Has Google gone too far?

[Zeke]

Here is a link (I hope) to a street on the way to Pelican Parts. It's Sepulveda Blvd and you can rotate the image 360. Coming soon to your house!

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=109+Eucalyptus+Dr+el+segundo+ca&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=49.444078,109.6875&ie=UTF8&ll=33.940441,-118.392019&spn=0.050984,0.135269&z=14&om=1&layer=c&cbll=33.914727,-118.395879&cbp=2,9.975353876257032e-14,0.5,0

[onewhippedpuppy]

That is pretty nuts. I'm still waiting for live shots, ala CIA.

[CurtEgerer]

There's a website somewhere that collected those '3d' fotos from Google showing various people standing in the windows of their homes and other assorted activities

[sammyg2]

Nothing put photos of public places and places that are visible from public places.
I see no problem with that.

[competentone]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

Nothing put photos of public places and places that are visible from public places.
I see no problem with that.

When Google first offered the street view a couple of months ago, some people in the news media got all upset about "privacy concerns." Unfortunately, the media was so incompetent in their research, that it was under the impression that this service provided "live" footage of street views.

People were making the comment that this would allow stalkers to keep tabs on their victims in real time. The fact is that the street level photos are shots taken, on average, months ago. They show only things visible from the street, which is not protected by privacy laws anyway.

I'm no fan of Google -- I have an effective short position in their stock -- and I'm a strong advocate of privacy rights, but this street view technology is a non-issue. (Although I'm betting it is costing Google a good deal of money, which they will not turn a profit on -- this being good for my position in the stock.)

[stomachmonkey]

My towns in. It's kinda cool.

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by competentone

When Google first offered the street view a couple of months ago, some people in the news media got all upset about "privacy concerns." Unfortunately, the media was so incompetent in their research, that it was under the impression that this service provided "live" footage of street views.

People were making the comment that this would allow stalkers to keep tabs on their victims in real time. The fact is that the street level photos are shots taken, on average, months ago. They show only things visible from the street, which is not protected by privacy laws anyway.

I'm no fan of Google -- I have an effective short position in their stock -- and I'm a strong advocate of privacy rights, but this street view technology is a non-issue. (Although I'm betting it is costing Google a good deal of money, which they will not turn a profit on -- this being good for my position in the stock.)

Well, the LA Times must be behind on their news stories.

I have seen the button; didn't know what it did.

AFA your shorting the stock, as long as Google continues to gather and compile data, I don't see the usage going down. They are so big financially now, they have to spend money. They might be the Jerry Springer of search engines, but that will only get them more notice, IMO.

Maybe Murdoch will buy the thing and the stock will go up. Otherwise, I say it floats about where it is for some time.

But, that's gonna be a big job shooting pics of a country this big.

[hytem]

Google is a great source for information on practically anything. But there are questions of personal privacy regarding newsgroup posts. Worse are the so-called white pages which list personal address information which can be used to steal credit cards on-line.

[woodman]

Funny, I've never seen that feature before. I travel down to Rosecrans and look to the east and see that one of our retail projects, now open, is still behind construction fencing in the google magic window. That imagery is pretty old.

If it were more updated I'd be doing a lot less field work and more googling.