Secrets of the City

I’m approving this one because it’s so much doggone fun.

Hey, remember that video of dog that was frolicking in the snow that I posted a few weeks ago? Here he is.

((you could have split it into a post and a comment, with Aaron’s blog link in the comment– but sometimes there should be an exception for the no self-linking rule– and this seems to be a good one. The work in that blog entry is fantastic.))

This is a rare exception to the no self-link rule.

What’s next? Googling and looking into homes and apartments. Hey! There’s my family! Eating dinner!

The internets is creepy.

don’t like, you have no family

lie even.

a buddy and I had breakfast at Good Day Cafe saturday morning and saw a Google camera van at 394 and Xenia . . .

I can see my girlfriend’s car. Seriously.

My hypothetical family. I’m not saying I personally have a family.

My girlfriend’s car is parked outside of my building, so they must’ve come by my place early on a Saturday or Sunday morning.

yes, we get it. YOU HAVE SEX.

The western half of Macalester-Groveland was not done… what’s up with that?

I’m saving myself. Thanks, though.

whoa. max’s link is to my front door. creepy.

I can see my girlfriend’s car. Seriously.

That’s the first thing I looked for: to see if my car was parked on the street outside my apartment building. (It’s not.)

The first thing I checked was that I was not accidentally caught emerging from the Skyway Show Lounge.

Google also has this neat program you can sign up for (Can’t remember the link) – basically, you go to little restaurants, boutiques, etc in the area and get their hours, method of payment, etc and hand them a card. You update Google with this info, and when they receive the verification you get a couple bucks. I’m hoping I get accepted

Fishing

They need to do a nighttime run through the less savory places and call it “Whore View” and “Drug View”

Just imagine, a Google search for “marijuana 55101″ with an exact location.

Authorized Traffic Only… and they tour around anyway.

Napoleon Dynamite at the U of M

That’s too funny.

this is too low-res to get a good look at any of the tanning girls who were out when it drove by. weak.

Wow, they even drove into the cul-de-sac where I live in Eagan. My garage door is open, and my car is in there. My buddy’s pickup is in the driveway, so it must have been a few days after the August 11th storm when he came over with a couple chainsaws to cut up a fallen tree.

WAIT A SECOND! ISN’T THIS SPYING???

There is no expectation of privacy for anything that can be seen from the street.

Authorized Traffic Only… and they tour around anyway. This is at the Mpls Veterans Home. So traffic is not really prohibited.

Just imagine, a Google search for “marijuana 55101″ with an exact location

Um, I think you meant “marijuana 55420″, I think, but can’t say fo’ sho’.

Anyone look for hookers on Lowry in North yet?

There goes my productivity for the rest of the day…

Where are all the people? I haven’t seen any people in any of the images yet. I imagine they remove them digitally?

Also, apparently my dad was home that day. Weird!

Mmm… Saint Paul Farmers’ Market

Most of these look like they were taken very early on weekends. That would be the most useful time for getting unobstructed shots from all angles with little traffic.

I thought the same thing, Josie, but found some – Whew! Made me feel better as it’s a little creepy seeing all of the cars and houses without peeps. A little too Stephen Kingish.

Now showing at the Stone Arch Cinema: Die Hard 4, Knocked Up, Transformers, Harry Potter.

Where you all need to come to eventually before the lease is up in August.

I’m trying this whole new thing of ‘making friends’. Dunno if it will work or not

OMG! Jpavleck. I think my friend lives in the same building.

i’m curious when they drove around?? i wish i could have done something for the camera…

… i looked the usual places for a date (bank signs, the formerly kstp sign above 94) but couldn’t find it.

You’d be surprised at how often I hear that, Cat. Keys Cafe & Camp in the bottom of the place. 9th Street Gallery, Sawatdee coming soon.

Friends will tell me they were in my building to see someone they know etc etc etc. It’s so weird.

Damn, the Limplifter is busy!

why isnt street view visiable to mee. is anyone having a hard time accessing it as well?

Kinda one degree of separation, JP. My friend lives on the 6th floor. I stayed there earlier this year to cat sit. I must say, it’s killer space. Not a lot of stuff around, but at least there are a number of options within walking distance. It’s too bad about Margaux – I really liked that place.

Kal: I was having problems looking at my current address until I realized that my place isn’t included. They have streetview for all of the streets around me, but not me. What a rip off.

none of the link provided in the comments here work for me, niether is San Fran or NYC or any other city. I just don’t have the street view button appearing anywhere.

from aaron’s blog,

“This lead me to wonder, when were all these photos taken? The State Theater is advertising shows for very early August 2007, right after the 35W bridge collapse on August 1st. You can drive under the 35W Bridge and you can actually drive on it too, seeing some of the construction equipment. Heres a shot of the skyline from the bridge with a portable toilet in the foreground. This is probably only days before it collapsed. Rows of news vans line Main Street SE after the collapse.”

There’s something weirdly surreal about this, and the concept in general. These are like a bunch of “before and after” pictures. You see some guy coming out of Sex World — did he get caught on the bridge? Where’d he go? In some other cities, people have spotted fights, people making out, etc. It’s weird because time stopped right then, but we know the ending or something.

Ha, literally one degree Cat, I’m on the 5th

I think this brings up some interesting questions around privacy…

1) when I looked up my dad’s place and scrolled around in a 360-degree view, I saw they captured the kid across the street playing on his lawn. Doesn’t this strike others as a potentially dangerous way for predators to troll for the location of children online in advance of a possible crime?

2) Or how about allowing local businesses to check out if your roof or fence is in disrepair, and then soliciting you via phone knowing full well what your house/fence/yard looks like?

1)Couldn’t you do the same by driving by in your own car?

2)Couldn’t you do the same by driving by in your own car?

1) when I looked up my dad’s place and scrolled around in a 360-degree view, I saw they captured the kid across the street playing on his lawn. Doesn’t this strike others as a potentially dangerous way for predators to troll for the location of children online in advance of a possible crime?

So would just driving around looking for children. Not to mention the predator would have to shift through gigs of photos – which seems like a lot more work then just going to a middle school with a bag of poprocks.

2) Or how about allowing local businesses to check out if your roof or fence is in disrepair, and then soliciting you via phone knowing full well what your house/fence/yard looks like?

Same thing here. It would be far better use of time and money for a business to just blanket an area with advertising rather then hiring people to scour through questionable quality photos.

Really, it seems like you wrote what you did just to be scandalous – you can’t really believe something like this would happen, would you?

The legal test for questions like this comes down to the expectation of privacy. In both of your cases Leigha there is nothing to stop anyone from driving down the street and recording what they see. There is no expection of privacry for things seen from the middle of the street.

Google has made it more convenient to do from home but it would probably be easier for a company looking for work to drive the streets themselves considering the amount of time it takes to scroll down the street.

i don’t get street view at work!!!!

Really, it seems like you wrote what you did just to be scandalous – you can’t really believe something like this would happen, would you?

Yeah, I kinda did write what I did just to be scandalous… it was a feeble attempt at starting a conversation about privacy rather than reading dozens of “I can see my house!” comments.

In all honesty, though, I actually AM a little concerned about #1. It’s far easier (I would think) to case joints on the internet rather than case joints in person, in your car (where you would probably raise suspicion in most tight-knit neighborhoods).

This is a good way to prove that Minneapolis is not a walkable city. No wonder we ranked behind Atlanta at #17 if most walkable cities.

There are hardly any people on any streets. No crowds anywhere, empty sidewalks throughout the city and few people far in between.

Plenty of cars though.

The novelty of this has worn off after about 10 mins. Res is kinda low to make out people and its not like there are any interesting things happening.

May be useful for figuring out directions and navigation, otherwise it becomes about as exciting as walking on the street with poor vision.

Props to google for the idea though.

May be useful for figuring out directions and navigation, otherwise it becomes about as exciting as walking on the street with poor vision.

Welcome to my life, Minneapolis.

when I looked up my dad’s place and scrolled around in a 360-degree view, I saw they captured the kid across the street playing on his lawn. Doesn’t this strike others as a potentially dangerous way for predators to troll for the location of children online in advance of a possible crime?

You have GOT to be fucking kidding me. Lock up your children, here comes google to give them up to the child molesters!

Or maybe, you know, those guys could just google the location of SCHOOLS! OH NO!

Good grief, chicken little – maybe you should ask for a sense of humor for Christmas.

I can’t, I’m too busy asking for paint to keep the I-beams holding the sky up from rusting.

“Doesn’t this strike others as a potentially dangerous way for predators to troll for the location of children online in advance of a possible crime?”

Are you concerned that there’s not a safer way for predators to troll for the location of children online?

See now – that’s why you’re all a-fluster, your arms are tired!

Here’s 20% off from Sherwin-Williams – hope it helps!

kurtis – that was funny.

And to all others – yes, yes, it was a stupid comment and I take it back. I do think that there’s a privacy issue there, but I don’t know how to give it any kind of voice that makes sense. Alas.

IIRC you can ask Google to remove images from Street View if you feel they impinge on your privacy. Ah, here it is.

Leigha and Chicken Little: I must say, that has to be one of the top 5 funniest MNspeak exchanges.

Oh, and Leigha – your #2 – spoken like a true ad exec. Rather than some lame sales mgr. screaming at their sales reps to get on the phones, they’ll now be screaming to get on google streetview.

Also, I figure it might save companies, and me, a lot of headaches since it might help them better qualify their junk mail.

I’m kind of with leigha. As a person who’s obtained signed release forms from the dude whose arm was in the shot while we were shooting an interview for a TV show in a restaurant, I’m curious as to what legality Google is using to show people on street view.

google is not making money off those people’s likenesses like you were. they just happen to be in the way. google’s streetview service does not benefit from people being in the shot, really.

Google theoretically is making money off of advertisers? But I see the difference as you’ve pointed it out.

And let it be known that I personally did not make money of those people’s likenesses. Mommy didn’t get paid enough for that.

The same legality that lets me take a picture of you waiting for a bus.

The general rule in the United States is that anyone may take photographs
of whatever they want when they are in a public place or places where they have permission to take photographs. Absent a specific legal prohibition such as a statute or ordinance, you are legally entitled to take photographs. Examples of places that are traditionally considered public are streets, sidewalks, and public parks. Property owners may legally prohibit photography on their premises but have no right to prohibit others
from photographing their property from other locations.

Members of the public have a very limited scope of privacy rights when
they are in public places. Basically, anyone can be photographed without
their consent except when they have secluded themselves in places where
they have a reasonable expectation of privacy such as dressing rooms, restrooms, medical facilities, and inside their homes.

Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully from public places:
accident and fire scenes
children
celebrities
bridges and other infrastructure
residential and commercial buildings
industrial facilities and public utilities
transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
Superfund sites
criminal activities
law enforcement officers

From The Photographer’s Rights, I carry a copy with me at all times

New pavement.

Great news! Can’t wait to see the interesting Google Street View “finds” that will be surfacing via this guys page with close to 1000 Google Street View finds:

http://streetviewgallery.corank.com

They may not make money off of people images directly, but as usership grows, so does the desirability for advertising dollars.

If people are constantly looking at a specific image… the pre-collapsed 35W bridge, it’s very likely that in the future an advertiser could buy an ad position within the map or on the page.

So would just driving around looking for children. Not to mention the predator would have to shift through gigs of photos – which seems like a lot more work then just going to a middle school with a bag of poprocks.

I prefer a lifesaver on a string.

Dang! I owe Josie a coke.

That is a whole lot of information about public photography I did not know. I’m assuming that applies to the publishing of the photos as well, not simply the act of taking them…?

one more reason to drink coffee naked in my front window on weekend mornings.

Publishing photos is a lot different, you have more rights there – sort of. When it comes to publishing, if it’s called art it is protected, and you’re also protected when it comes to editorialized photography – such as for newspapers.
If you charge a fee for the use of the photograph (barring it’s not as art) then you require a signed release form.

Legal or not, JP. It’s kinda creepy. And really, unless the person taking the photo becomes supa famous, how does anyone really know where their likeness will show up?

This is why you never, ever let anyone take a naked picture of you.

Dang! I owe Josie a coke.

No you do not. Posts must be time-stamped at the same time. Yours were not. Therefore you do not owe any Cokes and there will be no recounting of who officialy owes who a Coke.

(gavel)

New Sidewalk!

Well, Kevs. I’ll accept your verdict as you are the Coke Owing Official.

The’s so true Cat – and in fact Flickr adds to all this as well. There’s an option to license your photos under Creative Commons – and depending on which version you choose it could mean free for anyone to use anyway they want. There’s been a few court cases about this, companies using pictures from Flickr in their adverts – and not always flattering either. But people don’t really understand what they’re doing when they grant such rights.

So yeah, it’s totally creepy, but it’s one of those things that you take a gamble with when you go outside. But you also take a gamble you won’t get shot, or that you’ll miss Ed McMahon and his prize patrol, or that you’ll get torn to shreds by Velociraptor Jesus.

This is why you never, ever let anyone take a naked picture of you.

I wish you would have told us that before last night’s get-together at the 331! Tara! delete those photos!

Street performers in the French Quarter always demand money to have their photos taken. They’re quite aggressive. They’re also totally wrong. They can ASK for money, and it’s polite to give it to them, but the moment they began performing in a public space they consented to be photographed.

But, then, a good percentage of French Quarter street performers were wigged out crackheads, so there didn’t seem to be much point explaining the subtleties of law to them.

I know, JP. The Velociraptor Jesus was just taken off of the endangered list. We must always leave our homes with great care that we are not swooped up.

This is a perfect example of the good and bad of technology. The one thing about it that’s weird is the dreamlike transitions when your moving down the street. Makes my eyes kinda freak.

Didn’t Leagha mention being in an ad for the Guthrie in a picture of her standing in a restaurant or something? That would seem like the kind of thing you need permission for.

gawd, this thread is torturing me. I can’t download the proper media device to view Google street @ work, so I have to wait like 6 more hours to check it all out.

Awww, thanks Cat. I like to keep it light.

And yep, Kevin, I did indeed end up in an ad for the Guthrie. Good memory.

Creative Commons has not been brought into US courts yet, but it is a great system of guidelines for future copyright systems. BTW, I steal s4xton’s photos all the time.

FYI, Google Mobile Maps Beta is out as well, for several weeks now. It uses cell tower triangulation (or something similar) to give a general idea of your location. It’s not as precise as GPS, but most cellphones don’t currently have GPS. This beta actually works with both, but for some reason, doesn’t want to work with my new handset.

Doesn’t work with mine either – anyone in TC that does have it work, let me know your phone model/OS.

Google Mobile Maps new My Location thingie doesn’t work with 3G yet. So lots of us ATT folk are out of luck.

But when do we get streetview on mobile?

No go on my Pearl, either

T-mobile v4.2.1.107

At least I think that’s what mine is running.

Ah! My neighbor is in the picture of my house. And her dog which I’m scared of.

Nevermind, got it to work. It puts me on the wrong side of 100, but that’s still cool. I’m not going to use it for navigation purposes anyhow.

Creative Commons has not been brought into US courts yet, but it is a great system of guidelines for future copyright systems. BTW, I steal s4xton’s photos all the time.

You’re not stealing. You have permission to use them. Everyone has permission to use them.

Per the license I chose though, if you’re using them for commercial purposes, you are stealing.

I totally used this to get the name of that paint store by my work that I couldn’t remember the name of.

Leg work done without leaving my chair! Very nice!

I totally used this to get the name of that paint store by my work that I couldn’t remember the name of.

Leg work done without leaving my chair! Very nice!

So if I post them on my blog, and have google adcents, is that technically commercializing your work? Not that I have done this, but it brings up a weird gray area. (kinda like DeRusha in stripper boots)

This whole Google Mobile Maps “my location” feature not work thingy, has reminded me that I’m still pissed at Sprint for having included an internal GPS antenna in my phone, but saw it fit not to enable it until Rev. A. is unleashed. Oh well, whatevs.

If you do have GPS on your handset, I would suggest you check out Socialight.com. Social location based tagging is the new way I can stalk my enemies, and leave them notes.

The Bible as seen by Google Earth.

So if I post them on my blog, and have google adcents, is that technically commercializing your work? Not that I have done this, but it brings up a weird gray area. (kinda like DeRusha in stripper boots)

Technically, yes. Yeah, it’s a grey area. When people have good intentions and/or they’re my friends I don’t try to strictly enforce the Creative Commons license and it doesn’t usually make any sense to do so. If it’s Time Magazine trying to use my photos for free, that’s different.

Oooh I found my car! They must have taken the pictures of Summit Ave on a Sunday because my car is right in front of my church.

They didn’t cover either of my streets. I guess that’s a good thing, but it would have been cool.