Google Earth - Invasion of Privacy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LowlyPion
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Earth Google
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of Google Earth and its Street View feature on privacy, particularly in relation to public behavior and societal norms. Participants explore the boundaries of privacy in public spaces and the cultural perceptions surrounding activities that may be deemed embarrassing or socially unacceptable.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that actions taken in public view, such as visiting a sex shop, do not warrant privacy protections, as they are visible to anyone.
  • Others suggest that the existence of Google Earth may lead to a cultural shift towards greater acceptance of behaviors traditionally viewed as taboo.
  • A few participants express skepticism about the idea that Google Earth constitutes an invasion of privacy, citing that individuals are in public spaces.
  • There are humorous reflections on the embarrassment associated with being seen engaging in certain activities, likening it to being caught in compromising situations.
  • Some participants question the societal norms that dictate what is considered acceptable behavior in public, suggesting that technology could challenge these norms.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of being photographed without consent, particularly in sensitive situations.
  • Several comments reflect on the nature of gossip and societal judgment, suggesting that technology may not eliminate these behaviors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on whether Google Earth constitutes an invasion of privacy. While some agree that public actions should not be protected, others raise concerns about the implications of being photographed in private moments.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the variability in how often Google Earth images are updated, which may affect perceptions of privacy. There is also mention of specific legal cases regarding privacy violations related to Google’s services, indicating ongoing legal and societal debates.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals exploring the intersections of technology, privacy, and societal norms, as well as those interested in the implications of public behavior in the digital age.

LowlyPion
Homework Helper
Messages
3,127
Reaction score
6
A FURIOUS wife has called in divorce lawyers after spotting her husband’s car parked outside another woman’s house — on Google.

She saw the Range Rover while using the internet giant’s new Street View service to snoop on a female friend’s home.

The hubby had claimed he was away on business, but his missus recognised his motor immediately because of its blinged-up hubcaps.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2350771.ece

Gee and my car is parked in my driveway on Google Earth too.

Given that it is a snapshot of sorts at some rolling time, time not specified, it's hard to imagine that privacy is being violated, if people are parking cars on public motorways, or stepping on to public streets from a sex shop.

The idea that there is a consequential liability associated with impersonal bulk imaging is a trifle difficult to grasp, but then again who would have thought that McDonald's might be sued for someone spilling their own coffee in their lap after getting it from a drive thru?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
LowlyPion said:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2350771.ece

Gee and my car is parked in my driveway on Google Earth too.

Given that it is a snapshot of sorts at some rolling time, time not specified, it's hard to imagine that privacy is being violated, if people are parking cars on public motorways, or stepping on to public streets from a sex shop.

The idea that there is a consequential liability associated with impersonal bulk imaging is a trifle difficult to grasp, but then again who would have thought that McDonald's might be sued for someone spilling their own coffee in their lap after getting it from a drive thru?

Poor guy :smile:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7898407.stm
A legal claim by a Pittsburgh couple that Google's Street View feature violated their privacy has been thrown out by a federal judge.

Christine and Aaron Boring sued the search giant after photos of their home appeared on the free mapping program.

There are many other cases..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The implications of this are wide ranging, but it seems pretty clear that what you do in public view is not protected by privacy.
 
I have a hard time trying to an invasion of privacy. I've heard a few stories and personally I think they are quite entertaining. The fact of the matter is that Google Earth doesn't intentionally seek out cheating husbands or old men walking out of strip clubs. Besides, these people are doing it in broad daylight, for everyone to see.
 
Wow, he went to a sex shop. I said "sex shop" -giggle giggle giggle... :rolleyes:

It would be nice if we, americans, just cut the crap about sex and realize it's a normal part of life. Why should this guy have to hide his face because he went to a sex shop? He didn't go to a whore house...
 
russ_watters said:
The implications of this are wide ranging, but it seems pretty clear that what you do in public view is not protected by privacy.
You are no longer safe in your backyard surrounded by a privacy fence.
 
How often are they updated? I saw someone's car which I know they have had for about a month or less parked at their home.
 
Last edited:
Evo said:
You are no longer safe in your backyard surrounded by a privacy fence.

I'm sure it's still safe to sunbathe. Though the idea that you might hide a swimming pool from the town assessor has sure come a cropper. Unless you get a Google Camouflage Cover.

Cheney apparently had his home blurred out of Google Earth. Apparently it posed some kind of security risk in his fantasies.

On the flip side of things maybe Google should advertise they are picturing a certain area, and if you want to come outside and be part of the photo ... those exhibitionists out there can come be part of an informal census event, or if they don't want their underwear flapping on the line, or garbage cans spilled in front they can go out to tidy up their public presentation before the yellow and white subcompact comes rolling through the neighborhood.
 
Google shouldn't have to tell anyone anything. You're out in public when you set foot out your doorstep.
 
  • #10
I understand the privacy arguments, but I personally hope the new technology ushers in a cultural change of acceptance, and a consequent fall of the Moral Majority and its idiotic church-mandated vice laws. In a post-Google world, you can sunbathe nude, or go to a sex shop if your Magic Dolphin dies, without anyone really giving a damn.

I've never understood why many human behaviors, done every day by virtually all humans, are still widely considered to be "shocking."

- Warren
 
  • #11
chroot said:
I understand the privacy arguments, but I personally hope the new technology ushers in a cultural change of acceptance, and a consequent fall of the Moral Majority and its idiotic church-mandated vice laws. In a post-Google world, you can sunbathe nude, or go to a sex shop if your Magic Dolphin dies, without anyone really giving a damn.

I've never understood why many human behaviors, done every day by virtually all humans, are still widely considered to be "shocking."

- Warren
Because a person is intelligent but people are idiots.
 
  • #12
chroot said:
I understand the privacy arguments, but I personally hope the new technology ushers in a cultural change of acceptance, and a consequent fall of the Moral Majority and its idiotic church-mandated vice laws. In a post-Google world, you can sunbathe nude, or go to a sex shop if your Magic Dolphin dies, without anyone really giving a damn.

I've never understood why many human behaviors, done every day by virtually all humans, are still widely considered to be "shocking."

- Warren

You're hoping that, by giving them better tools to stick their nose into your business, they'll won't get any feeling of accomplishment and will find something more fun to do?

Or that, by giving them so much fodder to stick their nose in, they'll become overwhelmed and give up in frustration because they can't keep up with it all?

I don't think gossip is something that can be phased out by technology.

As Dolores Keane said, Irish women can gossip, even though it's considered sinful, because they confess and ask forgiveness beforehand.
 
  • #13
To get caught leaving a sex shop just at the moment the google camera car driving past is pretty unlucky really.
 
  • #14
what's wrong with going to a sex shop?
 
  • #15
When its on google Earth and the girlfriend/wife/etc sees it. Its the equivilant to being caught wanking by your mum. Everybody does it the act but situation is still bloody embarrasing.
 
  • #16
chances are that if i went into a sex shop my gf would go with... actually never been into one without my gf. What you're saying is that it is socially unacceptable (even though people do it) and others have also noted that this "invasion of privacy" might actually make socially unacceptable things more socially acceptable and then you wouldn't have to be embarrassed about visiting your local Stinky Pinky. Just like 100 years ago it was taboo to see a woman's ankles... :smile: You got to love those sexy ankles!
 
  • #17
Poor ole townies, all that temptation on your door steps, once us bumpkins were told it is wrong to sleep with sheep we were left with no vices.
 
  • #18
Thats far too complicated for my thinking, its just from my experience people find anything in the trouser department to be embarrasing.

The other thing I find amusing is people who get redfaced and flustered asking for condoms in chemists. WHY?! they are the ones who are getting some!
 
  • #19
xxChrisxx said:
The other thing I find amusing is people who get redfaced and flustered asking for condoms in chemists.
A man with a nervous twitch in his eye finds that aspirin helps.
So he is sitting there going through his pockets pulling out handfulls of condoms before finding an aspirin.
His friend asks: Why all the condoms?
Have you ever tried buying aspirin in the chemists when you can't stop winking ? He replies.
 
  • #20
evo said:
you are no longer safe in your backyard surrounded by a privacy fence.

LowlyPion said:
I'm sure it's still safe to sunbathe.

Depends on your definition of "safe"

52° 4'43.35"N 4°19'58.00"E
 
  • #21
epenguin said:
How often are they updated? I saw someone's car which I know they have had for about a month or less parked at their home.

As far as I know there is no preset frequency. I have not seen a place updated more often than about once per year. Doesn't mean no such areas.
 
  • #22
So people can identify individual cars.

And still can't find Bin Ladin. :(
 
  • #23
Alfi said:
So people can identify individual cars.

And still can't find Bin Ladin. :(

Maybe when they get Google Street Street Maps Balochistan mapped he will be wearing a Waldo hat peeking from a cave?
 
  • #24
mgb_phys said:
A man with a nervous twitch in his eye finds that aspirin helps.
So he is sitting there going through his pockets pulling out handfulls of condoms before finding an aspirin.
His friend asks: Why all the condoms?
Have you ever tried buying aspirin in the chemists when you can't stop winking ? He replies.
A woman on the beach wants to go in the water, but she's afraid someone will steal her cigarette. Her friend tells her that she puts her cigarette in a condom which she wears on a chain around her neck when she swims. So she goes to the pharmacy for a condom. The clerk asks her what size and she says "Big enough for a Camel."
 
  • #25
That story from the Sun in the OP is a hoax

http://idiotforever.wordpress.com/2009/03/31/how-i-duped-the-sun/

I also got lucky because The Sun is a bunch of fools. The picture I sent wasn’t even a street view. I don’t even know if the picture was of an apartment building. It could be a commercial building for all I know. I just zoomed into London (because that’s the biggest city I know) and picked Victoria Street (because Victoria Beckham is a little bit attractive). Then I looked for some parked cars. I guess The Sun didn’t include the Street View picture in their story because they knew it wasn’t a Street View Picture at all and they just wanted to write a fun juicy story.
 
  • #26
Well, I got to say... From the perspective of a female, I don't like google maps very much. I have been stalked before, and it isn't fun. And I have been threatened on the internet, although the people I feared most on the internet didn't have enough personal information to be risky. It used to be hard to get people's information, but nowadays, you just need a little bit of information, a little bit of money, and the internet.

I have tried very hard to keep my personal info off the internet, and it seems it is getting harder and harder each year to keep up with it. No one asks for permission.

I have a hard time understanding the internet generation today, posting all their info on myspace, facebook, youtube, etc. I guess it takes losing your privacy before you see this as an invasion, I don't know. If they keep it at a low resolution, I don't have an issue with it, but some areas zoom in much closer than others, and street view definitely should not be in residential areas.

But that's me.
 
  • #27
Greece puts brakes on Street View
Greece's data protection agency has banned Google from expanding its Street View service in the country, pending "additional information" from the firm.

... Authorities want to know how long the images would be kept on Google's database and what measures it will take to make people aware of privacy rights.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8045517.stm

It goes on to say that one neighborhood in England (Milton Keynes) blocked the Google car from taking the photos, because of concerns for facilitating crime. I'm not quite sure I grasp that level of xenophobia.
 
  • #28
Borek said:
Depends on your definition of "safe"

52° 4'43.35"N 4°19'58.00"E

:!)

Too funny!
 
  • #29
LowlyPion said:
It goes on to say that one neighborhood in England (Milton Keynes) blocked the Google car from taking the photos, because of concerns for facilitating crime. I'm not quite sure I grasp that level of xenophobia.
Especially in a country with 2 CCTV cameras/person - it's amazing there is any crime at all.
 
  • #30
Dutch muggers caught on Google street view camera
"The picture was taken just a moment before the crime," a police spokesman said.

In March, the victim recognised himself and the two robbers while surfing Google Maps, which has a "Street View" feature allowing users to see images of buildings. The images are usually taken by a camera mounted on a car.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSLJ87085420090619