jsnipy
...
+3,276|6529|...

http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/03/google_caves_to.html wrote:

The Pentagon said that Google (NSDQ: GOOG)'s Street Views is a threat to national security and made Google pull images taken on streets near U.S. military bases. Google complied with the governmental order, even though the images were taken from public streets. Freedom of information and security butt heads once again.

The government was concerned that the images, which included views of the entrances to military bases, were a threat. Gen. Gene Renuart, head of the military command responsible for homeland defense, said, "It actually shows where all the guards are. It shows how the barriers go up and down. It shows how to get in and out of buildings. I think that poses a real security risk for our military installations."

But the images were taken from public streets, where anyone could walk and take the same pictures and/or video and post them to the Internet. The question remains whether the government had the right to request that the images be removed. While that question is assuredly being debated, Google complied. Google spokesman Larry Yu said, "We have been contacted by the military. In those instances where they (the U.S military) have expressed concerns about the imagery, we have accommodated their requests."

Street Views has caused controversy from the start. Many privacy advocates claimed that even though images were taken in public places -- where no reasonable assumption of privacy really exists -- people were being exposed doing things they might not wish to have plastered on the Internet for all to see.

According to this Reuters report, "a man was pictured exiting a San Francisco strip club. In another case, a woman was shown sunbathing. Complaints have even included a woman asking that a picture of her cat be taken down, a request Google denied."

This is definitely a thorny issue. The government has been eating away at various public freedoms and due processes for the sake of security. While I believe ensuring our protection is one of the federal government's main functions, Benjamin Franklin's words continue to ring in my head: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
*Title is sarcasm*

Last edited by jsnipy (2008-03-07 09:03:24)

naightknifar
Served and Out
+642|6567|Southampton, UK

Whatever, They have no pics of me so I don't care.
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6497|Northern California
Probably a good idea, though public-capable images should not be censored...even in the name of national security.  Full panoramics, internal images, etc probably should not be permitted and don't infringe 1st amendment rights by censoring.

Be nice if the friggen pentagon did real work instead of nitpicking with such petty stuff.  They already own pretty much all communications of voice and data from which they could monitor data flowing internationally and catch badguys in the suburbs of Pakistan viewing such google maps...but no, they're not that smart.
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6650
google maps shows black hawks parked in iraqi airfields.
steelie34
pub hero!
+603|6387|the land of bourbon

IRONCHEF wrote:

Probably a good idea, though public-capable images should not be censored...even in the name of national security.  Full panoramics, internal images, etc probably should not be permitted and don't infringe 1st amendment rights by censoring.

Be nice if the friggen pentagon did real work instead of nitpicking with such petty stuff.  They already own pretty much all communications of voice and data from which they could monitor data flowing internationally and catch badguys in the suburbs of Pakistan viewing such google maps...but no, they're not that smart.
riiiiiight.  the pentagon is a huge waste of money.  what have they done for us lately?  people like you make me laugh.  you will probably never be exposed to terrorism in your life because of our national security, yet you constantly decry threats to free speech and talk shit about the agencies that keep you safe.
https://bf3s.com/sigs/36e1d9e36ae924048a933db90fb05bb247fe315e.png
G3|Genius
Pope of BF2s
+355|6632|Sea to globally-cooled sea
What good does google hope to accomplish by posting these things?

edit:  Furthermore, if they're going to be taking pictures of private property and posting it on the internet, they subjects of the photos should be compensated.  When I use a photo for my company's website, I'm required to compensate the subject of the photo.

Give that cat some catnip!!!  /jk

Last edited by G3|Genius (2008-03-07 09:29:27)

teek22
Add "teek22" on your PS3 fools!
+133|6387|Bromley, London

this is pointless.

If someone really wanted to do something they walk down the PUBLIC street themselves and get a better view of how they would attack.
I am 100% sure no one would decide to attack a location without visiting it once before.
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6229|Escea

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

google maps shows black hawks parked in iraqi airfields.
I admit it, I spied on Area-51

*waits for black van to arrive
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6497|Northern California

G3|Genius wrote:

What good does google hope to accomplish by posting these things?

edit:  Furthermore, if they're going to be taking pictures of private property and posting it on the internet, they subjects of the photos should be compensated.  When I use a photo for my company's website, I'm required to compensate the subject of the photo.

Give that cat some catnip!!!  /jk
Google publishes purchased satelite images..they don't take the images themselves.  Further, the aerial views are not in question..it's the ground photos that are built into the google map program that anyone can input..like wiki sort of.  And yes, I think the government has the right to censor sensitive places that are NOT available to the public....like inside a base or detailed aerial views of things. 

Separately, if aerial views are to be censored, I think it's already being done when requested..I've seen some spots in our country where the aerial is gone.
DonFck
Hibernator
+3,227|6638|Finland

Why is it that everytime I read about restrictions on the Interwebs, the word "overkill" comes to mind. Be it Pakistan forbidding the tube of you, Finland cracking down on alledged child-porn websites (in the process of which shutting down among a "R.I.P. Thai princess"-website and hence creating a miniature diplomatic conflict), or google maps giving "information" to terrorists.

Google maps will be reduced to showing maps that we can see in our second-grade Atlases in 1988. Youtube will show only clips from "My Little Pony", given that someone doesn't find it offensive.

Overkill.

What's next? Making Japanese tourists illegal? "They've got cameras, they must be providing intel to Al Qaeda!"
I need around tree fiddy.
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6627|London, England
Loads of countries have asked Google to remove things from their world satellite thing.

One of the more interesting military finds:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aksai_Chin … peculation

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl= … 9,0.042915

A scale model of a disputed area

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard