Slashdot Mirror
Google Using Pre-Katrina Imagery on Google Maps
Thirdsin writes "CNN reports that images of lands devastated by Hurricane Katrina have been replaced on Google's map service with pre-Hurricane Katrina imagery. Now a subcommittee from The House Committee on Science and Technology has asked CEO Eric Schmidt for Google's motivation behind the
imagery switch. '[Congressional subcommittee chair Brad] Miller asked Google to brief his staff by April 6 on who made the decision to replace the imagery with pre-Katrina images, and to disclose if Google was contacted by the city, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. Geological Survey or any other government entity about changing the imagery. "To use older, pre-Katrina imagery when more recent images are available without some explanation as to why appears to be fundamentally dishonest," Miller said.' It is worth pointing out that images from Google Earth have not been changed."
Are you kidding? Our Congress is investigating why google has made a change in its maps? And they're fishing for someone to start a political brawl with?
Don't we have... I don't know, something related to government services that they should be doing? Or, if it's going to be related to business, related to business that has a significant impact on consumers? Or poverty? Or taxes? Or services? Or the debt? We (as a nation) have a nine trillion dollar credit card debt, and we're worried about whether google's mapping decision was something we can get into a political scuffle about?
"but I'd be willing to bet it was simply decided based on quality/resolution of images, and some underling working on it didn't really think about the fact that it the imagery in question is significantly different from how it looks now."
...
I'd like to take you up on your bet.
If google regularly revises its images on google maps, sometimes rolling them back in time for reasons of quality or resolution, I'd believe it. I doubt that any American would mistakenly upload old images of New Orleans, no matter their seniority or expertise, given what a giant story Katrina was. If it was a simple underling's error, why hasn't it been rolled back yet?
One factor you are ignoring is that by using old images, they have made their maps less accurate. The idea of a map is that you know where you are and what the things around you look like. Imagine they had access to super hi-rez satellite images from the 1980s. Should they use them? They *do* have higher resolution
Of course not! Lots has changed and been built in the US since the 1980s. You would just be creating a very hi-rez, inaccurate map. Who needs that? Who cares if you have higher-rez images of the past? You don't want them on a current map.
The fact is that the fallout from Katrina, and the fact that very little has improved two years later, is a serious blight on America's image as a first-world-nation. You expect this kind of thing in Africa or South America. I don't have any evidence for my particular interpretation, but you certainly don't have any for yours.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
"Why should my tax dollars go to people who have chosen to live in disaster-prone areas?"
You're failing to look at the big picture. The reason is because New Orleans is one of the busiest ports in the world. All of the goods we send down the Mississippi river enter the ocean through the port of New Orleans. Of course, the port is more than just long docks and loading cranes. Part of the infrastructure of the port are the human workers who actually make the thing go. All of the people who live in New Orleans provide the human infrastructure to keep the port running. That's the reason they live there -- the port needs human laborers to keep the cargo coming in. Those human laborers need places to sleep at night, places to eat, places to buy groceries from, etc. You get the idea.
The problem with ports is that they have to be on the water. We can't build ports in the middle of Montana so that they will be safe from hurricanes. Ports, which hopefully I don't need to explain are a vital part of our infrastructure, will periodically be threatened by flooding and hurricanes. As a society, we have to band together to create massive projects such as ports so we can import our morning coffee from South America and send our DVDs to Europe. You won't personally be conscripted to work on the port itself, like in the pyramid-building days of ancient Egypt, but you will have to pitch in some money in the form of taxes. Or, we could just let our ports be destroyed, one by one, after each flood or hurricane. We don't really *need* bananas from Brazil, or rice from China. But I don't think you'll find much to eat in the middle of your desert.
As a society, we did fuck up the New Orleans situation. We had a horrifically inadequate levy system. Politicians at all levels failed to bring them up to par for decades. As a society, we didn't plan ahead to protect our infrastructure, and now we are paying for it.
I do agree that if people are taking risks, such as building million-dollar beachfront homes in California or Florida, we don't need to subsidize them through taxes. However, we do need a port on the mouth of the Mississippi, and we need to make sure that that port will be manned no matter what natural disasters threaten it.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
I don't guess but am pretty sure you missed the reason for concern in the original article.
Becoming dependent on a commercial entity for providing you with data important for the ability of your democraticaly chosen government to take decisions is extremely dangerous.
When you on occasion not like the actions of your elected officials you would take corrective action at the next election, something you can't do with a Google.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
By not taking the curvature of the earth into account with these directions, they have made your swim much longer than it needs to be
Indeed. Noting this, [Congressional subcommittee chair Brad] Miller was quoted as saying, "To use a straight line path across the map when greater circular paths are shorter without some explanation as to why appears to be fundamentally dishonest."