Inappropriate Images In Street View
Thursday, 31st May 2007 by Alex Turnbull
In the comments on our last post one of our readers posted a link to this, er, revealing billboard advert parked in front of the Bellagio, Las Vegas.
Which of course raises a question about the suitability of these images to be seen by anyone who stumbles across them. On a regular Google search, you'd have to edit your preferences to turn off SafeSearch, but there's no way to filter the images in Street View. Additionally, these pictures feature real people, their houses, their cars, and their cars' numberplates. And none of these people gave their permission before these things were posted online.
It turns out Google have clearly though of this already - if you click "Street View Help" in any Street view window, you can read the following message:
Report Inappropriate Image
Google takes concerns about its services very seriously. Please use the link below to report concerns about an inappropriate street view.
Thanks to EAF and Chris DiBona.
About the author
Alex has decided that his title will be Senior Vice President of Stuff.
I find real life to be inappropriate at times. Could I ask Google or some similar organization to come over to where I live and censor it for me?
People walking on the street in Vegas will see those all day long so i don’t see the problem with having the image on google. Although, thinking about it, when in Vegas you won’t see the billboard because you’ll be too busy with someone handing you a card for the same sort of services every few seconds!
Well I wouldn’t let my son wander about vegas on his own, but this potentially allows him to do that doesn’t it?
Well, if he could use a computer that is. I mean, other than bash the keyboard and throw the mouse on the floor… 😉
I think your reasons for not letting him wander about on his own wouldn’t be based on what he’d see!
I see the point that some stuff should be censored on there i.e. if they happened to drive by and get a snap of an amorous couple down an alley 😉 but something thats on show 24 hrs a day is silly, no matter how “rude”
I lived in Vegas for 4 years. I always hated those mobile signs, they block your view. I also hated those people handing out the “services” cards. They didn’t care if you were with some female or not… really annoying.
here
outside a gentleman’s club
What’s the big deal, your numberplate is on your car at all times for anybody to see at any time? Your house can be seen from the street by anybody at any time.
You’re in public space, you have no expectation of privacy.
The problem is just that when one goes to Vegas in person, one expects adult-oriented stuff. When one is browsing Google maps, one doesn’t. (I would even say that in Vegas, one is usually interested in adult things, whereas on Google Maps, one is interested in pretty pictures and interesting backstories.) So it’s a different audience. Also, although many tens of thousands of people may be in Vegas in a day, many many millions of people can see the Google images; the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Check out some more inappropriate locations on this list:
http:\www.laudontech.com\StreetView\streetview.html
You know what, Vegas is Vegas. It doesn’t matter whether you are there in person or in cyberspace. If you go on Google Maps and look around you should have a reasonable expectation of what you will see. Vegas has a reputation for a reason.
I do agree there should be some type of restrictions for children. When you start getting into this level of detail a certain amount of dirt gets uncovered and it’s unreasonable to think someone will be able to edit this up front. Hence the “report inappropriate content” link.
It’s an awesome feature, but it does reflect real life in a level of detail not everyone is comfortable with.
This is stupid. First self censoring is stupid. Why are those guys are afraid of accidentaly seeing ‘inappropriate’ things? If ypu don’t like don’t look. I you happen to view a picture of a street expect to see anything that you could see on the street. Spotting out ads like this and then protest is just so stupid.
As for the comment on children seeing that half naked women. First of all I don’t think it’s that much o a problem. We used to see them as well and pobably he already saw some pictures accidentally. But if you don’t want him to see it then don’t let him to use the computer without you ‘guiding’. Just as you wouldn’t let him wander around on the streets. Use a filter or make google implement something that lets users restricts where he can go (just as in the real world 🙂 ). The internet is full of real world people and you should not let your child wander around unattended.
Wait, self-censoring is stupid? You think, then, that one shouldn’t have the ability/privilege/right to decide not to view things?
That’s certainly a… unique view.
Here’s a site to track all this stuff http://streetviewvoyeur.com
“You’re in public space, you have no expectation of privacy.”
Really? So if I go outside I have no right to privacy? What about the images where you can see into buildings through the windows? Do I have no right to privacy unless I have my curtains pulled and am hiding under the bed?
I just made a spot to submit, vote and discuss these links… http://www.davidsterry.com/streetview
If you happen to be using Google Maps to look at street views of Las Vegas, then you are looking to see what Vegas streets look like.
If you aren’t, then you are on drugs, and I don’t pity you.
I fail to see how using Google Maps to look at Vegas is supposed to give better results than Google Image Search on “vegas” with moderate filtering.
Why are children searching for Las Vegas anyway? It isn’t exactly top conversation around the swingset.
What the heck is ‘inappropriate’ about people in swimsuits??? Does that mean those of you that have problems with that never take your kids to a beach or a pool? I have yet to see a single image on this service that goes beyond that. You might also want to consider that by restricting your kids’ access to innocent images like these, you are simply making the matter more interesting. They WILL become more computer-smart than you. They WILL bypass whatever filter you may have. And they MAY WELL stumble onto sites they definitely shouldn’t be looking at. In my experience it is much better to treat children in a way that allows them to become responsible … rather than trying to keep them innocent.
Also it is quite amazing to me how many people (and I am not saying that any on this board do) that have issues with people in swimsuits have no such qualms about violence. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not one of those people that think anyone that has ever watched a violent movie or played a violent game will grow up to be a killer. But to suggest that images of people in swimsuits are more harmful to children than images of people harming each other just seems very twisted.
The US, an expert in censoring nudity – and on the other hand it has the biggest porn industry – could there be a connection? when will you get it: censoring nudity is making people sexually neurotic and defenitely even more horny. to me its all hypocrite.
And concerning the kids: What you expect to happen if a kid sees a nude body? Why should it be interesting? I myself expect the kid will have forgotten it 3 minutes afterwards unless you make a big fuss about it like some of you guys…
Tammo, you took the words right out of my mouth. Come On People! What disturbs me more than images of women in bathing suits are the Puritan responses that call for sensorship. Its a woman in a bathing suit for crying out loud.
it’s life, get used to it!
i discover this great photographer on flickr http://www.flickr.com/people/donbenito/ ; what you think about his work??
How about this one ? View Placemark,,1,6.316608177362393
I was looking at North Las Vegas and found a scene on the corner of Aliante and Centennial a large oil spill. It was taken in June 2007 as inappropriate image. How would I get more information on this incident, because i am interested to find some more information on the so called safety islands with painted hash-marks. They are not safe, specially this one, because the tire marks indicate frequent traffic on the island. I took a snapshot one Sunday of six cars lined up waiting for green. I call it full house, safety island was included too. If you make a mistake and try to continue to drive in any direction you violate the traffic law. This is still a dead and. I am sure that this spot is deadly even now in 2009. I wonder how many citations generated this corner. If you know anything about this accident, please let me know, to help improve safe driving and help those who facing such intersection the first time. Zoltan