Update on DC aerial image censorship

Just want to add that to view Area 51 in Google Maps you have to pick
the "Satellite" view. (The "Maps" view doesn't show anything since the
roads there aren't on maps.)

"Jufi" writes:






What I thought was surprising was that anyone offering those aerial photo
galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to gray-out the White
House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those locations a secret? Is there
anyone the planet who doesn't know where they are? I honestly don't care,
but I find things like this just really, really strange.


A) Never underestimate the current Administration's quest for secrecy.

B) In at least one case, there's widespread speculation about an alleged
SAM battery in place on a rooftop.

But I think it spoils all the fun to un-obscure the buildings; used to be
you could look for such, easily find some place so SekRet it was hidden,
and then start looking up what went on there.

ps: Is that AFBase outside Denver still missing? The one with acres of
dishes for Milstar, etc.
--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

Charles Packer wrote:
Vice President Cheney has "had his house removed from
Google Earth." Thus said Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show,"
according to my wife. So I invoked Google Earth and
lo, all of the grounds of the Naval Observatory -- where
his house is -- is displayed at a much lower resolution
by means of much larger pixels; at least 10X larger,
my eyeballs tell me.

But that's not all. In another surprise, the White House
and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
their roofs.

But if you want to see Cheney's lawn at full resolution,
just use MapQuest in aerial image mode. All three of the
DC locations are at full resolution. However -- this is
really odd -- the Treasury building (next door to the White
House) has been obliterated by a seemingly misplaced image
which is a copy of one immediately to the southwest.

--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org

One should assume that those images that are obscured are obscured for a
purpose. Most likely there are rooftop installations of a national
defense nature, and I strongly agree that they should not be made
available to potential terrorists.

GoogleEarth, and similar facilities are a serious security concern, both
to the governments of the world, and to many individuals who feel they
have reached a state of the art that seriously compromises personal, and
national safety.

Jufi wrote:

"Charles Packer" wrote in message
...

But that's not all. In another surprise, the White House
and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
their roofs.

What I thought was surprising was that anyone offering those aerial
photo galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to gray-out
the White House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those locations a
secret? Is there anyone the planet who doesn't know where they are? I
honestly don't care, but I find things like this just really, really
strange.

Strange? Why?
Your address may be listed in the phone book, but they don't include the
security code to your alarm system, or what kind of locks you have, or
how many security guards you have on duty at your estate. With the
resolution available in some areas, such information can be extracted
from the images.
Thieves no longer have to cruise a neighborhood to 'case' it, they can
just do it online with Google Streetview!

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2008-03-03 09:42:16 -0800, "Jufi" said:


"Charles Packer" wrote in message
...

But

that's not all. In another surprise, the White House
and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
their roofs.

What I thought was surprising was that anyone offering those aerial
photo galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to
gray-out the White House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those
locations a secret? Is there anyone the planet who doesn't know where
they are? I honestly don't care, but I find things like this just
really, really strange.

Ostensibly it is to keep you from seeing certain security measures. The
White House image now looks sharp, but it has been 'cleaned' by the
Secret Service. Google has been known to cooperate with some other
governments in removing certain objects from Google Maps.

I doubt things will change under a new administration. What the Secret
Service says, goes, no matter how idiotic a President might think it is.
FDR used to go out of his way to antagonize his agents, making them run
after his wheelchair, and JFK made a point of never carrying cash,
mooching off his agents, but that is about as much as a President is
allowed to protest. Probably by the time the Secret Service is done
briefing a new President on all the people who want to kill him (or her,
if it is Hillary) the poor individual is probably as paranoid as they come.

Not a job a normal person would want, for sure.

In Hilary's case, her firs term would probably be up before the briefing
ended.....

Ron Hunter wrote:
Charles Packer wrote:
Vice President Cheney has "had his house removed from
Google Earth." Thus said Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show,"
according to my wife. So I invoked Google Earth and
lo, all of the grounds of the Naval Observatory -- where
his house is -- is displayed at a much lower resolution
by means of much larger pixels; at least 10X larger,
my eyeballs tell me.

But that's not all. In another surprise, the White House
and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
their roofs.

But if you want to see Cheney's lawn at full resolution,
just use MapQuest in aerial image mode. All three of the
DC locations are at full resolution. However -- this is
really odd -- the Treasury building (next door to the White
House) has been obliterated by a seemingly misplaced image
which is a copy of one immediately to the southwest.

--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org

One should assume that those images that are obscured are obscured for a
purpose.

A stupid assumption.

Most likely there are rooftop installations of a national
defense nature, and I strongly agree that they should not be made
available to potential terrorists.

Oooo! We're all SO scared of the bogeyman that we'll give up freedom,
safety, money, and privacy.

Coward.

--
Ray Fischer

If a Google Earth aerial photo needs to be "scrubbed" then there's a
huge vulnerability that allowed it to be taken in the first place

It's just about impossible to prevent these kinds of photos from being
taken. Banning planes from flying over the buildings doesn't help
because a plane doesn't have to be directly overhead to take an aerial
photo. And even if you make it a no-fly zone for miles around, there
are still satellite photos which can have a surprisingly good
resolution.

Anonymous writes:


Utter nonsense. What security experts call "security theaters". Great
movie plot material (and obviously derived from over exposure to the
same), but useless in any practical context outside the entertainment
industry.

If a Google Earth aerial photo needs to be "scrubbed" then there's a
huge vulnerability that allowed it to be taken in the first place.

We can just shoot down all the SPOT and other foreign birds that
go by.

ps: Where do people think Google/MSN/etc buy their images from?

--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

wrote:
If a Google Earth aerial photo needs to be "scrubbed" then there's a
huge vulnerability that allowed it to be taken in the first place

It's just about impossible to prevent these kinds of photos from being
taken. Banning planes from flying over the buildings doesn't help
because a plane doesn't have to be directly overhead to take an aerial
photo. And even if you make it a no-fly zone for miles around, there
are still satellite photos which can have a surprisingly good
resolution.



shhhh... somebody may believe you, they'll go wake up Cheney to tell
him all about it, and he'll **** in his knickers before he gets out of bed.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'

Ron Hunter wrote:
Jufi wrote:

"Charles Packer" wrote in message
...

But that's not all. In another surprise, the White House
and Capitol are now rendered at full resolution, unlike
in 2004, the last time I checked (and posted here about
it). At that time, they were either pixelated or had
strange blank colored rectangles overlying parts of
their roofs.

What I thought was surprising was that anyone offering those aerial
photo galleries would either feel the need to, or be forced to
gray-out the White House, Capitol, or anything else. Are those
locations a secret? Is there anyone the planet who doesn't know where
they are? I honestly don't care, but I find things like this just
really, really strange.

Strange? Why?
Your address may be listed in the phone book, but they don't include the
security code to your alarm system, or what kind of locks you have, or
how many security guards you have on duty at your estate. With the
resolution available in some areas, such information can be extracted
from the images.
Thieves no longer have to cruise a neighborhood to 'case' it, they can
just do it online with Google Streetview!


I had my house's image fogged because I didn't want Cheney watching me
watching him.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'