[Novalug] [OT] Google takes heat for using pre-Katrina imagery

[Rich Goodwin]

On Sun, 2007-04-01 at 15:15 -0400, Alan McConnell wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 12:33:43PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 08:29:05PM -0400, Alan McConnell wrote:
> > >	Pete, you are very ready to jump on the Congress for getting
> > >	after Google.  But I would first ask: why did Google switch
> > >	from a depiction of the present state of affairs -- which AFAIK
> > >	continues shamefully bad -- to a pre-Katrina depiction. 
> > 
> > Why should we ask that?
> 	<LOL>  Because it takes a certain amount of political programming
> 	for such an obvious question not to spring to mind.

With all due respect, if one wants to find something ... one will find
it and call it obvious.

> 
> > More importantly, where is congress' constitutional authority
> > to question a private business about what content it chooses to
> > display on a free web site?
> 	We all have a copy of the Constitution, right?  Check 
> 	Article I, often subtitled, Powers of the Congress.  A hint
> 	as to the Section: its number is a power of the only even
> 	prime.
> 
> 	Perhaps a more relevant question is: why should Congress
> 	take a look at what Google is doing?  my answer to this --
> 	and I give it sadly -- is that we are in a new era of
> 	privatisation.  Our government is privatising all kinds
> 	of things; we are renting out our highways, renting out
> 	the care and feeding of our military forces, etc etc.
> 	Do you(Mike and others) not know that many of our
> 	governmental functions depend on information about
> 	where things are?  and AFAIK the government has not set
> 	up an online agency with capabilities similar to those
> 	of Mapquest and Googlemap.

 NGA and USGS are the closest that I can come up with that would if they
were so chartered.  As a taxpayer, I am not willing to pay for such a
service when there are plenty out there already and provide much better
than what the Gov't could provide.

> 
> 	Should the government privatize?  the present "conservative" 
> 	philosophy is: Yes!  the Private Sector is much more able
> 	than the government.    But if we are
> 	going to let the Private Sector do things essential to 
> 	government activity, the government, especially the Congress,
> 	had better exercise due oversight over said private sector.

You assume here that the Gov't is or should be doing this.  I apply that
word for a reason.  I PREsume that Gov't is not (and should not) ne
involved in such activities.  It is not cost effective for anyone.

> 
> > >	So let's find out first who leaned on Google to airbrush history.
> > 
> > And why on earth, other than rampant paranoia, would you believe that 
> > somebody did that?
> 	Well, Mike, you present for us your theory about why Google
> 	should display the present devastation in New Orleans, and then
> 	recall this display to show how New Orleans used to be.  Is
> 	your theory that someone at Google did this on their own 
> 	recognizance(like e.g.  Douglas Feith doctored up the intelligence
> 	on Iraqi WMD on his own)?

Huh???? What does WMD have to do with New Orleans?  Oh ... I guess you
had lunch with Mr. Farakahn't.   

> 
> 	As for paranoia, I plead guilty.  Paranoia on the part of
> 	private citizens is, these days, the citizen's highest duty.
> 	If anyone reading this isn't paranoiac, then they are in a
> 	cocoon somewhere.
> 
> > neighborhood are years old), how they decide which to use (weighting age 
> > against resolution), whether it is at all plausible that a human makes a 
> > decision about every square foot of coverage (no, it's not--it must be 
> > automated), and whether it's reasonble to expect that the people writing 
> > the automation software special case things based on potential 
> > congressional stupidity (it's not).
> 	I don't know what this is all about.  If you don't think New
> 	Orleans is a "special case", that's your right.  Most people
> 	view New Orleans as the preeminent natural disaster -- in terms
> 	of property damage, lives shattered, etc -- that the U.S. has
> 	been hit with in at least the last several decades.

Hmmm ... a tad presumptious to say "Most."  Where is the data asupport
this?  Alot I'd buy any more than that .... I want to see the data.  You
see I'm suspicious by nature and really don't buy talking points.

> 
> Caveat:  I personally do not know New Orleans; I was there once for a
> conference many decades ago.  And I am certainly not familiar with
> what Google has done.  But a billion-dollar enterprise like Google,
> in depicting the New Orleans disaster, should certainly make every
> effort to make what it is depicting as accurate as possible.  Does
> anyone quarrel with that statement?  And if Google is portraying
> the remnants of a once great American city as it was before the
> disaster struck, I'd say: damn right I want Congress to complain.
> And the rest of us, the people who elect the Congress, should too.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Alan
>     "He lies.  He spies.  He wants us to ignore
>     His war . . ."   Impeach him!

I saw "Enemy of the State" last nite and swear I saw them zooming in on
you with some funny camera .... 

Happy April 1st!  ;-}

Rich
-- 

GPG/PGP Key Id: 1B257AEC from pgp.mit.edu

Remember, all Windows machines are, by definition, fault tolerant.

              They run Windows don't they!!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://calypso.tux.org/pipermail/novalug/attachments/20070401/6ba01e08/attachment.pgp