iTWire - Google Street View: Is privacy only for the rich?

Stephen Withers turns his gaze on the world of Apple, with detours into other aspects of IT and communications as they catch his attention.

Google Street View: Is privacy only for the rich?

by Stephen Withers
Thursday, 07 August 2008
Page 2 of 3 Templestowe shows very patchy coverage - one area between secondary roads may be fully covered, while an adjacent one is not. What's that all about? And why is there a small uncovered pocket in East Keilor, just south of the disused quarry? It looks like Google's car drove part way down one road and just stopped. Coverage in Williamstown (favoured by Labor politicians) is solid, yet neighbouring Newport and Spotswood don't fare so well. There's no reason to expect Street View to provide 100 percent coverage of the metropolitan areas where it is available, but the gaps do lend themselves to conspiracy theories. So I put the question to Rob Shilkin, Google's head of corporate communications and public Affairs for Australia and New Zealand. He said there have been no carve-outs, and that any missing pockets in metropolitan areas will be filled in as the images are processed. But if you have requested that the photos of your house are removed from Street View, you'll be pleased to hear that such requests are "being prioritised and being dealt with very quickly," according to Shilkin. However, someone connected with iTWire has requested partial removal of an image, and so far has only received an automated email acknowledgement. You can read the full text on page 3. << First page < 1 2 3 Next page > Last page - Post your comment >>

< Next story in category		Previous story in the category >