Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google's Streetview Seen As Culturally Insensitive In Japan

Posted by timothy on from the so-don't-look dept.

Jim O'Connell writes "Global Voices has a translation of an excellent open letter to Google by Osamu Higuchi, explaining that Street view is too invasive for Japanese traditional values when used in residential areas. Having lived here for ten years, most recently in an older residential area, I can attest to its accuracy — Living in such close proximity to your neighbors, it becomes necessary to 'not look' at everything that you might be able see from a place such as the street, where you may have a legal right to be. The cultural boundaries are simply different than those of the US."

3 of 524 comments (clear)

  1. It's called having a place to put a fence. by shoemilk · · Score: 4, Informative

    You appropriately got modded down, but I thought maybe some one should explain to you, not everywhere has the same geography/city layout. Before you ignorantly posted this, you might have wanted to experience Japan by at least looking through streetview and you would realize what you suggest is near impossible for a large percentage of the population. There are very beautiful houses with immaculate gardens that are surrounded by walls and then there are apartment builds or duplexes built on top of each other and almost nothing in between.

  2. Re:You conveniently ommitting... by martin-boundary · · Score: 5, Informative

    The fact that Google settled those suits, for the most part.

    There, I fixed it for ya.

  3. The land of the free (as in beer). by arth1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    For the RECORD, I would have to say that AMERICAN VALUES (which anybody can have regardless of nationality, race, gender, etc.) is STRONGLY supportive of both privacy and anonymity

    Being an American who originally came from Europe, I "STRONGLY" disagree.

    Here in the US, people never ask permission before taking a picture that you might be on, for example. If you're in the public, you're expected to suck it up. If you don't want your picture taken, you have to stay at home.

    Then there's newspapers publishing the name and pictures of crime suspects. Which quite often costs people their job and friends -- even if they are later found "not guilty". In other countries, where privacy is valued higher, this is a big NO.

    Then there are the ubiquitous closed circuit cameras in pretty much every store. Even in the goddarn dressing rooms!

    Oh, and try to rent a hotel room with cash, without showing a driver's license. Nope, they want your private information, so they can sell it to the highest bidder. Cause there are no privacy rights.

    And let me not get started on direct advertising. Wonder why you get all the ads in your own name? Because everyone you trade with will happily sell your personal details. Not only name and address, but what you've been buying or which services you've used, so you can get targeted for maximum effect. Take your dog to the vet, and a month later, you get ads for dog food dumping into your mail box. Subscribe to a magazine, and you suddenly get eight different catalogs in the mail with the same misspelling as the magazine.

    Here in the US, privacy is a commodity, not a right. I can think of few, if any countries I have lived in that had less privacy rights. Certainly not any of the European countries.