backtop


Print 40 comment(s) - last by mmcdonalataocd.. on Mar 26 at 8:06 AM


Aftermath of an auto accident caught by a Google Street View camera car  (Source: Google)
After receiving complaints regarding certain offensive images, Google has removed some of their Street View photos.

Although Google’s Street View service began with a great deal of publicity, complaints regarding certain offensive images have forced the organization to remove some photos.
 
Dozens of images have already been taken out of the UK Street View collection. It is thought the pictures removed contained revealing images of homes, a man entering a London sex shop, people being arrested and a man being sick.

One Google spokesperson explained that anyone who asks could have their images removed.

As for those photos that already have been deleted, Google’s Laura Scott said, "We've got millions of images, so the percentage removed was very small...We want this to be a useful tool, and it's people's right to have their image removed." 

"The fact there are now gaps [in Street View] shows how responsive we are," Scott added.

Street View is now available in a total of nine countries. It first began in the U.S. in May 2007 and since has spread to Japan, Australia, New Zealand, France, Spain and Italy. On Thursday, it was additionally launched in the Netherlands.

Imagery available through the service is taken along streets by customized camera cars. Camera cars in the UK, for example, have enabled their version to consist of 22,369 miles of UK streets and to include street scenes in 25 UK cities, from Aberdeen to Southampton. Some people, have managed to find themselves somewhere in the imagery containing these miles of streets. 

People have also managed to find ways to view the removed offensive photos by moving up or down a notch on the street. A black image with the message "This image is no longer available" has replaced each offensive photo, but apparently this does not provide blockage at all different angles.

Dr. Ian Brown, a privacy expert at the Oxford Internet Institute, was not surprised that there were some offensive photos: "This is exactly what you would expect from a service that relies on individuals to help Google not make mistakes." 

"They [Google] should have thought more carefully about how they designed the service to avoid exactly this sort of thing," Brown added.  

Dr. Brown also said that Google could have taken images twice, on different days. This way, any offending images could have been easily replaced and could have also protected privacy better.

Google assures it has gone to great lengths to ensure privacy. Its face recognition technology, for example, blurs all faces and registration plates captured by the camera cars. Last year, the Information Commissioner’s office ruled that this blurring was sufficient in ensuring that privacy was upheld.

Google also says Street View only displays imagery that is already visible from public thoroughfares.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Ontario Canada
By artemicion on 3/23/2009 12:32:06 PM , Rating: -1
You sir, are a bigot.

It's appalling to me that you would single out the Muslim religion without recognizing that EVERY culture recognizes certain aspects of life as "offensive".

It's even MORE appalling to me that you would single out the Muslim religion for finding nudity offensive when AMERICANS also find nudity offensive. Ummm, does Janet Jackson, Super Bowl, Justin Timberlake ring ANY bells for you?

And if we're talking about gender touble-standards, why don't you ask ANY woman in America if they're satisfied with the status quo in the U.S. in terms of sexism. Better than some of the aspects of Muslim culture? Maybe. But considering the content of the article, I see NO REASON to bring up your racist point of view here.

Wow. Just wow.


RE: Ontario Canada
By Sagath on 3/23/2009 1:02:12 PM , Rating: 4
Using an example of a culture is not 'singling out', nor is it racist. It is an example. He even says "To me" in front of his statement.

Generalities cause far more harm then an example. Would you find someone stating all Muslims are Terrorists better associated with a context of all cultures find certain aspects of life "offensive"? Neither are correct, according to your viewpoint, nor according to mine.

Maybe the OP isnt even American, what if he is Muslim, and finds the same Muslim culture offensive to him, his mother and his sister?

And again, he says nowhere that he finds it offensive about nudity in the Muslim religion, just that he personally doesnt agree with making them wear Burkas and being covered head to toe. Hardly a racist view. Definitely a personal one.

Relax, Chief. Much as you have your over-the-top opinion, in this country, you are both entitled to them. But try thinking outside the box. Not everyone is out to get you, or the Muslims ;)


RE: Ontario Canada
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/23/2009 3:09:12 PM , Rating: 4
You sir, need to chill out. He used an example to demonstate his point, and clearly it was an effective one.

Cultures in general need to get over themselves and be more tolerant of each other; I agree with Motoman 100% on that. The reason it's relevant here is because someone asked about censoring boobs. It was an obvious step to assume which culture might be most offended by said boobs, so his example makes sense.

And regarding the Super Bowl incident...I am not offended by boobs, but I am offended by Janet Jackson. Her boob wasn't even nice to look at.


"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki