Debate and Discussion

google street view
silentkitty at 11:09AM, June 7, 2007
(offline)
posts: 620
joined: 1-15-2007
As far as I can tell, the maps certainly aren't updated often enough for someone to be able to virtually follow you home.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:37PM
Volte6 at 11:10AM, June 7, 2007
(online)
posts: 949
joined: 1-1-2006
I disagree. I don't think you are entitled to privacy in open public places. Not without outlawing photography etc. in those places completely.

And it has nothing to do with doing anything wrong. That applies to privacy, in which doesn't exist out on the street.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:43PM
ozoneocean at 11:26AM, June 7, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
Volte6
And before that would you have cried out in protest against newspaper clippings? Photographs? Paper maps? This is just a newer version of the same thing.
Nope. As I said about this “street View” system before, unlike those other things this is user directed and available to anyone: not random, and not inaccessible.
Volte6
The fact you would leave your windows open is a signal that you don't mind people seeing in…
No… I suppose that's a good justification for someone eager to take a look, but it's not actually true. Most people just take their privacy for granted and so don't think that someone would look in, and a lot of people won't bother peering in either. It's just a normal expectation of privacy, which we have wherever we go and whatever we do usually; if it exists or not.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:27PM
SpANG at 11:32AM, June 7, 2007
(online)
posts: 3,105
joined: 1-1-2006
Volte6
I disagree. I don't think you are entitled to privacy in open public places. Not without outlawing photography etc. in those places completely.

And it has nothing to do with doing anything wrong. That applies to privacy, in which doesn't exist out on the street.
Then why do film crews need a permit to film in public areas? Why do the people they film have to sign waivers or permission contracts?

And it's not just because they make money. Several non-profit documentaries are made that still need permits and permission forms.
“To a rational mind, nothing is inexplicable. Only unexplained.”
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:52PM
StaceyMontgomery at 11:44AM, June 7, 2007
(offline)
posts: 520
joined: 4-7-2007
I'm with SpANG - this is kewl and fun, but it does make me worry. These technologies are really taking our Privacy, and more than that, our anonymity. The thing about “if you're not doing anything wrong…” is just wrong.

For instance, I've worked as volunteer for a Domestic Violence group. The women who sought out our help are increasingly compromised by these new technologies. There are times when a person wants to be unobserved. Are you going to a shelter for battered women? Going to an AA meeting? Going for an AIDS test? Is it really so vital that everyone have no privacy at all?

Of course, there are upsides. Google street view can also be really useful. And increased surveillance doesn't just help us find some criminals, it's helped us reveal instances of police brutality, to give one example.

The thing is, new technologies always have unintended consequences. It's a good idea to glance ahead, and see what's coming down our road.

Of course, we'll never get the genie back in the bottle - we *are* going to live with less and less privacy and anonymity. That means we'll need to invent new ways to do things - and of course, develop new technologies to help out.

Call me old-fahsioned, but I think Privacy is Good for people.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:55PM
Volte6 at 2:29PM, June 7, 2007
(online)
posts: 949
joined: 1-1-2006
Nope. As I said about this “street View” system before, unlike those other things this is user directed and available to anyone: not random, and not inaccessible.
It's just as available and user directed as the other things I mentioend.

No… I suppose that's a good justification for someone eager to take a look, but it's not actually true. Most people just take their privacy for granted and so don't think that someone would look in, and a lot of people won't bother peering in either. It's just a normal expectation of privacy, which we have wherever we go and whatever we do usually; if it exists or not.
So you've never seen a christmas tree in someones window before? Did you feel unethical about it? Just because it's there doesn't give you the right to see it, after all.

Then why do film crews need a permit to film in public areas? Why do the people they film have to sign waivers or permission contracts?
Not sure, my GUESS would be because they inconvenience business and residents. They used to close down my streets all the time for filming, and I hated it, because I couldn't even park.

Overall what I dislike about this viewpoint is that it says you have a right over the beams of light in the area you are, which is retarded. Openspace that's been established as public use should be just that. I liken it to you saying you want to have a party at the park and close it off to me, because i'm not invited. Sorry pal, my tax dollars pay for that too, and i'm gonna use it. If there's one thing I absolutely hate it's favoritism and elitism ( the movie filming being a perfectly good example of somebody paying money to force an inconvenience on me ).

Stacey
For instance, I've worked as volunteer for a Domestic Violence group. The women who sought out our help are increasingly compromised by these new technologies. There are times when a person wants to be unobserved. Are you going to a shelter for battered women? Going to an AA meeting? Going for an AIDS test? Is it really so vital that everyone have no privacy at all?
I wouldn't say it's an issue of my desire to take somebody's privacy. I feel very strongly in privacy for privacies sake, actually. I do take issue with anybody laying claim to a visible 180 arc of visible public space, though. That's as silly to me as holding the patent on a number (which btw, people do quite more frequently than most people realize).




….


Privacy is great. An overwhelming sense of entitlement isn't.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:43PM
ozoneocean at 3:02PM, June 7, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
Volte6
It's just as available and user directed as the other things I mentioend.
Not in as much as they're directly analogous to the “street View” feature. :)

Maps obviously apply mostly to the ordinary Google Earth thing (aerial views only), so aren't that relevant. Photographs that have been taken of a place and news clippings do relate, but they're more “frozen in time” and not nearly as easily context searchable. For example: From my computer all the way across the globe using the “street view” system I could presumably find a particular street that happened to have that feature enabled and be in the neighbourhood of someone I wanted to keep tabs on. All I'd have to do would be to bookmark it or whatever and return whenever I wanted to it to see if it updates.

-With available photographs and paper new clippings that's simply not possible. You can't match that level of accessibility… and in photos already taken you can't decide which direction you want to look; that view is all you have.
Volte6
So you've never seen a christmas tree in someones window before? Did you feel unethical about it? Just because it's there doesn't give you the right to see it, after all.
Of course you see these things, but you don't take them as an invitation to walk up and peer in do you? ^_^

Besides, as I say it's the “expectation of privacy” that we all have almost wherever we are. I'm not against the “street View” thing, but I can see that side of it.

As for waivers, that's not to do with inconvenience. That really does have to do with selling your privacy! But people who're just walking down the street and happen to be filmed don't need to sign one., only people who you're deliberately filming and who speak on camera, or who're identified (something likat that anyway).
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:27PM
SpANG at 3:08PM, June 7, 2007
(online)
posts: 3,105
joined: 1-1-2006
I will concede one point. It seems that Street view is not a “live feed” as I once thought. It's all static images. For now. But many of my points I feel are still very valid regarding privacy. ;)

As for waivers, that's not to do with inconvenience. That really does have to do with selling your privacy! But people who're just walking down the street and happen to be filmed don't need to sign one., only people who you're deliberately filming and who speak on camera, or who're identified (something likat that anyway).
That's probably PARTIALLY true. But I have seen reports where they say, talk about fat people, and then film a bunch of fat people walking down the street, as examples (like we wouldn't know what fat people look like). They never show the faces, because I am pretty sure there is a privacy or at least a legality to it.
“To a rational mind, nothing is inexplicable. Only unexplained.”
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:52PM
maritalbliss at 3:11PM, June 7, 2007
(offline)
posts: 1,045
joined: 4-15-2007
maritalbliss
We saw this on the news last night. Neat and invasive.

(No one ever gets my jokes.) I think the “Google Street View” feature has both positive and negative aspects. The term invasive…it does apply. I think a person would be slightly naive, taking into account all the episodes of “To Catch a Predator” I've seen, to deny that there are some realllll pervs out there; that WILL use this technology to find streets with an abundance of children and little supervision…other than the supervision of the camera, of course. One could posture that this creepsome individual could figure out how to bypass being filmed by “Big Brother” and design the optimum plan of attack, thus makin' his ability to take a more active role in the cybercommunity a stark reality. So, invasive; as in the sense of to encroach aggressively…it does, or has the potential too, just my opinion.

It's totally neat though.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:53PM
Volte6 at 3:30PM, June 7, 2007
(online)
posts: 949
joined: 1-1-2006
ozoneocean
Photographs that have been taken of a place and news clippings do relate, but they're more “frozen in time” and not nearly as easily context searchable.
These are frozen in time as well. it seems to me that you're complaining about the organization of the data rather than the collection of it.

ozone
Of course you see these things, but you don't take them as an invitation to walk up and peer in do you? ^_^
Of course not. I never suggested that you should be able to. In fact, once you step on their property you've definitely crossed a line. That's a completely different issue than what you can see from the street or sidewalk… I think it's an important distinction to make so that we aren't arguing the completely wrong points.

As for waivers, that's not to do with inconvenience. That really does have to do with selling your privacy! But people who're just walking down the street and happen to be filmed don't need to sign one., only people who you're deliberately filming and who speak on camera, or who're identified (something likat that anyway).
I'm pretty sure that when you sell photos etc. for profit there is a legal issue and you DO need permission.. but then i'm no law guy ;)




Overall I do feel we are entitled to privacy, but there should definitely be a line where private stops and public begins. If you get to claim the world as your private getaway, that's a serious problem and impedes progress.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:43PM
Cthulhu at 7:27PM, June 7, 2007
(online)
posts: 5,095
joined: 4-18-2006
That's pretty cool! But then again, I'm just saying that, because there aren't any near my place!
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:56AM
lothar at 7:44PM, June 7, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,299
joined: 1-3-2006
i don't have any problem with this at all !!
It's nothing like “big brother” because WE have access to it
its realy simple technology , just drive down the street and snap pictures at a set interval , it's just the access to this stuff in an organized way that is bothering people , before it would have been only police and military that can loook at this stuff , THAT is BIG BROTHER !
google is just bringing it to the PEOPLE ! and for that i aplaud them !
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:45PM
ozoneocean at 7:57PM, June 7, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
lothar
google is just bringing it to the PEOPLE ! and for that i aplaud them !
Who do you think “big Brother” really is? :)
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:27PM
lothar at 5:44AM, June 8, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,299
joined: 1-3-2006
ozoneocean
Who do you think “big Brother” really is? :)

well , if you go by the Orwellian deffinition of BB , that model of society was very stratafied with the inner party acounting for around 1% of the population (6 million people) and the outer party was roughly 20% yet they had no say in things , the “proles” who i would say most of us can relate to were 80% .
the 1% had control of all of the survelance mechanism , so the fact that google is offering this ability to virtually 100% of the population , i would say it's very different from big brother .
it's about power , and a thing is only powerfull if it is exclusive !
my point was that this kind of survelance is already available to the 1% . and Now if it becomes available to all (with a computer) then it looses its power as a tool of repression. i predict that it will be crushed under the facist boot with the excuse that it is somehow a threat to “security” .
so too is the fate of the internets , nothing threatens the power of the elite like an informed populace !!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:45PM
StaceyMontgomery at 5:57AM, June 8, 2007
(offline)
posts: 520
joined: 4-7-2007
If surveillance is available to everyone, it is still available as a tool of oppression by the government. Letting “everyone” have it simply opens up the possibility that people might be able to use it to fight back.

But the vehicle of oppression would still be there, if that sort of thing bothers you. And of course, there's the real danger use of the technology by “normal people” to oppress other normal people.

My basic concern, I think, is still out there. Should a woman be able to go to an abortion clinic without being monitored by a sidewalk cam? A battered women's shelter? A Mosque? An NRA meeting? Does everyone really need to be able to follow everyone - everywhere?

See, very soon, we'll have webcams everywhere. And face recognition software means that shortly after that, it will be possible to follow any person you want to - follow them everywhere. It might be the end of spouses cheating on each other.

But even if you think that sounds kewl - it's going to be a huge change in how society operates. And if you're being stalked by an abusive partner - or an abusive government - or an abusive credit agency - it's going to be a nightmarish one.

(edited for clarity)
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:55PM
kyupol at 5:57AM, June 8, 2007
(online)
posts: 3,712
joined: 1-12-2006
Street view has its good uses.

But lets see when al quaeda uses this to plan terrorist attacks.

NOW UPDATING!!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:25PM
lothar at 6:32AM, June 8, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,299
joined: 1-3-2006
fuk al-queda, it doesn't even exist !!! it's just a made up boogeyman to scare you into submission,
and from what i understand these are still images taken at a single moment in time , exaclty like in a newspaper , and they are all taken from the street (public property) and i doubt google is going to take the pictures again for a long time . just look at google maps sattelite images , most of them are realy old .
this is realy ridiculous ! what is everybody afraid of ? stalkers? terrorists? only the laziest terrorist or stalker is going to try using this technology , and in that case they are prolly to lazy to actually carry out any kind of action !
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:45PM
ozoneocean at 3:09PM, June 8, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
lothar
ozoneocean
Who do you think “big Brother” really is? :)
well , if you go by the Orwellian deffinition
Big Brother is everyone. Not power delivered from on high; it's when someone is always watching over you… and when ultimately you watch over you… But really, it's when you don't know who could be an informant and people control each other with very little intervention from the elite: that's the system in action.

This system has nothing to do with that, but it is these kinds of things that provide the tools when it comes to pass.

As to Volte's disconnect between the information and the handling of it: there is no separation in this case, that's the point of the service and the inherent difference between different forms of media. i.e. TV, Radio, Stone Tablets, Parchment, Microfiche… The medium isn't the only thing you consider, but all it's other properties as well, they're all one.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:27PM
subcultured at 1:44PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 5,392
joined: 1-7-2006
if the govt want to do surveilance you they wouldn't use google maps
J
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:02PM
Cthulhu at 1:46PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 5,095
joined: 4-18-2006
Ummm… Can someone help me out here?! I was looking at the world, and I noticed a huge metal-looky thing in Greenland. It's like 40 miles long! You can see it from space! Just use satilite view.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:56AM
ozoneocean at 2:25PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
subcultured
if the govt want to do surveilance you they wouldn't use google maps
Actually some governments do. Cheap I know, but there you have it. :)
As I say though, when it comes to big brother, it's the guy next door who you'll have to worry about… That's how it really works in totalitarian regimes. Like in Nazi Germany where you even had some Jewish people informing on each other, that's how insidious and overwhelming those systems are. In Lybia or Cuba say; you might not know who will inform on you for something, so even in private conversations you may not criticise the regime. All the government has to do is act on what your neighbours say and punish you for it.

So Castro is great and Gadaffi is the son of heaven! lol!
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:27PM
subcultured at 3:36PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 5,392
joined: 1-7-2006
umm…okay
too much conspiracy theory books fer you

so do you propose we get rid of the web also, or maybe binoculars, cameras, our eyes, satellites, cars…since almost anything can be used to spy on you.

it's a tool for people to see the sights. if people use it for bad things like the interweb with illegal pictures…then there will be repercutions to it. but why halter progress, because of paranoia or what ifs?

personally, i'm excited to see the streets of japan or the cities of london when they get around to it.
J
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:02PM
ozoneocean at 4:29PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
WTF sub? Conspiracy? That's the truth, no paranoia, that's actually what happens. Didn't you know? Ah well.

OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying this Google Street View is used that way or will be, but it's the kind of thing that would play a part in that sort of system. Just like I might say a base on the moon could be used to launch nuclear attacks on Earth: that doesn't mean I don't think they should have bases on the moon or that I'm paranoid, it's simply intelligent speculation of way out possibilities, which is something we should do when evaluating any new technology or advance, something that creative people such as us are very good at (or should be). :)

 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:27PM
subcultured at 4:43PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 5,392
joined: 1-7-2006
i was refering to your “big brother” speech :)
J
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:02PM
Cthulhu at 4:49PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 5,095
joined: 4-18-2006
Cthulhu
Ummm… Can someone help me out here?! I was looking at the world, and I noticed a huge metal-looky thing in Greenland. It's like 40 miles long! You can see it from space! Just use satilite view.

Could someone PLEASE just look at that, and tell me what it is?!
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:56AM
ozoneocean at 5:18PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
subcultured
i was refering to your “big brother” speech :)
I know. That's how it works. When you have a totalitarian system you don't have to worry so much about the government directly spying on you as much as your neighbours, friends, and even family members. That's how it actually works; and not everyone will be an informant, but if you don't know who is you have to behave like everyone is.
-that's when it's at its worst, which it isn't always, even in places like North Korea.

That's the thing people don't get when trying to understand how dissidents under those regimes feel… You wonder why their friends and family don't protect them, or why people don't just rise up and overthrow the dictator. People always assume that those governments must be spying on all those people individually or something to make them so submissive, but that's impossible! For a start, under those regimes most people accept that “reality”: that the system is good and they should support it), and secondly: that they should make sure others don't undermine it. So people who don't accept that “reality” have few choices. There's a lot of literature available written by dissidents from all eras, even blogs on the net now! And I'm sure you know at least one person who's lived under a system like that. I know a few.

-Again: this has only the most tenuous relationship to the Google thing, so please no one use what I've said above in an argument about it.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:27PM
lothar at 7:33PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,299
joined: 1-3-2006
Cthulhu
Cthulhu
Ummm… Can someone help me out here?! I was looking at the world, and I noticed a huge metal-looky thing in Greenland. It's like 40 miles long! You can see it from space! Just use satilite view.

Could someone PLEASE just look at that, and tell me what it is?!

could you be more specific ? is it north, south, inland , on the coast ? Greenland is a big place , i was just looking at it and i think i might know the feature you are talking about , but i dont know if we are looking at the same thing !

is it this ? looks like the censored it already !!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:45PM
Cthulhu at 7:38PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 5,095
joined: 4-18-2006
No, the yellow-ish thing about 50 miles North-east of it. You can even see it in the little picture in the bottom-right corner.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:56AM
ozoneocean at 7:57PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
You can see a lot of stuff from “space” depending on what magnification you're using and how high up you are… One of the things you can't see from "space is the Great Wall of China hilariously enough. lol!

That black bar is interesting… A communications device censored off? Radar tracking? Maybe just a photo mistake? That yellow thing looks like a problem with some old photos not matching up. Maybe it's part of the view of a mountain in summer or something, just cut in half with some images from colder times covering the rest?

-Who just moved the thread? Wish they'd say why…

Anyway, if you're looking for cool stuff, have you seen the Ekranoplane at the hovercraft base in Russia? The military hovercfafts are pretty amazing too, they make those LCAC thing look like river barges. Have a look around here. Pretty massive military machinery.
Worlds biggest aeroplane here.
Thousands of dead planes here.
Fun :)
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:27PM
Cthulhu at 8:10PM, June 9, 2007
(online)
posts: 5,095
joined: 4-18-2006
Who knows what the yellow thing is… It just freaks me out, though…

Also, I looked at “Area 51”. No UFOs anywhere, just jets, planes, and cars… they must be hiding the “UFOs”. Pretty boring.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:56AM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved