Attack on google street view
-
I'm with the anti-Street View brigade on this one, even though it's cool in a sinister Big Brother-ish kind of way. Did Google actually ask anyone's permission before embarking on this project to map every street on the planet? Are they operating with a public mandate? Is it ultimately accountable to anyone except its own board and shareholders. No, no and no. Everyone in their right mind would be utterly aghast if their own elected and accountable Government did something like this. They should be even more aghast that an unaccountable and seemingly unassailable corporation can do something like this without seeking permission.
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
Um...have you lost your freaking mind? :) Since when is it even remotely acceptable to take away a basic right like taking pictures of anything you want to from any public space? The anti-street view brigade are complete nutters clearly. They have *no* right to take away someone's right to take pictures from a publicly accessible space. What next? Reporters aren't allowed to take photos in public spaces. If they don't like it they can build a fence, plant some trees, failing to do so clearly demonstrates that they have *no* problem with people in public looking at their house. People moan and bitch about the UK increasingly surveilling their populace in the name of safety but the dirty secret is that the majority of the UK populace wants it or it wouldn't happen, there is a streak of desire for fascism coming out of the U.K. that always surprises me. I think some of you grew up reading 1984 and thinking it was a bloody fine idea. :)
-
That's one of the silliest things I've read in a long time. I can go down to the store and buy a map that details every street in every city in the area. I can then actually go down any of these streets that I choose and see people with my own eyes any time I wish. At no time do I ever need the permission of any one to look at them while they are out on said streets.
Ok, I want you to do this for me: Go and buy yourself a street map. Pick any residential street on that map and make a visit. Take a camera. Photograph each and every residence on that street in detail. If you return home alive, upload those images to your own web space with explicit details on whereabouts of the street you visited, time of day and so forth. Publicise the fact you have done this. Come back and tell me what happens. Either that, or get yourself a clue before making ludicrous analogies that bear no relation to the subject at hand.
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
-
Their point is moot. If your home "security" is based on "there is no picture of it", then you have no security. It's just the good ol' security by obscurity. Plus, if you don't want the picture to be taken then that's a sign that you're hiding something valuable, right? At least, if I were a burglar, that's what I would think. Of course nothing would stop me from driving through that street with a concealed camera so why wouldn't I do that? Then I'd have 1) the location of a house with something in it that is worth protecting and, 2) pictures so I can see where the security equipment is etc.
-
Um...have you lost your freaking mind? :) Since when is it even remotely acceptable to take away a basic right like taking pictures of anything you want to from any public space? The anti-street view brigade are complete nutters clearly. They have *no* right to take away someone's right to take pictures from a publicly accessible space. What next? Reporters aren't allowed to take photos in public spaces. If they don't like it they can build a fence, plant some trees, failing to do so clearly demonstrates that they have *no* problem with people in public looking at their house. People moan and bitch about the UK increasingly surveilling their populace in the name of safety but the dirty secret is that the majority of the UK populace wants it or it wouldn't happen, there is a streak of desire for fascism coming out of the U.K. that always surprises me. I think some of you grew up reading 1984 and thinking it was a bloody fine idea. :)
Since when was a private residence a public space?
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
-
Orkney, Broughton, right? Here's a fun one, go to google maps and type that in, then hit thet "satellite" view a few zooms out. . . or even several zooms out. Forget privacy, how'd they get the google van to drive underwater?
-
Since when was a private residence a public space?
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
-
Their point is moot. If your home "security" is based on "there is no picture of it", then you have no security. It's just the good ol' security by obscurity. Plus, if you don't want the picture to be taken then that's a sign that you're hiding something valuable, right? At least, if I were a burglar, that's what I would think. Of course nothing would stop me from driving through that street with a concealed camera so why wouldn't I do that? Then I'd have 1) the location of a house with something in it that is worth protecting and, 2) pictures so I can see where the security equipment is etc.
You've missed the point. Whilst privacy is a big issue (Google have removed my home from every angle quite quickly and without a murmur) it is also about Google making money from me cos you can be damn sure they aren't doing this becuase they're cute cuddly interwobblies; it's because they can sell it and if they want that they can damn well pay me for it. Or not. And it's not. Which is also fine.
-
You've missed the point. Whilst privacy is a big issue (Google have removed my home from every angle quite quickly and without a murmur) it is also about Google making money from me cos you can be damn sure they aren't doing this becuase they're cute cuddly interwobblies; it's because they can sell it and if they want that they can damn well pay me for it. Or not. And it's not. Which is also fine.
-
Since never, but if you aren't allowed to take pictures of it, the news would be almost completely pictureless.
So, let's take this to an extreme just for illustrative purposes. According to you, and you'd supposedly be fine with this, if I knew where you lived I could: Turn up every day for a year. Take photos of your house from every angle visible from a public highway or footpath. Publish those photos on the Internet, along with the address. And I have the right to do this? My right to take photos from a public space, publish those photos however I see fit and potentially to profit from them supersedes your rights?
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
-
With respect: Bullshit. You're trying to tie something entirely unrelated to the issue at hand. I agree with you otherwise; privacy is being eroded in a bad way however it's not the fault of the "internet generation" but the fault of the governments in both the UK and the U.S. in the name of anti terrorism and public safety taken *WAAAYY* too far. Google street view is entirely unrelated and trying to tie the two together undermines your argument. One of the most basic human rights is the right to do whatever the hell you want that doesn't harm others, i.e. taking pictures in a public place, looking at whatever you want to, going wherever you want to etc. If we take your argument as being linked to pictures being taken of something in public then you're siding with the crazy laws that are increasingly restricting people from taking photos of *anything* in public which is taking away an important right for no useful purpose.
John C wrote:
One of the most basic human rights is the right to do whatever the hell you want that doesn't harm others, i.e. taking pictures in a public place, looking at whatever you want to, going wherever you want to etc.
or walking naked around the city or even better X|
-
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
I'd have been thrilled no end if I was ever featured in a Google street view scene
How much are you willing to pay for the negatives Nish?
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
Henry Minute wrote:
How much are you willing to pay for the negatives Nish?
negatives? you really are from another era. :-D
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google - the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get - use the code block button (PRE tags) to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets
-
Henry Minute wrote:
How much are you willing to pay for the negatives Nish?
negatives? you really are from another era. :-D
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google - the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get - use the code block button (PRE tags) to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets
Oh, yes. :) Still using them too. Although it is becoming more difficult, and expensive, month by month.
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
-
Oh, yes. :) Still using them too. Although it is becoming more difficult, and expensive, month by month.
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
the polyester ones? triacetate? or good old cellophane? :laugh:
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google - the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get - use the code block button (PRE tags) to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets
-
the polyester ones? triacetate? or good old cellophane? :laugh:
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google - the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get - use the code block button (PRE tags) to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets
It's celluloid, for me every time! :) The glass plates kept breaking!
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
-
So, let's take this to an extreme just for illustrative purposes. According to you, and you'd supposedly be fine with this, if I knew where you lived I could: Turn up every day for a year. Take photos of your house from every angle visible from a public highway or footpath. Publish those photos on the Internet, along with the address. And I have the right to do this? My right to take photos from a public space, publish those photos however I see fit and potentially to profit from them supersedes your rights?
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
Would you like to? :) You have my permission, in case you need it, which I doubt.. edit: ok, I checked, you (officially anyway, who actually ask?) need permission to take a picture of a human, but you can take a picture of most anything else without permission It's vague around pictures of landscapes with some people in it but that sounds exactly like what google is doing edit2: in the netherlands - laws will be different elsewhere.
modified on Friday, April 3, 2009 2:25 PM
-
John C wrote:
One of the most basic human rights is the right to do whatever the hell you want that doesn't harm others, i.e. taking pictures in a public place, looking at whatever you want to, going wherever you want to etc.
or walking naked around the city or even better X|
-
Regardless of how this particular group of people handled matters, the issue itself is real. Personal privacy is being continually eroded on a wide variety of technology enabled fronts. Additionally, each new generation who grows up in this environment will find it less and less unusual since they have never known a time when it was different, allowing the problem to worsen without resistance due to their apathy. I understand that this is an international community, and that not all nations or cultures have a strong sense of individual rights. However, this continual erosion of privacy (and the apathy of technology savvy generations) is rampant even in America, where we're supposed to care about such things. The modern mantra of the Internet generation is that all information should be free, all intellectual property should have no rights or ownership, all data should be shared with everyone without restraint, and in fact there should be no restrictions of any kind for anyone. By the time they figure out the many personal vulnerabilities that come with such an environment, it will be too late. Data, once gathered, never really goes away. The fact that Google is large, powerful, and owns a camera does not make it more important than the rights and privacy of the individuals who populate the world community.
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalUSA.com
Christopher Duncan wrote:
The fact that Google is large, powerful, and owns a camera does not make it more important than the rights and privacy of the individuals who populate the world community.
I'm an individual. I like to take pictures in public places. I also like it when someone's already taken pictures of the streets in a place i'm traveling to, so i don't spend vast amounts of time clogging the streets trying to figure out where i am. Where are my rights? Sorry, i'm with John C on this one. Taking pictures of public places has been kosher for decades, the Internet changes nothing. We have cameras taking pictures of people in public in real time on the taxpayer's dime; IMHO, that's a whole lot more concerning.
The sig has been drinking...
-
Ok, I want you to do this for me: Go and buy yourself a street map. Pick any residential street on that map and make a visit. Take a camera. Photograph each and every residence on that street in detail. If you return home alive, upload those images to your own web space with explicit details on whereabouts of the street you visited, time of day and so forth. Publicise the fact you have done this. Come back and tell me what happens. Either that, or get yourself a clue before making ludicrous analogies that bear no relation to the subject at hand.
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
-
Would you like to? :) You have my permission, in case you need it, which I doubt.. edit: ok, I checked, you (officially anyway, who actually ask?) need permission to take a picture of a human, but you can take a picture of most anything else without permission It's vague around pictures of landscapes with some people in it but that sounds exactly like what google is doing edit2: in the netherlands - laws will be different elsewhere.
modified on Friday, April 3, 2009 2:25 PM
-
I could do that without any problem. Of course I have a life to live and wasting even a small part of it on someone who just does not want to admit he's wrong just does not happen to be on my list of todo items.
kenrentz wrote:
I could do that without any problem.
Very unlikely. You'll be visited by the boys in blue at the behest of one of the residents. If you tried that on the Outlaw's street you'll be visited by the undertaker.
10110011001111101010101000001000001101001010001010100000100000101000001000111100010110001011001011