Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

from Ogle Earth: Street View and privacy - what's up with the Europeans?

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey Martin
    Street View and privacy - what s up with the Europeans?
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 1 6:46 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Street View and privacy - what's up with the
      Europeans?<http://feeds.ogleearth.com/%7Er/ogleearth/%7E3/351765953/street_view_and.html>
      http://feeds.ogleearth.com/~r/ogleearth/~3/351765953/street_view_and.html






      Jeffrey Martin
      www.360cities.net - The World in Virtual Reality
      tel. +420 608 076 502 / skype jeffrey.s.martin


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Roger D. Williams
      On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:46:12 +0900, Jeffrey Martin ... Jeffrey, I can t speak for the rest of Europe, but I do know that camera
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 2 6:12 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:46:12 +0900, Jeffrey Martin <360cities@...>
        wrote:

        > Street View and privacy - what's up with the
        > Europeans?<http://feeds.ogleearth.com/%7Er/ogleearth/%7E3/351765953/street_view_and.html>
        > http://feeds.ogleearth.com/~r/ogleearth/~3/351765953/street_view_and.html

        Jeffrey, I can't speak for the rest of Europe, but I do know that camera
        surveillance is very common throughout the UK... I saw notices to this
        effect everywhere I went on a recent holiday there. So the man in the
        street is predisposed to think of cameras in connection with surveillance
        and the use of such information by the police to inhibit crime. And while
        they might be disposed to accept this in view of the threat of terrorist
        attacks, they do not like the idea that anyone can access such images
        whenever and wherever they want.

        I agree this is a gross misunderstanding and over-reaction, but it may
        help you to realize where the tabloids are coming from and what a chord
        they strike with the general public.

        Roger W.

        --
        Work: www.adex-japan.com
        Play: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
      • Carel
        ... I would feel safer if allowed to view what the government is looking at. There should also be surveillance of the surveillers of course, so that we can see
        Message 3 of 6 , Aug 4 9:02 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          Roger D. Williams wrote:
          >
          > .... And while they might be disposed to accept this in view of the threat
          > of terrorist
          > attacks, they do not like the idea that anyone can access such images
          > whenever and wherever they want.
          >
          > I agree this is a gross misunderstanding and over-reaction, but it may
          > help you to realize where the tabloids are coming from and what a chord
          > they strike with the general public.
          >
          > Roger W.
          >
          >

          I would feel safer if allowed to view what the government is looking at.
          There should also be surveillance of the surveillers of course, so that we
          can see those professional government voyeurs in action. What astonishes me
          is how no one in Britain seems to be concerned about the heavy handed
          government invasion of privacy. If the citizens' life should be an open
          book, so should the government's and politicians' shenanigans.

          Carel Struycken

          --
          View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/from-Ogle-Earth%3A-Street-View-and-privacy---what%27s-up-with-the-Europeans--tp18774657p18824207.html
          Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
        • John Riley
          ... I was surprised when I found out that the cameras that are set up along the interstate highways in SC are viewable over the web. But, they get boring very
          Message 4 of 6 , Aug 4 9:24 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            On Aug 5, 2008, at 12:02 AM, Carel wrote:

            > Roger D. Williams wrote:
            > >
            > > .... And while they might be disposed to accept this in view of
            > the threat
            > > of terrorist
            > > attacks, they do not like the idea that anyone can access such
            > images
            > > whenever and wherever they want.
            > >
            > > I agree this is a gross misunderstanding and over-reaction, but
            > it may
            > > help you to realize where the tabloids are coming from and what a
            > chord
            > > they strike with the general public.
            > >
            > > Roger W.
            > >
            > >
            >
            > I would feel safer if allowed to view what the government is
            > looking at.
            > There should also be surveillance of the surveillers of course, so
            > that we
            > can see those professional government voyeurs in action. What
            > astonishes me
            > is how no one in Britain seems to be concerned about the heavy handed
            > government invasion of privacy. If the citizens' life should be an
            > open
            > book, so should the government's and politicians' shenanigans.
            >
            > Carel Struycken

            I was surprised when I found out that the cameras that are set up
            along the interstate highways in SC are viewable over the web. But,
            they get boring very quickly. They seem to only allow snaps from the
            cameras now, but in the past, I am pretty sure you could watch video.

            John



            John Riley
            johnriley@...
            jriley@...




            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Roger D. Williams
            ... Yes. The acceptance of this gross invasion of privacy seems almost universal. This struck me as very strange. Of course, living in Japan, a country
            Message 5 of 6 , Aug 4 10:21 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 13:02:41 +0900, Carel <cs@...> wrote:

              > Roger D. Williams wrote:
              >>
              >> .... And while they might be disposed to accept this in view of the
              >> threat of terrorist
              >> attacks, they do not like the idea that anyone can access such images
              >> whenever and wherever they want.
              >>
              >> I agree this is a gross misunderstanding and over-reaction, but it may
              >> help you to realize where the tabloids are coming from and what a chord
              >> they strike with the general public.
              >>
              >> Roger W.
              >
              > I would feel safer if allowed to view what the government is looking at.
              > There should also be surveillance of the surveillers of course, so that
              > we can see those professional government voyeurs in action. What
              > astonishes me
              > is how no one in Britain seems to be concerned about the heavy handed
              > government invasion of privacy. If the citizens' life should be an open
              > book, so should the government's and politicians' shenanigans.

              Yes. The acceptance of this gross invasion of privacy seems almost
              universal. This struck me as very strange. Of course, living in Japan,
              a country mercifully free (so far) from terrorist attacks, I must admit
              that attitudes are probably affected by decades of IRA bombing and the
              more recent Al Quaeda inspired attacks within the U.K. Who am I to judge
              that! I have two daughters, one son-in-law and a grandson living in
              London...

              Roger W.

              --
              Work: www.adex-japan.com
              Play: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
            • Marcel Geers
              First of all, since when do you take tabloids so seriously? They ll claim a celeb is mortally ill when someone wears no make-up! ;) Personally, I try to
              Message 6 of 6 , Aug 6 11:13 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                First of all, since when do you take tabloids so seriously? They'll
                claim a celeb is mortally ill when someone wears no make-up! ;)

                Personally, I try to minimise burgular-sensitive information in
                pictures I share with others. For obvious reasons. I also try to
                minimise people in my shots (which isn't possible for everyone), just
                because some people seem to care about whether they are visible
                without make-up or not.......in that respect, I'd dislike being
                visible, staticly, on streetview. Furthermore, if your neighbour's
                house has shutters and yours don't, then your house has a higher risk
                of being broken into. It is your own choice whether that is a
                situation you want to continue. Making this information available to
                potential burglars from the other side of town or another nearby city,
                is just asking for trouble IMHO. The difference with CCTV cameras is,
                that the video recorded by those cannot be viewed by potential burglars.

                About cameras on highways: over here in the Netherlands, speed is
                checked in some areas by logging a license plate and determining the
                time it takes to reach the next checkpoint. This gives a very good
                calculation of the average speed over a longer period and it has a
                high "catch rate". While the system as is is hated because of the
                possible fines people may receive at home, there's hardly any to no
                complaints about the logging practise as it is not allowed to be used
                for any big brother like practises (no long term logging). We trust in
                the system that it is used in the manner it is designed to and that
                government does not abuse it for checking up on employees or other
                such things.

                You could be paranoid about it or you could just have faith in the system.

                If I have my history right, which I may not, the gathering of Jews
                (that is, determining on paper who is one) in the Netherlands during
                WW2 was relatively easy for the Germans due to the elaborate
                documentation every municipality kept\keeps about its citizens.
                Nowadays, the amount of information available to the different
                government institutions for reasons of ease of use, fraud prevention
                and servicability is even much higher. This is no problem in a normal
                society. Should we limit ourselves just in case in some future some
                evil regime will come to power?
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.