I find it amusing that a lot of people think that someone would actually fancy their pig-ugly spawn, going so far as to track them down on Google. There's two schools within walking distance of my house. I could kidnap an attractive one if needed.

streetview *yawn* story *yawn* that really isn;t *yawn* worth the *zzzzzzzzz*

Can someone explain what these BAD people can do using street view that they cannot do from their own cars?

Mine is the one with the paranoia leaflet in the pocket, but you know that already don't you??

That is just bullshit. Streetview cannot help you plan burglaries any more than just walking down the street. In fact walking down the street will be much better for planning purposes as you see much more detail and you can see what time of the day people leave their homes. Same for "children predators". Streetview is a very helpful tool, but I think that if these communities doesn't want it then google should not provide this useful tool to them.

Streetview can do nothing bad for any community... why? because they're not doing anything that anyone cannot do for themselves. On the other hand it could potentially lure in tourists, i.e. money for the community.

For you, ze trawl is over.

Childs can be misused by child predators to target children!

"locations in the United States, France, Italy, Australia and Japan" And the UK! Don't forget the UK! We have a map and everything!

Oh, and Germany...

I think they'll find that, in a legal argument between a law-making entity and themselves, they'll lose on that question! If the law says they need a permit then they do. Google really are losing sight of things. Just because they _want_ to do things, it doesn't follow that they can or should do them.

Have the entire city go nude when the StreetView car is town. That way they can't publish the photographs (at least not in the more prudish countries, like the U.S.).

…that none of the people complaining have ever *used* StreetView.

The backlash appears to be what I'd expect for some technology out of a Tony Scott movie, and StreetView ain't anywhere near that good, as neat as it is.

Nothing, really, it's more or less the same they could do from their cars but from the comfort of their homes and without the risk of being seen, filmed, photographed (by Google) stalking around in the given area and they can preselect about where to actually go to be bad later on. Which is just the point, it makes life for BAD people easier. You select the house with the nicest car in front via Streetview, then you check out the overall setting using the satellite-image, then you wait for nightfall and drive over, using road-directions from Google. Happy happy joy joy.

"I find it amusing that a lot of people think that someone would actually fancy their pig-ugly spawn, going so far as to track them down on Google. There's two schools within walking distance of my house. I could kidnap an attractive one if needed."

thank you for admiting that your id and name and everyting about has been loged (you thought phorm was not deployed yet HA HA HA) the daily mail mod will be round to your house shortley to linch you for your ownn protection

Yes, I was snapped yesterday morning on my way to work. Does that mean my pretty, boyish face is the next target for over 9000 paedophiles on teh scary interwebz??!!!

By the way, I spotted the Googlemobile in Leicester, which is currently devoid of tags on the El Reg Street View domination map. I didn't get a photo of it, but it was at precisely the following Google co-ordinates:

52.601621, -1.186159

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=52.601621,+-1.186159&ie=UTF8&ll=52.605758,-1.186867&spn=0.138234,0.30899&z=12

... even if the reasons are faulty, is it not right that you our your community should be able to decide not to have your photo taken and published?

I lived in Molfsee for four years and this move doesn't surprise me at all - everyone there has something to hide. But seriously, my neighbour had a 200 year-old tree cut down in our yard, or rather my landlady's yard without her permission. He didn't like the shade on his patio. She was 87 at the time and didn't have the will to fight him after the fact. I also had an encounter there with a hunter who threatened to shoot my leashed dogs because we had frightened away the deer he had been tracking. Since this is the type of person that lives in Molfsee, I would not challenge them if I were Google.

.....Stacie D. Rumenap, former deputy director of the American Conservative Union, argues that Google Street View "can be misused by child predators to target children"....

its this type of bullshit that has banned parents from taking photographs of the kids at school events....

my daughter playing in the finals of a netball tournament scored the winning point for her team in the dying seconds... do i have a photograph of it? no.... i was not allowed to take photographs. She received a prize in the school prize giving last year.... could i take a photograph of her receiving the prize no i couldn't. its total bullshit...

why do these dick heads think that kiddie-fiddlers are interested in taking photos of children taking part in school activities...

and as for google streetview.. they have been down our road, and our house is there on the street, with our car parked outside... do i care.... no.... get over it...

mines the one with the "legal guidelines for photographers" in the pocket....

> Stacie D. Rumenap, former deputy director of the American Conservative Union, argues

> that Google Street View "can be misused by child predators to target children"

in other news: US policy makers found that kitchen knives can be used to stab people. chefs get ready to apply for a new knife-wielding permit that we won't give out.

Two comments in this article immediately make me believe there are people in this world that need to be shot for failing to meet the minimum IQ required for human society:

"The 5,000 inhabitants find the project "extremely alarming" as criminals can plan break-ins more easily"

As opposed to...!?!?! If a criminal stands on the street and eyes up the house they can still plan break ins! For <something>s sake, Google StreetView does not give you anything you can't go and see with your own damn eyes!

"Google Street View "can be misused by child predators to target children""

How...!?!?

Please, someone justify this comment. I see no worth in it whatsoever. Its been concocted by some sort of child-safety-fear cotton-wool wrapped idiot who thrusts the "child safety" card into the area as soon as the first syllable of "camera" is even thought of.

What are child predators going to do? Oh there's a child... I'll hang around that area in the hope that nobody in a 2 mile radius wil be around with the exception of that child who is so obviously guaranteed to be there at the same place at the same time every day.

Re-read that last paragraph. Have you realised how ridiculous the concept sounds? Why do people think that just because Google turns up with a camera that suddenly the rest of humanity disappears from the vicinity and leaves the nefarious to it? This simply does not happen.

Now ENOUGH with the stupid comments from the "OOH OOH ME FOR THE NEXT MEDIA COMMENT!" crowd. They don't have enough intelligence to be permitted audience for comment.

</rant>

-- Richard

@Johan Hartman

"Streetview cannot help you plan burglaries any more than just walking down the street."

And I suppose Google search can't help you any more than visiting a library can it.

"On the other hand it could potentially lure in tourists, i.e. money for the community."

Now that *is* BS.

@Mo

"StreetView ain't anywhere near that good, as neat as it is."

Well then it wont be missed will it so what's the problem?

Question: Why should an american company be allowed to photograph streets in foreign countries unchallenged? If a Russian or North Korean company was doing it, or - that most dangerous of potential terroists - an english bloke with a camera, it would be called terrorism and made illegal. But because it's the almighty google I fail to see how this makes it 'ok'. I for one certainly don't want my person, car, house or street to be photographed by some company, I don't care what it's for. None of their bloody business. Oh they will blur my face will they? Oh that's all right then - and I suppose they just 'delete' the orignals do they? How do *I* know that actually happens?

After having my collar felt for taking a photograph in a public place of a certain gateway I can safely say that all photography these days has first to be cleared by a local law official.

Why should google be treated any different from the rest of us?

Oh wait. They've got plenty of money...

Coat, Passport, See yah!

If that was in the UK and you were in a public space, said plod was wronger than a wrong thing dipped in wrong sauce and eaten with the wrong impliment.

I think you'll find that when arguing with a company from the USA about law, the only people who will win are the solicitors.

That is all.

While the given reasons are somewhat silly, if the majority of the people living there dont want streetview to take pictures in their area and have their local gov enact bylaws to that affect what exaclty is the problem?? Or did we forget about that lil thing called democracy?

Google doesnt have carte blanche to archive the whole world, nor to ignore laws either local or national which is has been know to do in the past.

Add the that the question of do we really need the whole world snapped and recorded on the net? What hapened to going somewhere to find out about it? or holidays? soo people wont even leave their bedrooms, if they even do now

"Streetview cannot help you plan burglaries any more than just walking down the street."

vs

And I suppose Google search can't help you any more than visiting a library can it.

... I don't see how those two sentences relate, at all. Seriously what is your argument?

""On the other hand it could potentially lure in tourists, i.e. money for the community."

Now that *is* BS." - Sure if its a shit town then it wont, hence the word: potentially.

I did mention that if the community really did not want the services then they should be left alone, its just that their arguments against it are plain stupid and smells like the ideas of some politician that hasn't got enough proper work to do.

Oh and by the way, if russia, north korea and iran were to offer online pictures of PUBLIC PLACES, taken from PUBLIC PLACES in the UK, I wouldn't give a shit.

So if cameras aid child molesters, can we ask for all surveillance cameras in Britain to be disabled, as we cannot be SURE they won't be misused by the operators?

After all, if it protects just one child, it will be worth it ...

Black helicopter, because *their* intrusions into your privacy are for your security and convenience.

Given how much google doesn't want it's poor street view cars being photographed here is the plan.

1) Phone up a red topped newspaper or go direct to a paparazzi agency (why not phone the twat with the pink mohican)

2) Tell them that you've spotted {insert name of faceless celebrity starlet with her knickers round her ankles}

3) Tell them she was sitting in a black Opel with a conspicuous long metal pole of the roof driving near {name of town}

4) Sit back and enjoy the irony of google complaining about being photographed wherever they go.

welcome our Google Streetview Overlords...

As for 'think of the childrens'... I think it would make planning easier to eliminate the little cnuts from the corner of the street, where they terrorise the elderly inhabitants and the local <insert ethnic variety here> shop with their skateboard and shoplifting propensities.

We've all been filmed and photographed a gazillion times already. At the very least you can see Google's results and complain if you want. Try that with TfL CCTV.

<sigh> this is such a non-story El Reg, fit only for Daily Mail readers and personages of a nervous disposition hailing from Tunbridge Wells.

/joke as there are certain to be readers with an amoebic cerebral dysfunction.

Did the German's need a permit issued to go around invading countries? No.

Did we and Google's grand parents own them in two wars? damn right, what's theirs is ours now.

The Google Reich cometh

"I don't see how those two sentences relate, at all."

Then you have bigger problems than I first realised.

Ok - let's pretend you are someone wanting some information which might be in a library. Is it easier to a) go to the first library and search, moving onto the next one if you can't find it, or b) do a google search for the same info knowing you will more than likely not even have to get up.

Now lets pretend you are a burglar planning his next job wanting to case areas. Is it a) easier to walk down every street looking for targets, or b) have a look around Google maps and street view meaning you don't even have to get up to spot potential targets and escape routes thus saving yourself a lot of time (and maybe also not drawing attention to yourself).

>US policy makers found that kitchen knives can be used to stab people. chefs get ready to

> apply for a new knife-wielding permit that we won't give out.

No they would just ban pictures of knives!

Faces are blurred, numberplates are blurred. In fat, a criminal would be better off going outside, having a decent look around, and then decided when to 'strike'. And all a paedophile has to do is visit his local primary school...

And it's not like we're not being watched anyway. There are CCTV cameras EVERYWHERE nowadays.

I haven't really been worried about this whole StreetView thing. People are just being paranoid about "teh scareh intarwebz".

Schleswig-Holstein is hardly the garden spot of Germany, judging by warm, wonderful Kiel.

"Faces are blurred, numberplates are blurred. In fat, a criminal would be better off going outside, having a decent look around, and then decided when to 'strike'."

Because as we all know burglars are predominantly interested in people's faces and their vehicle number plates.

"And it's not like we're not being watched anyway. There are CCTV cameras EVERYWHERE nowadays."

So does that mean you don't mind if a weirdo were to follow you, your missus or your kids around with a video camera... 'because CCTV is EVERYWHERE'?

"You select the house with the nicest car in front via Streetview then you check out the overall setting using the satellite-image, then you wait for nightfall and drive over, using road-directions from Google."

Because nobody ever did those things before computers and the internet...

Get off it already.

I've used Streetview a few times: once to look at a house in San Francisco of architectural interest , once to see what I could see where a relative lives, and once unsuccessfully to look at the address I was conceived at.

The first was sort of okay, but not really all that informative; how much can you see on a street of row houses that directly abut the sidewalk?

The second of these attempts didn't yield anything of interest — it's a leafy American suburban lane, and you can barely tell there's a house there.

And the third failed because Streetview ended a block before the address of interest.

In a hundred years, maybe, Streetviews of today will be of interest to urban historians, but right now it's one big yawner afaiac.

So what's the squawking all about?

erm, sorry? Can you not remember the series of pool raid parties down south that were planned using google maps. Imagine that, but with streetlevel view. Combine overhead shots with ground level photography (including streetlights, passers by [and lack thereof] etc) and you've got a great source to find that dimly lit mansion with a nice big patio window out the back.

And as for google 'not needing a permit' - who the hell do they think they are!!! I'm beginning to hate google as much as I hate MS.

Sir, the currect ammount of predators on the interwebz woud be "OVER NINE TOHUZAAAANNDDD!!!!!11111 LOLZLOZ ROFLMACOPTERZ!!111one"

That is all.

Surely the point of all this is not whether street view is good or bad, it's more about the fact Google seem to be pushing past everyone and going ahead.

All most people want is to feel they have some say in the matter. People are generally concerned about their privacy, most dont realise how little they have on the internet, but stick a camera in their front garden and they can't fail to see it as some kind of invasion of that privacy.

Google are more and more becoming the next MS i.e. too big for their boots.

If they really are 'doing no evil' why can't they be more friendly about it?

Jesus like, whatever.

OK, on the crime planning thing, it's marginally better than a map, but not necessarily all that much, as anyone who has ever tried to case a location for possible illicit entry and then gone there will happily attest. (Urbex, in case you're wondering).

And don't forget, the pictures capture a moment in time, and things change. I hate to piss on your bonfires, but you really have to try this in order to discover just how necessary it is to actually physically go there and have a look at the location you're scoping. Maps/Earth and friends are certainly where you're going to want to start, but the fact is they don't help all that much. Those of you with a less larcenous set of hobbies and interests ate just going to have to take my word for it.

A concrete example : Sometime last year finding myself with time on my hands, I was idly scanning google earth for likely targets for exploration and came across what I was able to identify as an abandoned munitions dump in the nearby countryside (still MOD land). I spent some time familiarising myself with the location and it's surroundings, identified possible ingress and egress and so on, packed a bag and set off on my trusty two wheeled companion. When I got there (after having accidentally ridden down several flights of steps which were not identified on the maps or visible from the sky, it turned out that rather than being as isolated as it appeared, it was at that moment in time overlooked by, in no particular order, a brand new housing estate and concomitant posse of navvies, a busy tractor driving school, and four nuns in an SUV. And all the fences had been patched. And it was on fire*. None of which was readily apparent from Google earth.

So all in all, the desk based recon was pretty much a waste of time, and in fact this is far from a unique episode in my own personal experience. There's no substitute for direct recon. Period.

And as for the kidpron, what utter bollocks! The only way that GSV could realistically help some stalking pedo to track down targets is if all children stand outside in one place at all times, and apart from that, by far the majority of kiddie fiddling is performed in house, as it were, rather than being the purview of some random outsourced "predator".

*Seriously. Is it just me that has days like that ?

Well, maybe you should lay off the intertron for a while, it obviously has a detrimental effect on your attention span. I said it made those things easier, not that they did not exist before.

Also, all those saying "It's CCTV everywhere anyway" should remember this article is about Germany. The camera density here is nothing compared to that in the UK.

That'd be the same Simon Davies who thinks Phorm is a good idea, presumably?

When I hear the phrase think of the kinds or if it saves one child you automatically assume bullshit is aout to follow.

Lately when I hear those two phrase I just want to beat the person that said it with my coffee mug

...to the street view images of Afghanistan when they get around to it. I wonder how their "right" to take photos in public places will go down with the local militias there?

Given the quality and resolution of the average Street View, I wouldn't expect it to be much use compared to a thief driving/walking past the chosen property himself. It is useful occasionally, when driving to a strange place covered by Google, I sometimes do a quick check of the streets to check on landmarks. It is possible to use the satellite view if it's got decent resolution, but not always as good.

Of course, in the UK they'd be thwarted immediately by a policeman demanding they hand over their camera and film for taking photos in a public place without permission ...

wouldn't they ?