Your unnecessary need to bring Jesus into a distasteful article like this shows that Gizmodo has very little respect for those who may believe in him. Next time you want to be really funny, use more than five minutes of your time to come up with something that may actually make people laugh instead of defaulting to hot button topics.
@Shamoononon has a hebetudinous dog: Surely we all squat to pee, from time to time... but I don't do this sort of thing outside the sanctity of my own bed for goodness' sake!
@ColonelBlaha: Yeah, I mean if they can take pictures on private roads and property, why they could....I'm sorry, what did you say? Roads are public? So anyone can walk on them? So you're expectation of privacy is zero? Oh, then is there really a difference between google and a tourist taking a photo and uploading it on their facebook page? There isn't? Damn.
@SWAK_GitEmSteveDave loves->★: There are such things as private roads where if you go on them it is considered trespassing. You are basically trying to say that Big Brother is legal and thus not a problem. Well, if the government makes a law saying the police can shot and kill people for no reason, would that be a problem? But it's legal, so in your reasoning you should have no problem with that. Go do yourself a favor and read the book 1984, and to follow up, Fahrenheit 451 is a good choice.
@easy2panic: "You are basically trying to say that Big Brother is legal and thus not a problem. Well, if the government makes a law saying the police can shot and kill people for no reason, would that be a problem?"
Even if it's about legality/morality, don't you think that what you said a little too extreme? And since when was the government involved in all of this? SteveDave didn't mention it. The article didn't mention it. From what I see, this is all done by a private corporation. And if the government (esp. US) is involved, they would be too cheap to spend on this kind of technology.
So before you go all emotional over some comment, relax and think about what you're saying.
As for your comment, I must first point out your use of logical fallacies. You have a slippery slope, a straw man, excluded middle, and an ad hominem attack. Very good. I am saying that if you are on a PUBLIC street, and a car traveling on said public street takes a picture, there is nothing wrong. Why? Your expectation of privacy is zero. I do understand that some roads ARE private, and yes, google has traveled down one once or twice, but then again, so have I. Doesn't make it right, but it happens, and it's an accident.
@easy2panic: You are a moron. Are you sure you read the 1984 novel by George Orwell, and not just the linernotes to the Van Halen album? Google Streetview doesn't traverse privately owned streets. Anything they take a picture of in public (and largely autonomously) is perfectly legal and justified. Bringing the notion of cops shooting people into the argument is both idiotic and competely irrelevant. This moron shouldn't have been pissing behind a car, and fully deserves whatever fleeting intarwebz shame she suffers from it.
Everyone in this thread that isn't you wins an internets default.
01/31/09
Naah... that's too crazy.
12/24/08
12/24/08
Google is watching you Giz....
12/24/08
12/23/08
All the time.
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/24/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/24/08
12/24/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
01/31/09
Ahem.
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
The kind that's pooping at the same time?
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
(Sick, you didn't have to publish the picture Gizmodo, less put it on the homepage where we had no choice but to see it.)
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/23/08
Seriously? You're going to compare cameras with guns?
Really?
12/23/08
-I decided not to write anything that would insult your level of intelligence, so I am writing this instead.-
This could be a never ending battle, so do yourself a favor, and don't waste your time arguing bulls**t.
12/23/08
Even if it's about legality/morality, don't you think that what you said a little too extreme? And since when was the government involved in all of this? SteveDave didn't mention it. The article didn't mention it. From what I see, this is all done by a private corporation. And if the government (esp. US) is involved, they would be too cheap to spend on this kind of technology.
So before you go all emotional over some comment, relax and think about what you're saying.
12/23/08
As for your comment, I must first point out your use of logical fallacies. You have a slippery slope, a straw man, excluded middle, and an ad hominem attack. Very good. I am saying that if you are on a PUBLIC street, and a car traveling on said public street takes a picture, there is nothing wrong. Why? Your expectation of privacy is zero. I do understand that some roads ARE private, and yes, google has traveled down one once or twice, but then again, so have I. Doesn't make it right, but it happens, and it's an accident.
12/23/08
12/23/08
12/24/08
01/31/09
Everyone in this thread that isn't you wins an internets default.
03/19/09