The moment I heard of street view, I thought to myself, "Street views will be nice, but how are they going to compute people out to make pristine shots?"

Now I find out it's used to invade privacy in residential areas? Changing the world into a neighbourhood watch is not an excuse, the next thing will be guns in a glass boxes with "Break in case of local crime" written on the bottom in every house with internet access?

On the other side of the equation, I'm not for restricting Street view from public venues, privacy should not extend beyond the boundaries of your home or castle. It looks like it's moving in the opposite though. Sorry but that smells of dictatorial territorial gang and mob mentality.

I applaud the people reserving their privacy, unfortunately judgemental people are seeking more material which to classify people with and it ends up being the private people and their privacy. They want to push a classification agenda on them.

Question: After they have accumulated the private classification data, if that is a good thing you are doing why not show yourself and tell everybody who you are, or is THAT private? :^P

According to 1890 Brokhaus and Efron's Dictionary of Japanese internet jargon, kamikaze is a person who with his crazy speed drives into somebodys ignore list

Dear S2go,

Do you even know what kamikaze means? Was that meant as an insult of some sort? Hard to tell... Either way, I am not Japanese, just someone who is a bit more exposed to intercultural issues.

Also, the fact that a phrase appeared four or five times (yes, I did a search) on a website notorious for under-edited articles (no offence, Inq!) is not a testament to its level of social acceptance or propriety.

Japs, Aussies, Russkies are usual vulgarisms acceptable in such discussions. It is OK even on Inq main articles, make a search yourself, you little kamikaze:

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/190/1025190/japanese-invent-lcd-melts-per

Seriously, the only difference between what Google's doing and what thousands of tourists do every year is that it's attached to a search engine. What next? Perhaps photograph police who stop and question ever person taking a photo in a public place and take their details so that they can make sure they don't post it on the 'net? Or maybe you'll have to wear blinders while walking in a public place.

Google aren't monitoring the actions of individuals. They're not following you around and watching you, they're simply taking a photo of places so that anyone can enjoy being there without going.

The other day, I wondered "what's the name of that Thai restaurant on King st"(Newtown, Sydney, Australia...) There are literally dozens of Thai restaurants on King st, so I could've spent ages searching the phone book, or I spent 1 minute searching with streetview.

If Japan doesn't want their public photographed, they should enact actual laws prohibiting it, not general laws that are meant to stop actual crimes. The word should be spread, anyone who takes public photos in Japan should post them with detailed descriptions.

I was considering going to Japan next year for a holiday, but instead I think I'll save my money and take a trip there on streetview.

Dear S2go, you may be interested to know that the term "Jap" is considered ethnic slur in most English-speaking countries. I hope your choice of words is simply due to your ignorance!

Some of the folks wondering why Japanese are so sensitive about this need to take a stroll down a street in a residential area in Japan. Americans with their big front yards will be shocked to find that the average Japanese family house has no yard at all to speak of, let alone a front yard with a driveway. Doors open pretty much right onto the steets and windows are generally also awfully close. The Google-car with its (go)ogle-cam driving around in residential areas will quite easily capture detailed photos of the insides of people's homes.

There are reasons why Japan wants to be so GD private with their faces!

1. That is because they live in a very non liberal country where things are very strict. And a lot of them probably do a lot of stupid stuff esp that Japanese lawyer in the article. They simply do not want to get cought by public coz they do something elligal! LOL! That is for you!

2. They cannot pull the C out of their A's.

Google is jsut trying to make things easier for people how to have fun in life! Thanks Google! Love you!!!!! Mwahh!

I'm so glad that Google is helping the world make some more progress, when the rest of other companies want to move at a snail pace, afraid of lawsuits, etc.. It shows that Google has two well-developed balls of assertiveness.

My recommendation for Google is to simply blur out all the people more completely so that we cannot even tell the color of the hair on their heads. Heck, to play it safe, all the vehicles should also be blurred out. If google can pay for a guy $5/hour to drive on the streets photographing stuff, google could also pay for a 3-4 other guys to ride with the driver, so that they can quickly blur out all the sensitive material in the pictures before they are exported into the database or something like that. Or they could do post-editing, which is sadly more boring in on a desk in the dreary office room.

Then Japan would have a much harder case against Google. If they want more privacy for their homes, they should put up a wall around their front yard, blocking it from the public streets. If a person is allowed to drive on a public street, it seems logical that a person is allowed to take snapshots of whatever is publicly available for viewing, and to upload their own pictures on Facebook or myspace. At least Google could do it the "safe" way, completely blurring out people and vehicles. As long as people seen in the windows of their homes are blurred, houses on public streets are just too stationary and available for public viewing that it is hardly an "invasion" to privacy---unless the street has restricted access for residents only. Sometimes, the common sense is so obvious that it's plain frustrating having to point the obvious.

"What is the difference between me walking in front of your house and taking a picture of you in your front yard, then, posting it on the net?" No difference; I don't want you doing that, either. Some people still believe what's done on private property should remain private (as long as it's legal) - the photos that Google or you or anyone else put on the 'net are an invasion of that privacy.

Adding to the message of ssj4. I do not care what Japs want to do with their country, it does not bother me at all as long as they do not expand beyond their island. But what bothers me every day I open the Inq (almost to the extent as if someone made a poop in public place and you've got in it) is that Inq keeps publishing mental nonsense of drashek. The rights, privacy, freedom of speech are great. But as soon as here appear one more drashek The Inq will die.

that they are a small minority when compared to the rest of the world......perhaps they'll understand when they are forced to learn mandarin to be able to communicate with their new bosses.

If we don't want it we don't have to have it.

they AREN'T keeping a "comprehensive record of everything you & your neighbors" do. They aren't showing live videos, they're just showing a few pics. So it IS same as you posting a blog entry about someone buying a cheese.

"And are you going to tell me that you can't identify people you know in photos with their faces blurred out?"
Yes you can identify, but only people you know. And since you already know them why will they want to hide a blurred photo of theirs from you?

@the INQ: Whenever I post a comment, I see "your comment will be posted if approved..." So what the heck are moderators doing? How do drashek's comments get published? Or are the moderators just some bots designed to click on "allow"??????

There ALL New Look, that takes other drresses out of 3D Picture, So You See, Primarily only According to the Google Earth blog, the company has updated the 3D buildings for New York City andwie the results are rather impressive. ste
site You Choose:
Say your in middle of crowd, Google, if you where building in Manhatten, strip away surronding Bodies & add exact fill for remaining image from other shots in memory so you would stand alone, crowd blocking you having become invisible, So nips need not fear, precious view can be scrubed & merely site of inquest noticed easily & that is being implemented Today.STe Drashek

I find the Street View very useful for trip planning to an unfamiliar location.
If folks are concerned about anyone seeing them in PUBLIC, then they merely need to stop by their neighborhood BERKA shop and pick up one for use in PUBLIC.
What a weird bunch of people.

We need to make the same efforts in the US. Street View is clearly an unwarranted invasion of privacy. To respond to Mapper99...

Firstly, that faces are blurred is nice but insufficient. The properties themselves should also be blurred, as well as any vehicles parked around. And are you going to tell me that you can't identify people you know in photos with their faces blurred out?

The difference between street view and you photographing my house and posting it on the net is one of scaling and databases.

As an example of the same sort of problem, if I spot you buying cheese at the store and post a blog entry to that effect, your privacy has certainly been invaded, but the invasion is so slight that you probably don't (and shouldn't) care.

If, however, I keep a comprehensive record of everything you & your neighbors buy (even if I scrub out everyone's names), then this information can be used to harm you. Look at how some supermarkets (Safeway, for example)use the purchasing histories they gather from their "club card" holders -- they have used the information to smear the reputation of people they've been involved in litigation with.

The big picture: accumulating every bit of technically public information about into one spot and providing an easy index into the information is an invasion of privacy just as great as installing CCTV cameras in every room in your house, because the amount learned about you is nearly the same. Street view is just one more piece in this privacy disaster. And a big piece it is.

Google is violating it's "dont' be evil" maxim with street view. But their definition of "evil" has grown frighteningly soft over the last few years, so it's not a surprise. All of which is why I don't use any google products outside of search, which has no serious competition (but as soon as a non-MS competitor emerges, I'll be there.)

I don't know why some people are so obssed about street view, is the same as someone going at the place and use their own eyes. They already blur peoples faces on the photos and, for me, that's pretty much enough. Street view is much better than the satellite view, because I don't have a plane or helicopter and seeing the the roof don't help that much when I don't know the place. I can't wait to google provide this service for my city.

Japan is, like Sweden, not a wholly owned subsidiary of the United States of America, Mapper. E.g. different laws apply.

What is the difference between me walking in front of your house and taking a picture of you in your front yard, then, posting it on the net? I think Google is well within theirs means to do this. Besides, faces are blurred!

http://streetviewgallery.corank.com

Japanese are on the ball with this one.
They have every right to keep their privacy.
Google can't just go anywhere they please and take photos of peoples lives and houses.

This is just a first step in googles invasion of privacy, what will they do in the future?

Street View is totally unnecessary