obfuscating strategically important sites in map data is counter productive. If you overlay the Chinese provided obfuscated mapping data over mapping data obtained by your own military apparatus, the "obfuscated" portions of the Chinese data suddenly become "highlighted".

[zambal]

The subject is the ability to make accurate up to date maps out of satellite imaginary. I fail to see how this is a counter argument against that.

[pertymcpert]

And a domestic government approved mapping service will tell you what’s going on inside a building? Why are you moving the goal posts?