Slashdot Mirror


Google Earth To Show Ocean Floor

f1vlad writes "Google is expected to announce the addition of ocean floor imagery to its Google Earth project, which will complete digital representation of our planet. 'The existing site, to which an estimated 400 million people have had access, already includes three-dimensional representations of large cities around the world and includes images from street-level and aerial photography covering thousands of miles across Britain and elsewhere. The new additions to the website are expected to include views of the ocean, and portions of the seabed. They will also provide detailed environmental data that will enhance information about the effect of climate change on the world's seas and oceans.'"

181 comments

  1. Well, there goes my plan by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anyone want to buy a slightly used underwater marijuana farm?

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Well, there goes my plan by xch13fx · · Score: 5, Funny

      is it in international water? Cuz you could make it a point of interest and have boats come take "tours." Just don't let the Somalians find out.

    2. Re:Well, there goes my plan by wooferhound · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't even worry about my land-based marijuana farm in my hometown
      Google hasn't updated the maps around here for 10 years . . .

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    3. Re:Well, there goes my plan by Tridus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah it's the same here. They can get the ocean floors in, but can't get anything even resembling a recent image of my area.

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    4. Re:Well, there goes my plan by spartacus_prime · · Score: 2, Funny

      I know a certain Olympic swimming who might be in the market.

      --
      If you can read this, it means that I bothered to log in.
    5. Re:Well, there goes my plan by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Plus Emilio Largo is going to have to move his secret operations.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    6. Re:Well, there goes my plan by Chyeld · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Since they just display the most recent imagery that their providers have, the issue isn't with Google but the fact that appearently no one considers your plot of land important enough to actually photograph. If you want an ego boost, find out how much it costs to charter one of the companies providing the aerial photography to do a fly by of your area.

    7. Re:Well, there goes my plan by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's really an excellent starter lair. I'm hoping to sell to a young evil genius couple. Though it's not really ready for world domination, it's probably just fine for country-wide domination. And while it's true that I had to turn the shark tank into a grow bed, everything is still wheelchair-accessible and cat-friendly. The laser cannon still works too, but the power bill is a real bitch if you use it.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    8. Re:Well, there goes my plan by furby076 · · Score: 1

      Picture in front of my place has a hot girl standing there. I love the city.

      On a different aspect - imagine what this will do for scuba divers - especially wreck divers.

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    9. Re:Well, there goes my plan by berend+botje · · Score: 5, Funny

      Even better is that the imagery of my part of the world has regressed! Two years ago the data was quite current. Now, however, the data seems about five years old.

      So what's the deal with that?

    10. Re:Well, there goes my plan by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Of course, Mr. Marijuana farmer might just call up the DEA to see if they have any recent pics. "High value" is a relative term.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    11. Re:Well, there goes my plan by GodKingAmit · · Score: 1

      Link?

    12. Re:Well, there goes my plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since they just display the most recent imagery that their providers have, the issue isn't with Google but the fact that appearently no one considers your plot of land important enough to actually photograph.
      I can still remember seeing the "Michigan College of Mining and Technology" in Houghton.

    13. Re:Well, there goes my plan by DelgadoRandom · · Score: 1

      DEA + X-COM2* = drug sniffing dolphins * see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-COM:_Terror_from_the_Deep

    14. Re:Well, there goes my plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well then buy the images yourself and share with the world you selfish bastard!

    15. Re:Well, there goes my plan by dmsuperman · · Score: 0, Redundant

      You, sir, win 7 internets. I must say I chuckled quite a bit when I read your post.

      --
      :(){ :|:& };: Go!
    16. Re:Well, there goes my plan by ConanG · · Score: 2, Informative

      You make a good point. However, Google Earth now has an option to regress the date of the imagery along a timeline. You click the timeline button, and you can slide it back and forth and see older satellite images along with the date of the photo. My area, although fairly rural, has imagery back to '95 and as recent as '07.

    17. Re:Well, there goes my plan by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I'm going to guess that it isn't going to affect wreck divers at all, as any deep-sea images will probably be artificial, and based on either satellite or sonar readings, which probably don't have the resolution to detect anything like a wreck (or else they would all be found now). I imagine the readings used to image the ocean floor aren't really good for much besides a rough image of the ocean floor to an accuracy of +- 100 meters or so.

    18. Re:Well, there goes my plan by Vortran · · Score: 1

      Uh... I thought Google just launched one or more of their own satellites? Am I mistaken?

      If I am remembering this right and they have their own new satellites, when are we (ever) going to see new/recent imagery? I've been waiting ever since I read (hallucinated?) about Google launching their own satellites. What's up with that, anyway?

      Vortran out

      --
      Knowledge is like ignorance.. too much can be just as bad as not enough.
    19. Re:Well, there goes my plan by treeves · · Score: 1

      Is that you, Michael Phelps?

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    20. Re:Well, there goes my plan by eleuthero · · Score: 1

      There may be something of national importance near you--the area around the Bangor sub base in Washington was at one time fairly well shown but is now a big patch of blur

    21. Re:Well, there goes my plan by Chyeld · · Score: 3, Informative

      Coincidently enough, your answer was published today.

      http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3927935&c=FEA&s=BUS

      Waiting for Profits in Space
      GeoEye Fights Delays With New Imaging Satellite
      By ANTONIE BOESSENKOOL
      Published: 2 February 2009

      Anyone who's used Google Earth has likely seen images from GeoEye, a Dulles, Va., Earth-imaging company. The Internet giant allows users to zoom in from a view of a continent to a car on the street by using images from GeoEye, along with ones from competitor DigitalGlobe, the U.S. Geological Survey and elsewhere.

      GeoEye has used its flagship Ikonos satellite to provide images for Google and the U.S. National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), its biggest customer. But those customers - and investors - have been waiting for GeoEye-1, the company's newest satellite, to become fully operational.

      GeoEye-1 has faced delays from launch to operation, and as a result, the company has been missing out on revenues under a new NGA contract.

      GeoEye-1, a two-story-tall satellite built by a contractor team led by General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems, is the world's highest-resolution commercial Earth-imaging satellite, according to the company. The first image the satellite took was of Kutztown University in Pennsylvania; a tennis player is visible about to serve the ball.

      GeoEye-1's launch, originally planned for the first quarter of 2007, finally took place last Sept. 6. Work went slower than planned, then the launch was bumped to allow Boeing Launch Services to give priority to a U.S. government launch. Once in orbit, the satellite suffered from delays in calibrating its accuracy and testing its software. The process, which normally takes up to three months, has lasted five so far, according to GeoEye spokes-man Mark Brender.

      GeoEye has told investors for several months that the company is nearing the end of this phase. Matt O'Connell, the company's president and chief executive, said the GeoEye-1 satellite should be fully operational at least by the end of the first quarter of 2009, though GeoEye is aiming for sometime this month.

      "We're still in the process of fine-tuning the accuracy," O'Connell said. "You make a change, you do a couple of orbits, you look at the imagery, you test it, you find what you think might be a bug, you do another change. So it's an iterative process, so it takes a while."

      The process now is focusing on aligning the positional accuracy of the satellite with the GPS grid, he said. "We're all disappointed that it hasn't gone faster. But we're excited that we are nearing the end of the tunnel."

      O'Connell said testing that he's seen lately makes him more confident that GeoEye-1 is getting closer to becoming fully operational, as more glitches are eliminated and the satellite is "hitting accuracy levels that are near our target."

      What's hanging in the balance is a new Service Level Agreement with the NGA that would boost GeoEye's revenues. Once GeoEye-1 is operational and the NGA certifies GeoEye-1 images as meeting the agency's standards, NGA will buy $12.5 million in GeoEye-1 images a month under its NextView program. That will give GeoEye a consistent revenue source after somewhat bumpy revenues in recent quarters. Revenues were down 24 percent to $106 million for the first nine months of 2008.

      GeoEye's competitor, DigitalGlobe, won the first contract under the NextView program. Its satellite, WorldView-3, provides black-and-white images to NGA.

      "We're comfortable the GeoEye is on a path that's going to have [GeoEye-1] operational and available for NGA taskings," NGA spokesman Dave Burpee said.

      In the meantime, the NGA and Google keep buying images from Ikonos, which was launched in 1999 by GeoEye's predecessor company, Space Imaging. GeoEye was formed in 2006 when OrbImage, a company O'Connell also headed, bought Space Imaging, a Lockheed Martin-Raytheon joint venture.

    22. Re:Well, there goes my plan by Eccles · · Score: 1

      Since they just display the most recent imagery that their providers have, the issue isn't with Google

      Except that Microsoft Virtual Earth and (I think) Mapquest have at times had significantly better or newer imagery for the same location. I've actually created KML files where I've taken an image from another mapper and made it an image in the KML because GE was out of date and didn't show the roads or was in lower resolution.

      One can hire planes to take pictures, it's not all satellites. If it was, they would have more uniform resolution imagery.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    23. Re:Well, there goes my plan by ZosX · · Score: 1

      You must not live in the United States. Do you have any idea how much they are monitoring communications here?

    24. Re:Well, there goes my plan by yorkshiredale · · Score: 1

      Link?

      I don't know whether to mod this as Insightful, Funny, or Desperate

      --
      The opinions expressed here are those of this individual, and may not reflect the policy or practice of the collective
    25. Re:Well, there goes my plan by hughk · · Score: 1

      There was a discussion on the disappearing Aral Sea on another forum. Someone was trying to use Google Earth to make a point but the imagery seems to be 7-9 years old.

      Where I am currently posting from, in Germany the imagery is also about 7 years old. I seem to remember there is a way of getting the date of the imagery but we recognised an old car that we had then.

      Google imagery is great, but please could they update it from time to time. I know that current satellite imagery is a valuable commodity and would happily settle for 2yrs old, but prefferably not older than 4.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
  2. Two words. by AltGrendel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Marianas Trench.
    Can't wait to see how that looks.

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

    1. Re:Two words. by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Marianas Trench.
      Can't wait to see how that looks.

      Really, really dark.

    2. Re:Two words. by wooferhound · · Score: 1

      I thought it was the marijuanas trench ?

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    3. Re:Two words. by ionix5891 · · Score: 5, Funny

      remember goatse? well think deeper and darker

    4. Re:Two words. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buffer overflow, thats 9 words

    5. Re:Two words. by Fear+the+Clam · · Score: 1

      remember goatse? well think deeper and darker

      But not as large.

    6. Re:Two words. by valdean · · Score: 1

      remember goatse?

      honestly is there anyone who DOESN'T remember?

    7. Re:Two words. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... but who's gonna drive their car around down there to get the StreetView(tm) pictures?

    8. Re:Two words. by nevillethedevil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      remember goatse? well think deeper and darker

      What has been seen cannot be unseen.

      --
      Be gone from my sight or prepare to feel my flaming wraith!
    9. Re:Two words. by Cormacus · · Score: 1

      No, definitely marinara. All red and tomato-y

      --
      Mon chien, il n'a pas du nez. Comment scent-il? TrÃs mauvais!
    10. Re:Two words. by Facegarden · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      ... but who's gonna drive their car around down there to get the StreetView(tm) pictures?

      The whole "TM" thing is really lame...
      -Taylor

      --
      Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    11. Re:Two words. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    12. Re:Two words. by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Some people haven't seen it.
      Lucky bastards.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    13. Re:Two words. by nku · · Score: 1

      20% Informative? **Shudder** :-)

    14. Re:Two words. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Long, deep and wet.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  3. Whoops by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wonder if a few of my "special jobs" as a concrete mixer will show up on these maps. If so, anyone got a list of countries without an extradition treaty with the U.S.?

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    1. Re:Whoops by Kickersny.com · · Score: 5, Funny

      If so, anyone got a list of countries without an extradition treaty with the U.S.?

      Wikipedia has a list for everything.

    2. Re:Whoops by Shikaku · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Even his special jobs?

    3. Re:Whoops by Gription · · Score: 1

      Cuba comes up on the short list of safe havens. (Beats the tar out of North Korea!)

      Depends on if one of the special jobs was there...

  4. Ooops.... This is what happens... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what happens when the Google Street View van accidentally goes off the end of the pier: It keeps driving!
    (or maybe the driver was distracted by the deer he just hit)

    I'm hoping I can get some clear views of Atlantis in the coming months

    1. Re:Ooops.... This is what happens... by fifedrum · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ha! the street view car that hit the deer, the accident occurred about 3 miles from my house. In their defense, there are thousands of deer roaming the area, so many that car deer collisions are a daily thing, and it's not at all uncommon to see a carcass on the side of the road.

      The undersea stuff is interesting because it might give a top-down view of wrecks if the wreck is in shallow water.

    2. Re:Ooops.... This is what happens... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Ooops.... This is what happens... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In all likelihood there's some moron feeding those deer.

    4. Re:Ooops.... This is what happens... by fifedrum · · Score: 1

      no really, what's interesting is they really don't feed them. Some provide salt-licks, most just ignore them.

      It's an artifact of loads of food, ample opportunity, almost no hunting in the area and horny deer. Pretty simple math actually.

  5. Google's world domination by ChimneysCantTalk · · Score: 0

    will now be complete. I should get going to Mars before they do!

    1. Re:Google's world domination by TeXMaster · · Score: 3, Funny
      --
      "I'm never quite so stupid as when I'm being smart" (Linus van Pelt)
    2. Re:Google's world domination by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      Ah HAH! I knew the three boobed woman was real!

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  6. Ship Wrecks by psergiu · · Score: 1

    Will we all became virtual Jacques-Yves Cousteaus and explore unknown shipwrecks from the comfort of our home ?
    Or the level of zoom is not that great ?

    --
    1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
    1. Re:Ship Wrecks by jammindice · · Score: 1

      Can't wait to check out the Bermuda triangle, if there are no ships then it must be true!

      --
      - My uid ends in 69...
    2. Re:Ship Wrecks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bermuda triangle has been debunked.

      http://www.randi.org/

    3. Re:Ship Wrecks by furby076 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well this will only detail the top, and maybe slightly angular, shots of wrecks. This will helpe us find lost wrecks. But as a diver I can tell you this will not replace scuba diving by any means....to see gorgeous coral, fish life, and go inside caves/wrecks is something you can only experience in person....video doesn't begin to capture the feeling...of being dinner for a school of barricuda :D

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    4. Re:Ship Wrecks by Chyeld · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, myself... I'm waiting for them to get Streetview of the ocean floor....

    5. Re:Ship Wrecks by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Huh? No it hasn't. There's been lots of mysterious disappearances there. The best theory I've heard is that methane bubbles from ocean floor deposits of frozen methane caused ships to sink, and even airplanes to crash. Discovery had a good program on it a while ago.

    6. Re:Ship Wrecks by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Neat trick. You made Randi's website disappear!

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    7. Re:Ship Wrecks by furby076 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, myself... I'm waiting for them to get Streetview of the ocean floor....

      See now i'll have to get a job for Google and slip some text for one of the pictures: /.

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
  7. Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by Vandil+X · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps now we'll be able to see those massive floating garbage islands in the Pacific Ocean that we're always hearing about.

    --
    Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
    1. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by darkitecture · · Score: 5, Funny

      Perhaps now we'll be able to see those massive floating garbage islands in the Pacific Ocean that we're always hearing about.

      You mean New Zealand?

    2. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by jammindice · · Score: 5, Funny

      Perhaps now we'll be able to see those massive floating garbage islands in the Pacific Ocean that we're always hearing about.

      You mean New Zealand?

      I believe he meant Australia, he did say massive

      --
      - My uid ends in 69...
    3. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by foniksonik · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah New Zealand is just one big Hollywood back lot nowadays....

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    4. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by Ihmhi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You'd be modded Flamebait if any Aussies could actually get through their Internet filter to Slashdot.

    5. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe he meant Australia, he did say massive

      But he didn't say hot air. Australia has lots of hot air.

    6. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and aren't the Global Warmers saying that dumping all our vegetable garbage in the Pacific will help reverse the effects of the massive .00038% CO2 (a "killer greenhouse gas") atmospheric content...?

    7. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by RabidMoose · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is it still flamebaiting, if those who would be baited are blocked?

    8. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, sea *floor*.

    9. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by Ihmhi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow, that's like... some Morpheus shit right there.

      Like... if a troll posts on a forum and there's no one to read it, does he still masturbate furiously to Buffy the Vampire Slayer / Willow lesbian fanfic?

    10. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except it hasn't even been rolled out for a proper trial yet and, even then, we can just use a proxy or OpenDNS. Thanks for playing, please try again.
       
      Here's a hint: maybe we have a sense of humour?

    11. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by cthulhu11 · · Score: 0

      While I have to say that the food in NZ was miserable, as expected given the English legacy, we found the people exceedingly friendly. Eg. we took a wrong turn on the Auckland waterfront after ariving by ferry and found ourselves across 50 feet of water from where we needed to be. A middle-aged couple saw us with our load of luggage and came up and offered to give us a lift. Super nice folks, and real lifesavers. We would have missed our rental but for them.

    12. Re:Floating Garbage Islands in the Pacific Ocean by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Actually, no one has been able to see them.
      They don't exist.
      People ahve reported them, sure. OTOH, people ahve reported Bigfoot as well.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  8. Google IS Evil! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is an outrageous violation of the privacy of the sea floor and its inhabitants. Google think they can just share whatever information they get with anyone they want. Boycott Google!

    1. Re:Google IS Evil! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You suck, MoFo!

  9. "street-level and aerial photography " by genka · · Score: 1

    Does Google have aerial (not satellite) photos like Microsoft? I've never encountered them on Google maps.

    1. Re:"street-level and aerial photography " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In Google Maps and Google Earth, Massachusetts is all aerial photography, because the state pays for and supplies it under an open content (but perhaps not Open Content) license. If you zoom in on the northeast US, you can see Massachusetts very well defined from a pretty high zoom.

    2. Re:"street-level and aerial photography " by nmg196 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nearly all the street-level photos on Google Maps are aerial rather than satellite. If you can see windows in houses or road markings, then they are definitely aerial. Publically available satellite imagery is rarely much better than 1m resolution but some of the best govenment operated satellites claim to have resolutions comparable to aerial photos (I've not seen any samples myself though).

    3. Re:"street-level and aerial photography " by xaxa · · Score: 1

      I doubt you can get this level of detail from a publically available satellite image (and there's two more zoom levels after what I linked to!)

    4. Re:"street-level and aerial photography " by nmg196 · · Score: 1

      I think people get confused as Google calls it's button "Satellite" even when aerial photography from planes is being used.

    5. Re:"street-level and aerial photography " by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      There's actually 3 levels. And I think I saw me mum.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    6. Re:"street-level and aerial photography " by ZosX · · Score: 1

      Wow! I can see the CCTV cameras on every corner!

    7. Re:"street-level and aerial photography " by hughk · · Score: 1

      Its old stuff though. A certain organisations headquarters at Vauxhall Cross are still under construction (building stuff still outside and no dishes on the roof.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
  10. Slight modifications by Thanshin · · Score: 5, Funny

    And now they'll have to adapt the vans that do the street level photography. Some fish are going to be quite surprised.

    Who wouldn't want to spend a month in a van and take several hundred million identical pictures? (Any resemblance with your holidays is pure coincidence).

    1. Re:Slight modifications by owlnation · · Score: 2, Funny

      And now they'll have to adapt the vans that do the street level photography. Some fish are going to be quite surprised.

      Not to mention the van drivers will be surprised when they encounter the sharks with frickin lasers.

    2. Re:Slight modifications by ionix5891 · · Score: 1

      google are evil

      first they kill bambi

      next up nemo

    3. Re:Slight modifications by troll8901 · · Score: 1

      sharks with frickin lasers.

      I, for one...

      Cthulhu or Laser Sharks?

    4. Re:Slight modifications by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      I'll be ok with it if they substitute nemo with emo...

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  11. in addition to shipwrecks... by wisebabo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There are some other sites that not everyone will be pleased will be in the public domain.

    How about the locations of sunken nuclear subs like the Thresher and the Russian sub the Glomar Challenger went after? There are some nuclear warheads still down there!

    Aren't there also a couple of nukes still "lost at sea" but with the approximate locations known?

    Also, how about the plutonium in the Apollo 13 Lunar Module that was impacted in "the deep Pacific"?

    My point is with rent-a-submersible services available (I guess from primarily, you guessed it, Russian vendors) it might be possible to pick up some dangerous things. In addition there are a few ecological sites (some "black smokers") that Oceanographers have been trying to keep secret to preserve them. Other than that, it seems like a great idea!

    1. Re:in addition to shipwrecks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      some "black smokers"

      You racist prick. Why not mention the white smokers too?

    2. Re:in addition to shipwrecks... by samriel · · Score: 0

      some "black smokers"

      You racist prick. Why not mention the white smokers too?

      they see me trollin'...

    3. Re:in addition to shipwrecks... by furby076 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      These objects aren't just lost because they don't know where they are (satellites have been able to bypass the water for object detection for a while now). The problem with retrieving these items is the depth, or danger. So to retrieve these items you need to have advanced submarine technology...and if you have that, you probably have nuclear weapons. But even if you have that, submarines still cannot penetrate the deepest parts of our oceans, and even if they could --- how does a submarine wrap a hook on another object? It would need robotic arms (the pressure would kill a scuba diver). So while a potential issue, it is VERY hard/impossible to retrieve such objects with todays technologies.

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    4. Re:in addition to shipwrecks... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      While there is side scanning sonar data that has resolution sufficient to see rivets on port lids, I imagine most of the bathyscapic data is going to be of much lower resolution. Unless you're looking for Atlantis it will be 'nothing to see here, move along'.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:in addition to shipwrecks... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Huh? Submarines have been able to go to the deepest parts of our oceans for decades. Heck, people dived to the bottom of the Marianas Trench (deepest place on Earth) back in 1960 with a bathyscaphe: Wikipedia article. Basically, the problem is what you said: grabbing objects isn't that easy, and requires robotic arms. This isn't that hard anymore, since we have lots of deep-sea submersibles with arms, but those are mainly meant for grabbing small objects, not nuclear weapons or other large objects.

    6. Re:in addition to shipwrecks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we haven't explored the entire ocean yet Google is going to magically map it's entirety? I'm sure nuclear submarine graves won't be removed from the view like all of these. Nup, couldn't happen.

    7. Re:in addition to shipwrecks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And there's some reason you need Google for this?

  12. 10% coverage to start - I find that impressive by Bearhouse · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "FTA: Although, so far, there has been only limited data collected about the sea floor, with just 10% of the habitat mapped at any useful scale for science..."

    I wonder how is going to work, since I'm guessing they cannot really 'map' the bottom of the ocean in the same way they do surface objects. Satellites with radar, ships with sonar?

    Stil, considering how vast the oceans are, even 10% coverage is pretty impressive.

    1. Re:10% coverage to start - I find that impressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They use a variety of sonars to do underwater mapping. The units I worked with were from Norway , and were Simrad EM multibeams. These sonars gave great resolution but the depth was limited when these sounders were mounted beneath the ship. Some vessels instead used a towfish design where we literally towed a sonar unit behind the ship. The data results from towfish designs was very noisy and not of as high a quality. The most advanced units were installed into an AUV(autonomous underwater vehicle) which we pre programmed and tossed into the water. These could reach depths of about 3500m and also included side scan sonar and subsurface sonar data.

      I was working with several US government agencies, NOAA, USGS, et al on re-mapping US coasts back in 2001 and I remember there was supposed to be a big job to update the alaska maps and other northern maps which hadn't had the depth charts updated in decades.

      I doubt they have even close to %10 but I do know they should have bathymetry for most coastal regions and pretty much anywhere that has laid cable/pipe in the last 10 or 15 years. We routinely mapped shipwrecks, proposed pipeline/fiber runs, and natural & synthetic coral areas.

      Though I wonder how google is getting the data. The bathy data I collected was our bread and butter. It took a few million just to get us on and off a ship. I am not sure what the price of the data was but I know what it takes to get decent pictures from way down there. And it isn't simple or cheap. I also don't think the companies collecting the data are going to just let google have it.

    2. Re:10% coverage to start - I find that impressive by ciderVisor · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Satellites with radar, ships with sonar?

      Noooooo. Sharks with frickin' lasers !

      Mod me redundant - I don't care. Someone had to say it.

      --
      Squirrel!
    3. Re:10% coverage to start - I find that impressive by Bearhouse · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that - interesting. This tends to confirm what I thought, namely that mapping the entire ocean floor to any meaningful level of detail is probably going to be prohibitively expensive?

    4. Re:10% coverage to start - I find that impressive by BobReturns · · Score: 1

      I'd imagine it'll just be large scale topographic detail.

    5. Re:10% coverage to start - I find that impressive by hohonuuli · · Score: 1

      The bottom of the ocean can be mapped. The tool of choice is the side-scan sonar [obligatory wikipedia reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side-scan_sonar ], either towed behind a ship or, if your research group is incredibly cool, from an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) See http://www.mbari.org/news/homepage/2005/mapping-auv.html

    6. Re:10% coverage to start - I find that impressive by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Exactly. That's what we have. Satellite radar has mapped large scale detail, the 10% figure is for more detailed data ("at any useful scale for science").

      --
      Not a sentence!
    7. Re:10% coverage to start - I find that impressive by terremoto · · Score: 1

      Swath bathymetry is how the high resolution mapping is done.
      http://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/operations/sfmapping/swath.htm

  13. ...Britain? by johannesg · · Score: 1

    Gee, I thought you could already see the entire friggin' planet, not just one tiny island.

    Anyway, I'm hoping for much-improved resolutions throughout the globe. Many places certainly don't reach the 50cm resolution that their own spacecraft gives them...

    1. Re:...Britain? by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Gee, I thought you could already see the entire friggin' planet, not just one tiny island.

      The article quoted (and linked to) in the summary is from a British newspaper ;-)
      (And most places in Britain seem to have high-resolution images, but Great Britain is only... erm... 0.14% of the land surface of Earth.)

    2. Re:...Britain? by jeffshoaf · · Score: 1

      Great Britain is only... erm... 0.14% of the land surface of Earth.

      So what's so "Great" about it then?

      --
      Putting the "anal" back into "analyst"...
    3. Re:...Britain? by johannesg · · Score: 1

      Great Britain is only... erm... 0.14% of the land surface of Earth.

      So what's so "Great" about it then?

      Their ego's...

    4. Re:...Britain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you name another Britain that is nearly as good?

      I thought not.

  14. Hasn't this already happened? by Sir_Dill · · Score: 4, Informative
    I was perusing Google earth the other day and I noticed that the sea floor was already shown with some coastal areas being VERY detailed.

    check out the northwest coast of the US for a good example.

    I don't know if this is an example of whats to come or if whats to come is going to be even better but I welcome higher resolution imagery of our planet.

    1. Re:Hasn't this already happened? by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      I was perusing Google earth the other day and I noticed that the sea floor was already shown with some coastal areas being VERY detailed.

      What you're seeing there is the underwater part of the continental shelf. The sea floor is a totally different beast altogether.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    2. Re:Hasn't this already happened? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      I love the underwater river beds off the coasts of northern California.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Hasn't this already happened? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Alright mister troll.

      I believe you are confusing Abyssal plains with the more generic term seafloor.

      Obligatory Wikipedia link

      USGS page detailing the mapping of the SEAFLOOR of the CONTINENTAL shelf around Monterrey Bay, CA

    4. Re:Hasn't this already happened? by ignavus · · Score: 3, Funny

      but I welcome higher resolution imagery of our planet

      but I welcome higher resolution imagery of sunken treasure ships.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    5. Re:Hasn't this already happened? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the last 2 weeks they updated the imagery of the sea floor already. It looks like they based it on the ETOPO1 dataset that was released last summer, and it is a BIG improvement. They also have some more detailed swath bathymetry from parts of the US coast and a few other locations. For example, along the Gulf Coast, outboard of the Mississippi Delta, you can see this knobbly seafloor terrain related to salt domes, and along the California coast are these submarine canyons near Monterey. It's pretty impressive compared to the crude seafloor terrain they had before.

  15. Ocean, the (short term) final frontier by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Funny

    In the land version we can see even people and cars. What we will see there? Submarines? Fishes? Coral formations? Our sunken economy?

  16. It was out two weeks ago by kaptain80 · · Score: 1

    Frank mentioned it on 2009-01-17 on Google Earth Blog.

    --
    Kurt Vonnegut: "If you can do a half-assed job of anything, you're a one-eyed man in the kingdom of the blind."
  17. This will backfire bigtime. by tjstork · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The ocean is so large and so vast, that, if Google codes the images honestly, that, people will readily see that for the most part, the bottom of the ocean is generally unexplored, that measurements of deep waters are infrequent and not in very many areas. They will see a few tiny areas where things have been photographed extensively, but, those will be but small points on a very, very large map. All of this unknown will open up ocean climate claims to ridicule, as if, measuring a drop of water in the shallow end of the swimming pool can somehow categorize the whole thing.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:This will backfire bigtime. by Spinalcold · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's one of the points, to show people how little we know of the ocean. It could possibly help the science community exchange ideas on the ocean or maybe even fuel more interest into exploring those large expanses.

    2. Re:This will backfire bigtime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, let's just check every single particule of the ocean to be sure.

      Everyday, I check my self every single water molecule comming from my home taps. A drop testing from the water company is clearly not safe.

    3. Re:This will backfire bigtime. by tjstork · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's one of the points, to show people how little we know of the ocean

      Oh, I agree that it could be that, and I also agree that we should be exploring the bottom of the ocean more, in fact, we ought ought to be monitoring it with a permanent deep sea measuring network.

      --
      This is my sig.
    4. Re:This will backfire bigtime. by tjstork · · Score: 1

      Everyday, I check my self every single water molecule comming from my home taps. A drop testing from the water company is clearly not safe

      If that's the case, then, why do we even bother with the FDA? Certainly, we could just check one cow per year.

      --
      This is my sig.
    5. Re:This will backfire bigtime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't test every cow in the us...

    6. Re:This will backfire bigtime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering how well mixed and homogenous pool water is, you actually can categorize an entire pool by measuring one drop from the shallow end. In fact, that's exactly how you DO test the water in a pool. This may or may not apply to the ocean.

    7. Re:This will backfire bigtime. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      All of this unknown will open up ocean climate claims to ridicule, as if, measuring a drop of water in the shallow end of the swimming pool can somehow categorize the whole thing.

      Bad analogy. That's like saying you don't understand how a swimming pool works because you don't have pictures of the tiles at the bottom of the pool at microscopic levels of details. There is a vast body of knowledge about the oceans - currents, salinity, flows, weather. Of course, there is a huge amount to learn and we really do need to be putting some quality time into that. But geographic detail, while important, isn't the only thing scientists need to model the ocean.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    8. Re:This will backfire bigtime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >They will also provide detailed environmental data that will
      >enhance information about the effect of climate change on the
      >world's seas and oceans.

      To that I say BALDERDASH. Just because we will have tools for visualizing (an incomplete) map of the ocean floors does not mean that we will have enhanced information about the effects of climate change on the seas and oceans. There will always be inherent complexity in modeling oceans and modeling the atmosphere, and modeling coupled ocean-atmosphere (that complexity doesn't go away just because we have enhanced visualization tools). Now, if Google were to spend some of Eric Schmidt's money on sending deep sea probes to the depths to generate more ultrasounds of the terrain and to add to the data sets (which become visualized) then that would be an entirely different story.

    9. Re:This will backfire bigtime. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      the bottom of the ocean is generally unexplored, that measurements of deep waters are infrequent and not in very many areas

      I guess this depends on your data source. Our submarines have very good maps, and much of the Cold War was spent making them.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  18. Thor's twins? by sl8r · · Score: 3, Funny

    Finally, the russians will be able to find Red October!

  19. Re:What is next? by iceteep · · Score: 2, Informative

    already done.... http://www.google.com/mars/

  20. The term is "Global Warming." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I won't let you get away with trying to scrub the term "Global Warming" from the public's consciousness. You misanthropic environmentalists invented the term, now you're stuck with it. You can't switch terms now that the Earth appears to be cooling slightly. While I applaud looking for new ways to provide energy that don't pollute the environment, I refuse to be lectured by the ultra-rich elite Left about how I should sit in darkness with my air conditioner turned off while they jet around the globe in private aircraft and enjoy luxuries that the rest of us can only dream of.

    1. Re:The term is "Global Warming." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just paid for my Vale condo with the profits from my carbon offset company. You better believe I'm not going to let go of this cash farm.

  21. And the terrian? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does Google show the Ocean Floor terrian too??

    It would be curious to travel deeper and deeper without being wet or suffer from the ocean pressure.

  22. Re:What is next? by spamking · · Score: 1

    DOH!

  23. Good news for.. by Falkentyne · · Score: 0

    Gilligan! We're coming little buddy!

  24. Mu ha ha, The Ocean Empire Building Begins by itsybitsy · · Score: 1

    Ah yes, now I can proceed with my plans to build the underwater empire that will span the entire planet which should really be called Ocean!

    Now if I could locate where my fleet, er school, of laser equipped sharks and dolfins have gone...

  25. What about the alien bases? by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    Will Google be compelled to blot out the alien bases like they did for Area 51?

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  26. Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The parasites will find Rapture!

  27. Part of the collaboration with Ninnle Labs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As many of you know, Google has been working with Ninnle Labs on things like a Google version of Ninnle Linux and Ninnle Office, and a port of Ninnle Office that will be crossplatform. This Google Earth mod is one of the early results of that collaboration.

  28. Wondering by Gription · · Score: 1

    Officially do you count a contraction as one word or two?

    1. Re:Wondering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One. That's why the smart kids in school used them as little as possible to get fewer mistakes per 100 words. Unless they made more mistakes that way.

  29. how about updating the existing terrestrial maps.. by slashdout · · Score: 2

    The terrestrial maps are outdated, I would love to see updated terrestrial maps instead of gazing at the ocean floor.

  30. Hidden worlds by vsnc · · Score: 1

    Ahh now it will be easy to find the hidden tunnels to the mermaids.

  31. Re:Britiain? by ciderVisor · · Score: 1

    It was on one of the discovery channel series, but I forgot what it's called. Anyone know?

    Dirty Jobs ?

    Oh no, that was the show where Steve did a British version of Jackass.

    --
    Squirrel!
  32. Google Earth 5.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google seems to have posted a couple relevant videos about the announcement early:

    What's New in Google Earth 5.0
    Explore the Ocean in Google Earth 5.0

    Anyone know anything about viewing the announcement event today live?

  33. What about ice caps? by ari_j · · Score: 1

    For oceanic ice caps, do we get to see (a) the ice, (2) the floor, or (iv) either one, selectable as with the satellite imagery on the regular Google Maps?

    1. Re:What about ice caps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The floor under the Arctic Ice Shelf is well mapped, but classified. That's the ocean between the US and Russia. There's lots of subs there with nuclear weapons. The floor under the Antarctic Ice Shelves is unmapped. Only the military has the money to do that and there's no strategic value there.

  34. Amazing! by Saysys · · Score: 1

    The inclusion of environmental information forms the latest part of the company's plan to offer the public more data about climate change. In 2007 Google convened a high-level meeting of experts to help it develop sources of submarine information and environmental data.

    It seems likely that the company will later unveil partnerships with institutions in Europe and the US as part of the project.

  35. Bathymetry by Lord+Satri · · Score: 1

    Funny yes, insightful, not sure. What's at stake is bathymetry (well.. that's what the rumors say), the 'topography' of the ocean floors, not satellite imagery of huge areas of surface water.

    Can someone tell me why we're discussing this as a state of rumor when a few hours later (after the actual announcement), we would have solid elements to discuss?!

  36. Google will find Hoffa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have no doubts..

  37. Yes,... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But will they have street view?

  38. Where the sea begins by DrNoNo · · Score: 1

    I hope we still get to see this. If we don't, it makes Google Earth a whole lot less useful.

  39. So how did they... by realsilly · · Score: 1

    .... get the car to drive around the ocean floor and not stop running? Did they use night vision? And how many sea creature have file complaints with Google over privacy issues?
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Sorry, it just seemed too easy.

    Personnally I'm looking forward to seeing it.

    --
    Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
  40. Wish they would cover the ocean surface by Anonymous+Cowdog · · Score: 1

    I wish they would cover the entire ocean surface. There is a lot of interesting stuff out there, and last time I checked they only show the coastlines. Would be fun to see tankers in the middle of the ocean, killer waves on the loose, plastic garbage collected in the middle of the south pacific, tiny sailboats in the middle of nowwhere, reefs, whales, giant squid, narwhal - maybe even Cthulhu is out there somewhere.

  41. Google Earth 5 available by kels · · Score: 1

    As seen on Ogle Earth, Google Earth 5 is available for download. Includes the new Ocean layer.

    --
    "I believe that the cult of the particular brings only death - for it bases order on likeness." St.-Exupery
    1. Re:Google Earth 5 available by moonbender · · Score: 1

      Doesn't start up for me (Ubuntu Intrepid).

      Anybody know how to fix this: ./googleearth-bin: relocation error: /usr/lib32/i686/cmov/libssl.so.0.9.8: symbol BIO_test_flags, version OPENSSL_0.9.8 not defined in file libcrypto.so.0.9.8 with link time reference

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    2. Re:Google Earth 5 available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Removing libcrypto.so.0.9.8 from google-earth directory helped me.

    3. Re:Google Earth 5 available by moonbender · · Score: 1

      Yep, that worked. Thanks!

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
  42. Update the Land Imagery by winjama · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would be more impressed if they updated all of the above water land maps. I live in Belize and our imagery hasn't been updated in about five years. Dave

    --
    Ubi est voluntas, ibi est via
  43. Next: Google Uranus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can look that up, not me!

  44. Actually we do.. by tjstork · · Score: 1

    You don't test every cow in the us.

    Bzzt, wrong. Actually, all USDA graded beef, is in fact, inspected by the USDA. Every carcass gets a stamp, from someone inspecting it. If you buy a piece of USDA anything, that means, someone at least eyeballed the dead cow and put a stamp on it.

    The controversy comes from, how much inspection there is. Some would say not enough.

    --
    This is my sig.
  45. Re:HEY the AC made a JOKE, don't mod me down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's okay, they modded me troll. Apparently someone is a bit touchy. I thought it was funny.

  46. Depth or danger? by phorm · · Score: 1

    I think that "cost" is probably a factor as well, and probably a big one at that.

  47. Sigh... by CobaltTiger · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Living in Iowa, I'm still waiting for my house not to look like a white blob. Random jungles and deserts already have better resolution than most of our state, and now it sounds like the sea floor will as well. I know Iowa isn't the biggest state out there, but can't we get a little love?

    1. Re:Sigh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been to Iowa. I'd rather see the sea floor.

  48. Draging anchors over submerged fiber optic cables? by Zymergy · · Score: 1

    This might be useful and more interesting if it shows the *actual* locations of the submerged fiber optic Internet cables that 'mysteriously' keep getting "anchor dragged" in the middle eastern part of our planet...

    Of course, it is just a matter of time before someone puts geographically identified snapshots of a corpses wearing 'concrete shoes' on particular spots the ocean floor...

  49. at 74,39 someone drawn on the floor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not kidding http://maps.google.com/maps?z=5&sll=74,39

    1. Re:at 74,39 someone drawn on the floor by weighn · · Score: 1

      just some Russian subs feeling their way along the bottom (oooh, that sounds rude)

      --
      Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
  50. Beta, as usual by danilo.moret · · Score: 1

    They are just beta testing, as usual. In a few decades lots and lots of what today is dry land will be underwater. They could wait a bit and claim they are showing underwater imagery but no, it's Google, they need a beta.

    --
    ^[:wq!
  51. I hate the reflective water surface by davecotter · · Score: 1

    Am i the only one who hates the fact that the water surface goes all opaque when you get close and tilt off vertical?? I want to see the hawaiian islands as mountains on the ocean floor, but the stupid surface of the ocean gets all reflecty and opaque with no way to shut it off! mmmmmmmm

  52. multiple-age satellite maps by peter303 · · Score: 1

    I thought History was the more interesting feature mentioned in the article. You could watch growing suburbs, melting glaciers, grwoing tropical farmlands, etc.

  53. Me too by Mr.+Firewall · · Score: 1

    Can't wait to see how that looks.

    Me too. Too bad the new GE doesn't actually work. I get this:

    We apologize for the inconvenience, but Google Earth has crashed. This is a bug in the program, and should never happen under normal circumstances. A bug report and debugging data are now being written to this text file: /home/#######/.googleearth/crashlogs/crashlog-E6127C3A.txt This bug report will be sent to Google automatically next time you run Google Earth.

    Maybe it will run on my Mac.

    --
    In times of universal deceit, telling the truth gets you modded -1 Troll
  54. About time, now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    people will finally see there really is no effect from global climate change (aka global warming, the original term that made the proponents look like idiots because we didn't warm up) because there is no global climate change.

  55. Pacific Trash Vortex now available on Google Earth by weighn · · Score: 1
    Google has unveiled what is touted as being one of the most comprehensive 3D maps of ocean rubbish in a major upgrade to its free Google Earth program.

    For the first time, web surfers can surf amongst some of the estimated 100 million tonnes of plastic and assorted human refuse that has been accumulating in the middle of the North Pacific Gyre since the 1950s - all without getting their hands dirty.

    Demonstrating the far superior beauty available from Web 2.0 applications, in comparison to the grubby ocean, the Ocean feature of Google Earth allows users to zoom in and out of specific locations on a tapestry of panoramic images that have been woven together. Beat that, stupid Nature!

    John Wanke, head of Google Earth said, "The great thing about this site is that it will be inclusive," the irony that we were all already included and represented by at least one piece of crap in the great pile no doubt lost on him.

    --
    Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths