the thin end of a VERY large wedge, I suspect.
More "blanks" to follow, no doubt.
I CAN see their point, however.
The worry is, where will this all end.
Give them an inch, etc.
Paranoia level 4.5 and rising.
The US defence department has banned Google from capturing images of military facilities for its entertaining Street View facility on Google Maps following the shock discovery of intimate pics of Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, Texas. It said in a statement that the offending snaps included "360-degree views of the covered …
In many countries, photographing a military or police building will get you arrested.
Although, I hoped that we were 'better' and more civilised than that. Banning google from having such a photo is not going to make the [US] nation a safer place. It's just more pathetic and wasteful paranoia.
But these are the boys who think looking over the shoulder of everyone else is their mission in life. Tap a wire and email here, (get-)Real ID card there, rendition everywhere. For people who want pictures and assorted biometrics for everybody, they get a little too touchy when you go around showing pictures of a simple street. Turnabout is fair play as far as I'm concerned.
Paris because she is smarter than most Department of Homeboy Security types.
is obviously the (tinfoil hat)/(black helicopter) ratio in the area concerned.
so the more tinfoil hats per black helicopter in a given area, the higher the paranoia levels. the US has lots of black helicopters, but also a lot of paranoid people, probably comes to about ten.
tinfoil hat donned.
Few years ago, I flew off Taif precipice in a Saudi airforce chopper to take photos for the mayor of Taif.
The airman said to me, please don't photographe the F16's.
Ok says me -at the time - the saudis were vehemently denying that the american military were present in saudi - course they were I used to drink Jack Daniels with the strike teams.
Anyhow, a couple of days ago -I used Google maps (not even google earth) to check out the old haunts.
Lo and behold, the F16 bunkers were clearly visible in considerable detail, plus 4 other bases that i know of which are 'officially not there'.
Does the Israeli Airforce know?
Of course, they used to fly touch and go on the northern base airfield in Tabuk to annoy the Saudis.
By the way, maps are old -Concorde is still sitting on the south eastern side of Heathrow airport; by the cargo depot.
Have you driven along the A30/Southern Perimeter Road recently?
Concorde is quite often visible along there in various locations.
Oh, yeah, the story. Well if it makes them feel safer that people can't see their access control points etc without actually going there.....No major inconvenience for anyone planning any sort of breach of their defenses though I'm sure.
Why don't they instead, build dummy access control points etc and use Google's mapping to misinform potential security threats? Or insist that Google use falsified images supplied by them?
when saying "but terrorists could use that information" will get you not only laughed out of an office, but carried out by using large objects inserted into uncomfortable orifices.
Of course, countries and governments will continue to have their secrets. Like officially-not-there Air Force bases, and officially-did-not-happen incursions into other countries. I see these secrets the same as defending a trade mark: if you don't defend them, then you cannot deny usage.
Paris, because you simply cannot deny usage.
But I thought that "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear"... Please, help me: I'm getting confused as to which propaganda I should be believing.
Seriously though, if the military is concerned that a simple street view might provide an advantage to a hostile party, then perhaps we should all be concerned with the carelessness of said military to expose sensitive data to the public at large.
On a lighter note, blacking out images is a perfect illustration of "security through obscurity".
I don't know if it's still the case, but I recollect that the Royal Ordnance factories never appeared on British OS maps.
That wasn't so bad, but now the terrorists just need to check out which areas have been blanked off and they've got a list of potential targets because the US gov will presumably put all their secure establishments in the blank category.
Just how many U.S. military bases have been attacked by terrorist, or anyone for that matter, inside the continental boundaries again? It's pure ignorance to think that anyone, much less a well organized terrorist organization would want to attack a very secure military installation and even if they were inclined to do so, that they would need pictures from google to pull it off. Seeing as the google van just "drove by" and snapped these pictures, I don't see any reason why someone else couldn't do the same, less conspicuously even... Question the real motivations behind this censorship of public domain.
There is an old story about a US school clas that was doing a project on creating maps from aerial photographs.
They approached the USAF for aerial photos of their local area, and were duly sent a stack - but with a large chunk missing.
On enquiring why, they were told that they couldn't have them, as it was a military base, and secret.
So they wrote to the Russian Embassy - who promptly sent photos of the missing area.
Probably taken by black Sikorskys.
It's always easy to make fun of Americans. However, a couple of things to consider. Many intelligence services are very fond of finding all sorts of public information about American military bases. They save a lot of money on having to find it the hard way. Pictures or military installations for free is just the icing on the cake. We can make fun of the paranoid behavior, but hey, as pointed out, most countries don't allow pictures to be taken of their military installations. Please, make fun of China or Russia not allowing pictures of their military complexes ;)
You'd be surprised at how lax security is on many military bases in the US. In particular, I learned growing up that Air Force bases are pretty bad. I'm sure there's a number of reasons that will ostensibly piss off some of my AF chums for saying so, but the short of it is that too many of the guards at the gates are young and haven't had the idealism beat out of them, so they have plenty of other things on their minds and often don't mind "bending" the rules.
Paris, because she doesn't seem to mind "bending."
The average gate gaurd is bottom rung, and gets paid (according to the latest charts) $1347-$1789 (£669-£888) per MONTH.
They normally work 8-12 hour ROTATING shifts, (Seven days 0000-1200, two days off, seven days 1200-2400, two days off, seven days 0800-2000, two days off, then four more days 0800-2000, four days off is an actual schedule for a military school.)
The military does not pay overtime. Ever. For any reason.
The other month when the Reg went looking for Black Helecopters really opened my eyes. I would just naturally have thought they would have had google clean those up, possibly as far as pasting fields and trees over the areas. But then it might be difficult to get an Internet server to alter it's content. In which case you simply reprogram the worlds routers to point to a dummy server. As may have happened to YouTube the other day.
<<Obviously it should be the "Chertoff", where one Chertoff is equal to the increase in paranoia felt by the average American during one press conference by the Secretary of Homeland Security.>>
This might have been true a few years ago but not a "Chertoff" is a joke that relies on misinformed ideas. This is also known as a clueless joke.
Stop Chertoffing is now a common phase heard in middle america.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020