What is Digg?83 Comments
- InfamousAtheist, on 04/24/2009, -3/+65This is so ridiculous. Why make them blur addresses? Can't just about everyone these days go to any public street and take a picture of a building? Is this somehow supposed to prevent the terrorists (OMG!!!) from getting information about buildings?
I'm all for privacy rights, but what expectation of privacy can anyone have if they're out in public? In Britain, are there not cameras virtually everywhere, recording the citizen's actions when they're in public?
The privacy groups over there seem to have seriously misguided priorities. - inactive, on 04/25/2009, -5/+60Britain ..Privacy..LOL
- grapesofbaath, on 04/25/2009, -4/+52Blurring addresses...on google street view? Britain, you are officially retarded.
- EnergyEinstein, on 04/25/2009, -2/+29Hm, blur address? Google Street View shows where they are on a map...
- Irishsmurf, on 04/25/2009, -2/+27This wont stop the Daily Fail readers from crying about how they are living in a degenerating society without any privacy, Then they will turn the page and read about some B-List celebrity getting their top off in the south of France.
Bloody Hypocrites - Quest4pi, on 04/25/2009, -2/+27So Google can't take pictures of people or addresses, but the Government can? Good call.
- Alegoo92, on 04/25/2009, -2/+26It's stupid to block addresses since the street view works WITH street maps, and the location of any picture is known based on the location on the friggin map!
- BooLag, on 04/25/2009, -1/+12Yeah cause the police with access to CCTV's at every damn corner really need Google's photos to tell your address...
- alexdemers, on 04/24/2009, -0/+10Now, let's see Canada. I saw some Google Street View cars a year and a half ago. Hopefully it'll come soon. Probably has to do with laws here.
- fusen, on 04/25/2009, -1/+10The summary is INACCURATE.
The ICO did NOT say that "addresses have to be blurred", there is no mention what so ever of any "addresses" in their press release related to this.
The pdf can be found here; http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/pressreleas ...
The only things that are blurred are people's faces and CAR registration plates, which is probably where the misunderstanding came from, but seeing as both these items are also blurred in the USA, this isn't anything special.
I'd appreciate if people buried this as it just adds to the ridiculous idea that the UK is heading towards 1984 which Daily Mail readers love to scream and shout. - waydee, on 04/25/2009, -2/+9Good news, it won't shut up the idiots who have made such a fuss over Street View however, it's been quite disheartening hearing such ignorant and illogical criticism of the service. I saw a debate on the BBC Have Your Say board just the other day and there were people there under the impression that the images are real-time, as if there's a Google camera floating above every street in Britain (I'd make a CCTV joke here but it's worn out).
I believe the press played a huge part in stirring up the opposition that was/is heard, there seemed to be a real slant to all the initial reporting that made a strong point of supposed potential for the service to help facilitate crime. The more sensationalist and invariably right wing press did what they always do and told Middle England to be outraged and made no effort to correct the misconceptions being spouted everywhere.
It's great that they didn't get their way but the whole affair is a sad reminder of just how dumb some (a lot of) people can be. - atgmac, on 04/25/2009, -0/+6I'm guessing it would be difficult to distinguish between vehicle licence plates and street address signs anyway. Many street signs are black letters on a while background - exactly the same shape and characteristics as licence plates. I doubt their algorithm is able to tell the difference.
- 1rage, on 04/25/2009, -0/+6StreetView cars were in Saskatoon and other western Canadian cities in the past couple of weeks and the local media said the imagery will be available in a few weeks.
- FozzDog, on 04/25/2009, -4/+8Let me guess... you read the Daily Mail
- inactive, on 04/25/2009, -4/+8Since so many Brits are unemployed, why not force them to stand in front of their flats and hold a piece of cardboard over their addresses.
- Secret7000, on 04/25/2009, -0/+3Sarcasm is difficult to detect in a faceless medium; you should know this.
- ohreilly, on 04/25/2009, -2/+5If you lived in the UK, then you'd note the sheer number of cameras (I'd go as far to say they rival/outweigh that of the council/police owned cameras) that are owned and operated by private concerns. Nothing to do with the government at all, and the police would only ever get to look at the output from them if a tape was handed to them for the purposes of solving a crime.
Don't let that get in the way of a misinformed shot at the UK, though. - meerling, on 04/25/2009, -5/+8Addresses blurred ?! How stupid are you?! You already have the address BEFORE you pull up the street image! Talk about morons! They might as well try censoring the title of a book on the table of contents... Those cretins need to transfer to the Ministry of Silly Walks, since they certainly don't comprehend their current job.
- hiro, on 04/25/2009, -2/+5... Because they dont?
- XeroXenith, on 04/25/2009, -0/+3And it's even harder when you justify your comment with a reasonable fact. Don't do that.
- TheAuditor, on 04/25/2009, -0/+3There was a two page article in today's.
Title: "GOOGLE EARTH. They read your e-mails and know the secrets of your private life. They take pictures of your home and can track your every movement [WTF?] Never in history has one firm known so much about us. So are we mad to allow Big Brother Google to take over the world?"
Article summary: "Google = Hitler"
It even refers to the people who use the Internet as 'Impressionable young people'
Excuse me while I wash my hands after handling this paper.
The B-list celebrity was a Miss Universe contestant posing in a bikini. - lazyslacker, on 04/25/2009, -0/+3As long as boobs aren't blurred, I'm fine with this.
http://digg.com/d1pJo9 - freehunter, on 04/25/2009, -0/+3They have an algorithm do do that, recognize faces and letters, they can just run that before they post the pics.
- DBeta, on 04/25/2009, -0/+3If they can't handle something as simple as deciding people's public rights, how would they possibly handle the stress of working for the Ministry of Silly Walks?
- tehgimpster, on 04/25/2009, -0/+3Not only are there CCTV cameras everywhere but the Police, MI5, Torchwood and everyone else who feels like it can stream video from every privately owned camera with broadcast quality 50 ips video.
- YoWhatDaFuxUp, on 04/25/2009, -0/+3Oh the irony....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7994 ... - sammyscraggs, on 04/25/2009, -3/+5All this police brutality ?? Idiot. A few cases at a WORLD EVENT does not warrant “ all this “ learn your history, look at what used to happen in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s compared to just how well the police do there job today. Think about 30,000 thousand protestors if not more trying to disrupt one of the most important summits since WW2 and there are a few thousand police, trying to keep the peace, doing there job getting ***** thrown at them, abuse hurled at them, and the rest so I think they did a fantastic job look at the fury and anger in some of the protestors eyes and then re-evaluate just how well the British police handled the entire situation. Just look at what happened in France a day later, infact don’t bother just keep your ignorant opinions to yourself as I cant be bothered with ill informed police raggin on the British bobby coz its wot the BBC do ……. Mug.
- TheAuditor, on 04/25/2009, -0/+2What's up with Ukraine?
- MrLlama, on 04/25/2009, -1/+3Yeah so many Brits unemployed... oh wait unemployment in UK is lower than USA, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Canada and most other major economies!!!
- weeFred, on 04/25/2009, -1/+3Yes but the retarded British public stirred up by right wing rags wanted it reviewed by the UK ICO. And after wasting public money on that review the verdict is pretty much the same as it was to begin with.
- Irishsmurf, on 04/25/2009, -1/+3Nobody told me V for Vendetta was real!
How am I meant to stay calm now?! - Qumahlin, on 04/25/2009, -1/+3"But i might stop creeps from sending odd letters to the people..."
How so? Do I need a street level view of someones house to send them a letter? The ridiculous thing is that blurring out the addresses is pointless, if I have the latitude and longitude of the house and know what street it is on I can easily get the address using google maps WITHOUT street view. - hiro, on 04/25/2009, -2/+4No you didn't or you wouldn't talk such bollocks!
- roflcopters, on 04/25/2009, -0/+2Blurring addresses is a little ridiculous, considering this is a map application we're talking about, but it's good that faces are going to be obscured -- this is a step in the right direction no matter how you look at it.
- inactive, on 04/25/2009, -0/+2If they have such a problem with street view invading their "privacy", maybe they should be focusing on their government's efforts to have 360 degree cctv cameras every 5 feet? Oh no, that would make too much sense!
- inactive, on 04/25/2009, -0/+2Because they have their heads up their asses, just like citizen in every other country.
- freehunter, on 04/25/2009, -1/+3Well, we've already got the anonymous idiots running around causing havoc wearing guy fawkes masks.
- Chooxo, on 04/25/2009, -0/+2I'm all for Google being able to take pictures.
But I'm not sure why you think it's strange the government can do something that a private company can't. - ohreilly, on 04/25/2009, -3/+5Digg loves it too. They seem to think that the UK is a nation of CCTV cameras and police officers waiting to take you down at every opportunity. And that we can't "fight back" because we don't have guns (but neither do the police).
It's a 1984 orwellian police-state v for vendetta fascist socialist country, don't you know. - michaelrsa, on 04/26/2009, -0/+2I was being sarcastic. I have no problem with cameras, I was just poking fun at those people who feel that having a camera here and there is the equivalent of totalitarianism.
- ScaryUK, on 04/25/2009, -0/+2Numberplates and faces have been blurred since Street View appeared a few months ago. It's not just been decided now.
- inactive, on 04/25/2009, -0/+2Correction "The [world] is heading towards totalitarianism. Give it 30 years."
There you go. - haydenk, on 04/25/2009, -0/+2I can't just walk up and take pictures of buildings in the UK, I am in the U.S.
I can see where their concern is, it makes it easier for people OUTSIDE of the UK to be able to know what addresses correspond to what buildings but since all they have to do is get directions to that address with Google maps, it wasn't very well thought out. - norman619, on 04/25/2009, -0/+2Is this normal for the UK? Private citizens can photograph street signs and such but companies, run by private citizents, can't do the same?
- TheAuditor, on 04/25/2009, -2/+3[sad sigh]
1. Live here before deciding
2. Political commentary is not journalism, journalism is not neccesserily the reporting of the truth
3. Understand statisitcs are regularily manipulated by #2
4. Nanny States are not bad in every respect
5. What evidence makes you assume the Britain's populace is 'weak and unable to take responsibity for themselves' ?
6. What makes you assume you are free? - thetrev, on 04/25/2009, -0/+1The british press are terrible for this sort of thing. the Brand / Ross incident, MMR vaccines, Jade goody, all events that were blown out of proportion and were not needed. The problem lies in that there is no-one there to stop them.
- waydee, on 04/29/2009, -0/+1You know I realised that after my rant lol, sorry - I meant to own up and save face but forgot about it.
- Almightymole, on 04/25/2009, -0/+1As long as they shout cheese first.
- TheGreatZarquon, on 04/25/2009, -1/+2Oh yes, I forgot: No one knows what sarcasm is on the Internets anymore. Buried for pebkac, I see.
-
Show 51 - 85 of 85 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is