Google Terror Threat 366
bogd wrote to mention a CNN article wherein Indian President Abdul Kalam stated his concerns that Google Maps could be used to aid terrorists. From the article: "The Google site contains clear aerial photos of India's parliament building, the president's house and surrounding government offices in New Delhi. There are also some clear shots of Indian defense establishments. Debbie Frost, spokewoman for Mountain View, California-based Google, noted that the software uses information already available from public sources and the images displayed are about one to two years old, not shown in real time."
First postage!!!! (Score:2, Funny)
"Netcraft confirms it...it is whack."
-- Oscar Wilde on Slashdot
"I'm going to fucking bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to fucking kill Slashdot for slashdotting Uncyclopedia on pirate day."
--Steve Ballmer on Slashdot
The Sovereign State of Slashdot (http://slashdot.org/ [slashdot.org] is an independent nation roughly located between the Republic of Sourceforge and Jesus Ocean. Formerly a member of the UN, Slashd
outsourcing (Score:4, Funny)
Where will they stop ?... (Score:3, Funny)
After reading the "arguments" of the Indian president, I would rather think that the US has outsourced government cluelessness to India.
Thomas-
Re:outsourcing (Score:2)
Re:Actually, he has a point ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sheesh. Cut the hysteria.
First of all, this is probably impossible. They don't have enough people and resources to do this. Al Queda, while being real and dangerous, is nowhere near as ominous a threat as our incompetent and hysterical government claims. AQ is just another device being used by governments to scare us into giving up our freedoms in the name of security. Notice how the government does not request secrecy for any private chemical plants or refineries, or other vulnerable targets. This is just politicians reacting hysterically to their own trumped up crap.
Second of all, even if all of India's tech sector imploded, or all of New York City was vaporized, it would at most put a few percent of people out of work temporarily. There would be no worldwide depression, no starvation, no nuclear war. It would be an asterisk on page 10,000 of human history.
Re:Actually, he has a point ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Only the most simple-minded would think they have NO reason, though limiting it to carry-on luggage is somewhat disingenuous. Rubber-stamped Wiretaps, IP data interception, indefinite detetention without due process of law... none of these have anything to do with carry-on luggage, but they're all things born of the fear of the AQ bogeyman, all usable to releive us "consumers" of our freedoms.
Re:Actually, he has a point ... (Score:3, Insightful)
You know, I have news for you (Score:5, Insightful)
2) India is a real, no shit, well-armed nation. If Al-Queda started trying to pull off attacks in India, they'd work to stop them, and by and large succede. Also note that India doesn't have a bill of rights, the authorities get more latitude when dealing with criminals over there, and many things considered cruel and unusual in the US are normal there. What's more, in a matter that was national security related, they'd have even less restrictions.
3) Al Queda NEVER had the resources to pull of an attack like that.
So please, let's cut the mad-tinfoil-hattery here. India has better security than to allow every US intrest in India to be destoryed and if you blew up all the call centres, the world would not stop turning.
Re:You know, I have news for you (Score:3, Informative)
Lots of companies (for example Cisco, Sun Microsystems, Microsoft, Texas Instruments, GE) have outsourced their R&D to India. Cisco's R&D cent
Re:Actually, he has a point ... (Score:5, Insightful)
When the hell are people going to get OVER the TERRORISTS? If someone is intent on doing you harm, they will find a way. Period. End of freakin' story. It doesn't matter how many draconian laws you pass, or how much information you hide.
Seems like the enitre world has reached new heights in unsubstantited paranoia. Yes terrorist attacks happen. Yes they suck. But you have more of a chance of being struck by lightening than you do being struck down by terrorists.
Live in fear, and you have built your own cage. And the terrorists win.
And no, thanks to GWB, we have more to worry about from terrorists because now they attack people who are less able to prevent/defend against them and are less educated and are more religious (always a very dangerous combination). People are more willing to join them because they don't like the US and would rather be the "Devil's" right hand than in his path. Fear works.
AH! Don't put that on the web! It can be used by terrorist! AH! Don't do that! The terrorist will get ideas! AH! Don't say that! The terrorists might hear you!
It's repulsive. It's stupid.
Backpack nukes? Sheesh. Study the mechanics of a real nuke and see just how infeasible a backpack nuke is.
Fearmongering at its best. I thought we left this sh*t back in the 50's and 60's. Only then it was communism.
But on the bright side, we should be able to feed the starving with all this red herring.
~X~
Offtopic fo' yo' gran-momma... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not about speaking English. English is a major language in India. The accent, hey,
Re:Offtopic fo' yo' gran-momma... (Score:5, Interesting)
See also (Score:5, Informative)
Access Control (Score:4, Funny)
No, no, a question. (Score:5, Funny)
If they answer yes, then redirect them to www.disney.com. Otherwise, allow them access. It's works great for the pr0n industry. You know,the question they like to ask "Are you 18 years of age or older?" This is fine for the politicians regarding pr0n access, why not for Google maps?
Politicians, they are sooo paranoid, except when it comes for fiscal reponsibility.
Re:No, no, a question. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:No, no, a question. (Score:2)
This is a pretty standard question for Dell, it seems [skippy.net].
Re:Access Control (Score:2, Funny)
Deny The Enemy (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Deny The Enemy (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Deny The Enemy (Score:2)
Hey a baseball bat IS a dangerous weapon in the wrong hands. I am sure terrorists could use a baseball bat in some form. After all they did use friggen carpet knife as a dangerous weapon. Are we going to have little disclosure signs? Do you have to sign an EULA "I will not hit people over the head?"
What I see more worrisome is that everything is "terrorist" materials! And that gives the government's the "right" to stop the flow of information.
less work (Score:5, Funny)
Ok then, more easily-accessible terrorist information. I mean, Google could blur out all security-sensitive buildings like the White House but then the terrorists know to bomb the blurry spots, or to go to the local tour agency in D.C and pick up a map of the city. Or buy Microsoft flight simulator and practice crashing planes into buildings (ya, they blurred out stuff too), etc etc. The list goes on. I agree that the information is already available like the Google spokespersons says. Google just makes it more convenient to access, that's all. Everybody has to go to less work for good and bad purposes.
Re:less work (Score:2)
Government ideas to counter terror (Score:5, Funny)
And anyone caught looking up popular destinations only in Google Maps, is headed to Guantanamo. Don't bother packing, they'll provide a toothbrush for you.
Re:Government ideas to counter terror (Score:3, Insightful)
That would be funny if the feds hadn't told cops to be on the lookout [cnn.com] for people carrying almanacs. Or if they weren't hassling [69.93.170.43] casual [toomuchsexy.org] photographers [boingboing.net] everywhere [freedomtophotograph.com].
Re:Government ideas to counter terror (Score:3, Insightful)
I know you're kidding but Dr. Bob Arnot of NBC, in the wake of 9/11, said that perhaps Flight Simulator was indeed part of the problem when he showed the "shocking" images of how you could use it to fly into the WTC.
In the ensuing weeks after 9/11 my then-coworkers (who at that job tended to be old - like 50's to 60's old) looked at me in shock when I told them that I've fl
So, does this mean.. (Score:4, Funny)
Terrorists are stupid (Score:2)
Presidents that work for terrorists (Score:4, Insightful)
Terrorism is about threat, and continously emphasising that threat is only helping the terrorists.
Re:Presidents that work for terrorists (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Presidents that work for terrorists (Score:2)
Exploiting terrorism to increase budgets for programs that do nothing to actually help prevent another attack is the lowest kind of low.
Terrorists are nothing to be afraid of, they are an annoyance at best and need to be treated accordingly. If you have a bug problem, you do some things that will help, check on their effectiveness occasionally, and forget it.
Re:Presidents that work for terrorists (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Presidents that work for terrorists (Score:2)
Re:Presidents that work for terrorists (Score:2, Insightful)
As brilliant as he may be... (Score:3, Interesting)
Google (as stated many, many times) only organizes information that is already public.
Everything a goverment wants to keep secret (and, mind you, governments should NOT do much stuff secretly) it should do underground (Cheyenne Mountain) and isolated from other, non-google type of spying. But mainly, governments shoud refrain from doing anything secretly.
How to make a fission bomb is not a secret anymore; how to refine uranium so it can be used still is, but not for long. The sec
Re:As brilliant as he may be... (Score:2)
The Rashtrapati Bhavan in Delhi, in comparison, is, and therein lies the problem.
Re:As brilliant as he may be... (Score:2)
Ironically, it was Hermann Göring that said.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Presidents that work for terrorists (Score:4, Insightful)
Can we make a mantra out of this?
Yes, a bomb in a work building killing up to thousands of people at a time is scary, but terrorism only becomes terrorism when a unique freak occurrence invokes a pervasive fear in people. Otherwise, its just a unique freak occurrence or "act of god".
Lets say that 500 people were killed in each of two different scenarios. 1) 500 people died in a building due to an earthquake. 2) 500 people died due to a deliberately set bomb.
Same net death count, but which one is more likely to be labeled as "terrorist"? And once the buildings are rebuilt and people go about their lives, what would be the difference between their lives? Odds are, the only difference would be how much one concentrates on and thinks about the event, and much of what they will think about will be in terms of fear. Now, imagine that the bomb was found to be set by a psychotic child and he was safely secured in a mental facility. Then, the fear would go down, and almost completely disappear. Now, if the bomb was by a network of organized people that have planned for years to deliberately set the bomb. The fear goes up. Why is that? It must have something to do with the deliberateness and all of that organization and planning. Keep in mind, that there are plenty of jobs and places to live that are much more dangerous than working in an office building.
Do people that have these dangerous jobs live in perpetual fear? Cab drivers, policemen, fishermen, rock stars, astronauts, soldiers? Hell no. At most, if they are that concerned for their family, they quit doing what they are doing and do something else. Otherwise, they just take it as being an acceptable risk to die doing what they want to do. For example, its an acceptable risk to drive for most people. Its the number one accidental way to die, yet people still do it, and do crazy variations of it like not wearing a seatbelt, driving when impaired from sleep deprivation or alcohol use, or driving at excessive speeds or in inclimate weather. So, even when there is a known risk of death, I don't know of anybody that is in fear of driving. Maybe have the sense to not do it under certain circumstances, but nowhere near a pervasive fear.
So, what is there to fear about going to work in an office building? Look hard. I'm sure you will figure it out.
Re:Presidents that work for terrorists (Score:3, Insightful)
Ignore terrorism, and shun people who push it as an agenda. This policy has three effects: one, you aren't scared all the time (defeats terrorism); two, it removes cre
In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:In other news... (Score:2)
It seems ridiculous to me, to think that a person who intends to carry out an attack is going to give up because he couldn't find a map of the place, but that seems to be their logic.
Re:In other news... (Score:2)
Re:In other news... (Score:2)
Re:In other news... (Score:5, Interesting)
You were joking, but in many countries this is true. On a cycling holiday in Malaysia and Thailand I naturally wanted topographic maps to know where the hills were. I saw tour guides had such maps but they're not offically for sale. At a library in Penang I was treated with suspicion when I asked to see their non-existent map collection. Of course it's quite stupid to pretend that terrorists (of which there were and are active groups in these countries) would be fazed by such restrictions. You can source excellent topographic maps of just about anywhere overseas, and of course the local military maps are available for the right price. The only people inconvenienced are legitimate travellers. Simialrly in more paranoid places tourists who take snaps of bridges or just about any public building can lose their cameras and get in trouble. Again quite a futile exercise of power, any "spy" can easily take pictures undetected. In Bruce Schneier's phrase, "security theatre" and scapegoating.
Paper maps are not accurate (Score:2)
The idea is of course that russian invasion forces wouldn't be abl
Maps of NYC and Washington, DC (Score:2)
Re:In other news... (Score:2)
Famous terror attacks (Score:5, Insightful)
All of these were possible without maps.
The locations of most public buildings is already very well known. Government tends not to keep its existence a secret.
I just don't quite see how the information gleaned from google maps is really going to help a terrorist organisation any more than, say, mobile telephones and large bags.
Re:Famous terror attacks (Score:2)
Nothing new.. (Score:5, Informative)
Not long ago, the operators of Australia's only nuclear reactor expressed concern [smh.com.au] about GE.
Korea (both north and south) have expressed their concerns about it.
The Dutch have expressed concern [dmeurope.com].
Even in Russia they are nervous. [mosnews.com]
So far google has resisted censoring imagery, but how much longer can they hold out?
The
Personally I hope this never happens, but you can never tell what will happen...
Re:Nothing new.. (Score:2)
Re:Nothing new.. (Score:2)
Please do not use GE as an abbreviation for Google. GE is known as General Electric. Very confusing.
Re:Nothing new.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Bzzzzzzt.... How would you call the blurring out of the white house?
Oh wait - it's god own country, that's something completely different.
Re:Nothing new.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Can't blame technology for Terrorism. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not the Technology, it's Budget & Safegua (Score:2)
Strictly speaking, what you're saying is right. But no one is blaming Technology. You've made a subtle shift here and then defended a position no one is taking. What people are blaming is the availability of technology.
This situation is more akin to someone being alarmed that kids are shooting themselves because gun owners are leaving unboxed guns around and then someone saying "well, you can't blame g
Re:Can't blame technology for Terrorism. (Score:5, Insightful)
The box cutters only worked on 9/11 because the "scripted" response to a hijacking was to be quiet and cooperative while the terrorists make their demands, and then they'll let you go when they've gotten what they want. Sadly, that tactic isn't very promising when the terrorists' goal is the fly the plane into a building, but I doubt they made their hostages aware of that fact.
I don't think we'll see anyone hijacking a plane with box cutters again, no matter how many they manage to sneak aboard.
Re:Can't blame technology for Terrorism. (Score:2)
So google map is a threat... (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is it, that leaders everywhere invoke the terrorists notion, and almost always it is during an election or when they want something that is not related? It is becoming like the hitler thread.
Politicians love to talk ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Politicians love to talk ... (Score:2)
Its not a contradiction, its called irony [answers.com].
crazy paranoia (Score:3, Insightful)
Canberra's parliament house (Score:2, Insightful)
It's not like you wake up one day and think to yourself, "Wow, Thanks to Google maps I can locate the foreign department's offices in new Delhi now, I might blow them up".
Austrlalia's parlimant and prime ministers private residency are
Pbulicly available? Where? (Score:5, Insightful)
Guys, emphasis is mine, but where else can I get this already available information to the public apart from a service similar to what Google offers? I do not know of any!
Re:Pbulicly available? Where? (Score:2)
Public Library (Score:2)
I know it's unfashionable in these days if the Intarweb, but your local public library probably has a good selection of maps, and if they don't have the one you wan't, they'll be happy to order it for you and maybe send you a little postcard to tell you when it's in stock.
Using this method I was able to get some useful computer science books (Sedgwick and the one on 3D graphics) when I was too badly paid by BNFL to be able to afford books of my own.
Here in the UK we have a marvellous resourch which is the
As an American... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:As an American... (Score:5, Informative)
In India, our presidents are rarely career-politicians, mostly because they have very little oversight on policy matters; they are usually eminent statesmen who "guide" the Prime Minister and his cabinet in formulating policy. The PM can, naturally, disregard the President's advice.
Re:As an American... (Score:2)
although, I think he's specialer
Re:As an American... (Score:4, Interesting)
The map in question (Score:2, Informative)
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.614345,77.19947
In other words . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course (Score:5, Insightful)
Food helps terrorists. Air helps terrorists. Maps help terrorists.
You know what else helps terrorists? Constantly freaking out about how every little thing is either vulnerable to terrorists or helps terrorists.
Seriously, what is it with the people that can't think about anything but terrorists? Don't they realise they are part of the problem? Calm down, chill out, have a cup of tea, and don't be part of the problem.
Re:Of course (Score:5, Insightful)
When you compare the number of deaths from terrorists with the number of deaths lost each year to weather, war, crime, or poverty things come into perspective very quickly.
Re:Of course (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, you learn to live with
There is nothing to fear but ... (Score:2)
Actually it has been proven that many things can assist terrorist.
From a car which anyone can use to kill another person or persons, etc..
To political propoganda used to gain public support for terrorism and its promotion. US government generated more terrorism in response to 9/11 than what 9/11 did.
And then there is the stock market to manipulate and drain whole regions (like the trillion dollar beat did to south east asia in the mid to late 1990's)....and how that mot
Why bitching about Google maps is bad (Score:5, Insightful)
One of Google's arguments isn't quite valid (Score:2)
Using Google's KML languague, you can overlay more recent photos on a particular area. Of course, if you have those photos, then that's the problem, not Google Earth.
US Schools (Score:5, Funny)
More Google Earth interesting images (Score:2)
Of course the biggest terror threat.. (Score:2)
Reminds me... (Score:2)
yay for freedom (Score:3, Informative)
So anyways the moral of the story is I love living in a "free" continent where security can overtake my freedoms, but me must continue to use the word "freedom" even more fervently as if it is true.
Dr Kalam says more than that. (Score:3, Interesting)
While a case can, indeed, be made about the need for a free flow of information, to call the information in Google Maps as "publically available information", however, is to ignore this double-standard.
Re:Dr Kalam says more than that. (Score:4, Funny)
guns don't do the shot by theiselves, you know (Score:3, Interesting)
What caused World War II? What causes most of war? Money? Only money? Get a grip - that it is VERY complex problem usually and it is too tangerous to left solution to arms - because, hell, it don't resolve anything at all.
Invasion of privacy...it better not be.... (Score:5, Insightful)
As governments (made up of people) pursue the invasion of privacy of individuals in the name of anti-terrorism than it should not be a double standard.
What would happen if the whole world was able to look at any area and/or spot on the planet in various resolutions and as it currently is (up to date), as well as time lapse sections?
The arguement for invasion of privacy is to prevent wrong doings and identify those pursuing such criminal direction.
So lets apply open source software methodology to the world view of google maps and earth!!!
Lets' identify the fuckers with their war machines and intentions....and when they argue against it, throw them in the prison of total world exposure for being intentional unfair and supporting double standards.
Lets get Google Maps up to speed of being current!
We need it to apply open source software methodology in riding the world of terrorism.
InfoWar (Score:5, Informative)
President Kalam knows all about terrorism - he was a rocket scientist who developed missile technology that puts fear of India's nuclear force into everyone in Asia, and therefore everyone in the world. Nuclear "deterrence" is fear harnessed for geopolitical ends, and therefore terrorism. All militarism is terrorism when used for political control, as it always is.
Terrorism is awful, unacceptable. So is the barbaric destruction terrorists harness, nearly always directed at civilians, either in "total war" or even the orwellian "collateral damage". We're so swamped with terrorism and the rhetoric about it that makes it work that we have to grow up and learn what it really is. The only cure for fear is to dispel the ignorance that lets the fear spread so widely, that lets fear of one threat contribute to control over management of another unrelated one. We have to develop the reactions to people selling fear so we can drop it. That wisdom is the only deterrence to terrorism, which makes it less successful, therefore less likely to be used. As long as terrorists get high ratings, we're doing most of their work for them, and they'll keep pumping out new products, winning, and destroying us. The more we learn to recognize them, the more we'll win. That's how we win "the war on terrorism". It's an infowar that can only be won by winning in our own minds.
I give media execs I'd like to innoculate against terrorism copies of War and Peace in the Global Village [amazon.com]. Marshall McLuhan wrote this peppy little book about how every tech innovation in history was followed by a "new kind of warfare", including global telecommunications. Martin Fiore revised it for _Wired_ to republish, with marginal quotes from James Joyce, updating it for the Internet age. Learning its lessons is like taking a dose of terrorism vaccine. If only _Wired_ were more than tech marketing, they'd rerelease it as a Flash movie, and it would virus its way around the Net, spreading immunity as it went. When we're sophisticated enough to see that happen "spontaneously", we might show signs that we'll win the InfoWar against terrorism.
Forget about the politicians and terrorists! (Score:2, Interesting)
I want to know to whom I complain about the loss of my privacy.
I don't want anyone being able to peep into my backyard (without a legal search warrant etc.)
No one asked me if they could 1) take a snap of my backyard and, 2) display it publicly.
They should have.
Cheers,
Ashley
security through obscurity? (Score:2)
Someone needs to wake them up from their cozy safe little dream.
Funny though, I recall someone saying the white house and pentagon don't appear on teraserver, blocked out or something.
In other news... (Score:2)
An ethical question regarding privacy (Score:2, Insightful)
Maps and Security Paranoia! (Score:2, Interesting)
found a new fscinating component (Score:2, Insightful)
Destroyer (Score:3, Insightful)
It would seem that DHS and similar have created a new golden opportunity for terrorists everywhere.
In the 'old days' terrorists had to mess with dangerous explosives, or if really ambitious, chemical and biological hazards. The old holy grail, dangerous nuclear material was generally out of reach.
Today, they can create just as much terror in government and the civillian population just by thinking up something a terrorist MIGHT think of and promptly mentioning it to appropriate authorities. The kicker is that by taking that approach, they are mostly indistinguishable from 'the good guys' and still accomplish their goal.
Re:Nothing new (Score:2, Informative)
Don't worry folks, GoogleEarth won't change anything soon.
Re:Outdated? (Score:2)
Alternatively we could just kill all fanatics.
Re:Outdated? (Score:2)
Re:Outdated? (Score:2)