Google Earth 'Street View'
Ret.
major cities, most urban areas are not included at all.
I was surprised to see, for example, how much of Spain is included - even
remote Andalucian villages - whereas large towns in the UK such as
Warrington, Plymouth, Brighton, etc are not.
Was it the highly publicised objections from some residents in the UK that
put off Google from progressing faster here?
Kev
Phil Stovell
> Street View appears to be progressing very slowly in the UK. Apart from
> some major cities, most urban areas are not included at all.
My sister saw the Google van going down her street over 6 months ago, yet
it hasn't appeared (near Southend).
> I was surprised to see, for example, how much of Spain is included - even
> remote Andalucian villages - whereas large towns in the UK such as
> Warrington, Plymouth, Brighton, etc are not.
Yes, some of my old holiday destinations in Tenerife and Mallorca are
there, but Exeter isn't! Southampton (Yuk!) is, but that's the only place
on the south coast.
> Was it the highly publicised objections from some residents in the UK that
> put off Google from progressing faster here?
I was wondering the same. They might be worried about being labelled as
tourists or paediatricians by some PCSO J. Obsworth and having the photos
deleted.
> Kev
Sam
"Ret." <xxx> wrote in message
news:k5idneQJLZMfB93W...@pipex.net...
I have to say, I'm finding it quite frustrating.
I was followed by the Google car about 7 months ago in Swaffham, and passed
it a few more times coming in opposite directions later in the day.
I've been checking almost every week since to see if I'm on there, but so
far nothing.
Stuart B
And you have posted this drivel to legal as you have a legal question
?
--
Partac
"Stuart B" <indivi...@takemyteethoutgmail.com> wrote in message
news:gk91k5973va3pq0do...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 13:24:21 -0000, "Ret." <xxx> wrote:
>
>
> And you have posted this drivel to legal as you have a legal question
> ?
*plenty* of discussion on the legality (or otherwise) of taking photos in
the public domain.
Sam
"Partac" <petem...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7qbop8...@mid.individual.net...
Perhaps Google were stopped under S44 and had all their hard drives erased
by an over eager PCSO.
Mentalguy2k8
"Ret." <xxx> wrote in message
news:k5idneQJLZMfB93W...@pipex.net...
> some major cities, most urban areas are not included at all.
>
> I was surprised to see, for example, how much of Spain is included - even
> remote Andalucian villages - whereas large towns in the UK such as
> Warrington, Plymouth, Brighton, etc are not.
Maybe Google restrict their street maps to areas people actually want to
see!
Gordon Henderson
Phil Stovell <ph...@stovell.nospam.org.uk> wrote:
>Yes, some of my old holiday destinations in Tenerife and Mallorca are
>there, but Exeter isn't! Southampton (Yuk!) is, but that's the only place
>on the south coast.
I saw a google camera car on the A38 halfway between Exeter & Plymouth
just over a year ago - parked in a layby - on the Plymouth direction. I
understand it does take some months to get the data processed and into
the system, however...
http://unicorn.drogon.net/stuff/google3.jpg
Gordon
Vicko Zoomba
> "Partac" <petemac9...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:7qbop8...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
> > "Stuart B" <individual...@takemyteethoutgmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:gk91k5973va3pq0do...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 13:24:21 -0000, "Ret." <xxx> wrote:
>
> >> And you have posted this drivel to legal as you have a legal question
> >> ?
> > It's a job to come up with a better group- after all, there has been
> > *plenty* of discussion on the legality (or otherwise) of taking photos in
> > the public domain.
>
> Perhaps Google were stopped under S44 and had all their hard drives erased
> by an over eager PCSO.
That would be a fine thing. If only it was a real possibility!
McKevvy
Turk182
wrote:
There is nothing drivel about this question.
Google photographed my home area 9 months ago, it has not appeared
yet. There are pictures of children in houses eating food on
Streetview - my last posting on this is no where to be seen (I wonder
if that's because I access on Google). It must have dawned on Google
by now, that there are thousands of car numbers and loads of people
identified - so it is only a matter of time before a crime results
from Googles unlawful intrusions.
There was also a lot of evidence to suggest that complaints were not
dealt with swiftly.
Turk182
Vicko Zoomba
Hopefully so. I'm dead against them. It's a complete invasion of
privacy or financial gain.
McKevvy
Mr X
"Turk182" <digital...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4d326291-85d5-48a3...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> On 3 Jan, 14:16, Stuart B <individual...@takemyteethoutgmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 13:24:21 -0000, "Ret." <xxx> wrote:
>>
>> And you have posted this drivel to legal as you have a legal question
>> ?
>>
>> --
>
> There is nothing drivel about this question.
>
> Google photographed my home area 9 months ago, it has not appeared
> yet. There are pictures of children in houses eating food on
> Streetview - my last posting on this is no where to be seen (I wonder
> if that's because I access on Google). It must have dawned on Google
> by now, that there are thousands of car numbers and loads of people
> identified - so it is only a matter of time before a crime results
> from Googles unlawful intrusions.
>
Stuart B
<digital...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>There was also a lot of evidence to suggest that complaints were not
>dealt with swiftly.
>
>Turk182
So what got any evidence to support that claim ?
Go outside and there are thousands of number plates for all to see
--
Mrcheerful
thank you for that info. I have just been able to see a relative's place in
a really obscure bit of the Jaen region of Andalucia.
Turk182
> "Turk182" <digitalradi...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Your shocked becuase your empathy only allows you to imagine a
situation like your own. Had you had to shelter children from a
violent mother of father or had predators attempt to access your
child, you may be more sensitive about a list of homes, their outside
security arrangements and the description of the children being
compiled with photos by a person accessing Google Streetview on a fast
internet connection.
People with a six foot high fences should be able to feel reasonably
safe from casual photographers. Street View is not a street view.
It's an ABOVE Street View.
Turk182
Turk182
wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 09:41:42 -0800 (PST), Turk182
>
>
> >There was also a lot of evidence to suggest that complaints were not
> >dealt with swiftly.
>
> >Turk182
>
> So what got any evidence to support that claim ?
There were many report of people's requests not getting acted upon in
the press last time this was heavily spoken about.
>
> Go outside and there are thousands of number plates for all to see
>
Oh I see where you are coming from. You have no objection to homes,
property and car reg number ion Google, because people can see this in
the street anyway. Gosh, you're right there. What is your address by
the way? If I am able to trace it anyway, do you mind if I publish
it on the internet? If I don't hear from you soon I will presume that
is ok.
Turk182
Ret.
If, indeed, there are faces on Street View then it is a rarity and not
common. Most faces are blanked out. In fact the 'blanking out' software goes
a bit overboard and often blanks out headlamps because they are round like
faces. It also often blanks out street name signs because they are
rectangular like number plates. The chances of the face of someone who
doesn't want to be found being 'missed' is remote in the extreme.
Kev
Ret.
You're welcome. Personally I think it's a bloody marvellous bit of
technology. My wife's sister and her husband live in Competa - a village
high in the Andalucian mountains North West of Malaga. Their villa is on
street view - but my sister's house in Plymouth isn't!
Kev
Dave Muir
There is no limit to paranoia.
--
Dave
"Democracy is not Liberty. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on
what to have for supper. Liberty is an armed lamb contesting the vote."
Dave Muir
My house and car are on Google though you can't read the number plate.
Perhaps yours is to?
How does that make it any easier for me to trace and spy on you?
Does it make it easier for you to find and stalk me?
Worry about the important things, mate.
Turk182
>
> - Show quoted text -
If we talk about rare, we are still talking about thousands - and that
is too many.
Number plates revealed amounts to many thousands. In some areas, 1
car in 6 have they're number revealed.
The Info Commisioner was bowled over by the scale of Google's
operation. Google rushed around doing millions of homes before the
ICO had really understoof what was involved.
THe BBC poured out massive amount of misinformation on the subject. I
contacted one home owner to inform them that their little girl could
be seen, sitting inside her home in her pyjamas eating her tea. The
parent were horrified as they didn't even know that Google had been
along their road, or that if they had been, the technology would have
captured such an image. This I know seems unimportant. My objection
is , that in very small number of cases, Google will reveal something
of significance to someone who has a reason for using that information
in a hostile way.
Perviously, people would have had to visit the various premises they
were interested in, and climb on a ladder etc, to obtain the correct
image. Now, the predator can work from his living room. He can be a
robber, a thief or a molester of some sort. It may even be a vengeful
partner trying to track down someone he believed is living in a
certain area. This can now be done on an industrial scale.
With an unregisted mobile phone and Streetview, crime has just got a
lot easier. Apart from that - I love it. It's always fun looking at
other people - it's no so great when the camera is on you.
Turk182
Phil Stovell
> http://unicorn.drogon.net/stuff/google3.jpg
Fuck me, no wonder people are suspicious!
Stuart B
<digital...@aol.com> wrote:
>Oh I see where you are coming from. You have no objection to homes,
>property and car reg number ion Google, because people can see this in
>the street anyway. Gosh, you're right there. What is your address by
>the way? If I am able to trace it anyway, do you mind if I publish
>it on the internet? If I don't hear from you soon I will presume that
>is ok.
>
>Turk182
Wow
So where are the facts to show that in anyway google has been shown to
be a part in any burglary or mugging.
--
Turk182
wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 10:21:53 -0800 (PST), Turk182
>
Stramge that isn't it? You would think people using Streetview as a
crime tool would be falling over themselves to let everyone know.
Turk182
Stuart B
<digital...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>Stramge that isn't it? You would think people using Streetview as a
>crime tool would be falling over themselves to let everyone know.
>
>Turk182
I take that as a no then ?
--
Turk182
wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:37:23 -0800 (PST), Turk182
>
>
> >Stramge that isn't it? You would think people using Streetview as a
> >crime tool would be falling over themselves to let everyone know.
>
> >Turk182
>
> I take that as a no then ?
>
> --
No doubt many ladders have been used in crime - can I prove it? I
don't think so.
Turk182
Stuart B
<digital...@aol.com> wrote:
"It must have dawned on Goggle
by now, that there are thousands of car numbers and loads of people
identified - so it is only a matter of time before a crime results
from Googles unlawful intrusions.
There was also a lot of evidence to suggest that complaints were not
dealt with swiftly."
As google maps have been online for a time now.You would think or able
to show that google is in anyway implicated would you not ?
Where is the evidence that google has been in anyway associated with
any crimes that have been committed as a result car number plates or
people identified on its site.
You have so far not supplied any.
--
Turk182
wrote:
Yes you're right. I'm a fraud ......Oh hang on a minute, what this?
Em. And this:
Perhaps this:
And this relates to Googles failures to blur out detail:
But if my view that we are sleep walking into a destruction of all
known privacy, then just look at this:
How long do you think it will be beofre you can flash this camera on
to a passing car, and Google will tell you the address it normally
parks at.
Turk182
Stuart B
<digital...@aol.com> wrote:
Yes you're right. I'm a fraud ......Oh hang on a minute, what this?
Thank you for the links
Where did I call you a fraud ?
--
Turk182
wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 13:23:26 -0800 (PST), Turk182
>
>
> Yes you're right. I'm a fraud ......Oh hang on a minute, what this?
>
> Thank you for the links
>
> Where did I call you a fraud ?
>
> --
No its ok Stuart. I used to be in am dramatics, so I just like to
hype it up a bit in case I can get some compensation:-)
Turk182
Stuart B
<digital...@aol.com> wrote:
>No its ok Stuart. I used to be in am dramatics, so I just like to
>hype it up a bit in case I can get some compensation:-)
>
>Turk182
Stuart B is the name of the groups resident idiot poster Usenet Nutter
--
Alex Heney
wrote:
<snip>
>
>My house and car are on Google though you can't read the number plate.
>Perhaps yours is to?
>How does that make it any easier for me to trace and spy on you?
>Does it make it easier for you to find and stalk me?
>
>Worry about the important things, mate.
This is Turk182 you are talking to.
He specialises in turning things much smaller than molehills into
large mountains.
Most of the treads he starts take things of miniscule risk and bloat
them up to be certain killers.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
A closed mouth gathers no feet.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
Turk182
> On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:35:35 +0000, Dave Muir <dm...@hotmail2.com>
> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> >My house and car are on Google though you can't read the number plate.
> >Perhaps yours is to?
> >How does that make it any easier for me to trace and spy on you?
> >Does it make it easier for you to find and stalk me?
>
> >Worry about the important things, mate.
>
> This is Turk182 you are talking to.
>
> He specialises in turning things much smaller than molehills into
> large mountains.
>
> Most of the treads he starts take things of miniscule risk and bloat
> them up to be certain killers.
> --
> Alex Heney
If that's true, then I think that you and me are from two opposite
corners of reality.
Me from the "get out the building there's a fire" camp, and you from
the, "I'm not leaving until they carry me out" camp.
Somewhere in the middle lies reality.
Turk182
F Murtz
And if the house is blanked out there must be a reason I think I will
drive round and see what they are hiding (might be good pickings)
Big Les Wade
>I
>contacted one home owner to inform them that their little girl could
>be seen, sitting inside her home in her pyjamas eating her tea. The
>parent were horrified
More likely they were pretending to be, to humour you.
A few parents are probably paranoid enough to care that someone can see
a picture of their child in pyjamas eating breakfast. But even in the
midst of today's Great Paedophile Terror, I believe they are in the
minority.
>as they didn't even know that Google had been
>along their road, or that if they had been, the technology would have
>captured such an image. This I know seems unimportant.
It not only seems it, it is it IMO.
>My objection
>is , that in very small number of cases, Google will reveal something
>of significance to someone who has a reason for using that information
>in a hostile way.
It is *possible* that you have a serious point. But to convince me, you
need to identify and describe these new risk scenarios precisely; show
that they are sufficiently dangerous and frequent to matter; and show
that the best way to avoid them is to ban Streetview, rather than to
make these very small number of potential targets take defensive action.
>Perviously, people would have had to visit the various premises they
>were interested in, and climb on a ladder etc, to obtain the correct
>image.
That's not a serious scenario. What would this person be trying to
achieve? What is the "correct" image? In what circumstances would he
need a ladder? You don't need a ladder to see into my front room.
> Now, the predator can work from his living room. He can be a
>robber, a thief or a molester of some sort.
That's just vague scaremongering. Exactly what is this evil person
trying to do and what mischief can he do from his living room that he
couldn't do before?
>It may even be a vengeful
>partner trying to track down someone he believed is living in a
>certain area.
How exactly would he do that using Streetview? Wouldn't it be easier
just to walk or drive round the area?
--
Les
If by creating a police state we can save just one child, then it will all have
been worthwhile.
Alex Heney
I think you are more in the "somebody has a match - get out of the
building before they cause a fire" camp :)
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
My life may be strange, but at least it's not boring