Slashdot Mirror
Google Testing an Airborne Camera Drone
mbone writes "The Blogoscoped site carries news that Google has purchased a German 'Microdrone' for evaluation (here is the original German version). These devices can take off, fly a mission, and land automatically using GPS. They can carry night-vision cameras or even 'see-through-walls' Far IR cameras. Of course, the maker of these drones assures us that they cannot be a 'Big Brother in the sky' because that is 'verboten.' Is it just me, or is Google entering dangerous airspace here? It seems like the ruckus from a backyard-after-dark addition to Street View could completely overshadow the legal tussles Google has already encountered with its street-level photography." Reader Jaymi clues us to another airborne effort a couple of Google employees are mounting with some help from NASA Ames: the NexusOne PhoneSat project — to determine if low-cost mobile phone components can withstand space travel.
As long as the only pictures they take are legal ones from public places (including airspace), I don't have a problem.
If it rhymes it must be true.
They can carry spy-o-scopes, but that doesn't mean they will.
In fact, they aren't even mentioned in either linked article as far as I can see.
It sees you when you're sleeping, it knows when you're awake, it knows if you've been bad or good, so be good for goodness sake.
If I see it above my street, I'll put up a cloud of birdshot...
I don't see how these would be any different than their existing aerial photography. All of the high resolution stuff they have is from planes with cameras at a few thousand feet. I'm guessing they want to integrate this into their existing street view runs. As the van drives around, they launch one or more of these up to refresh their overhead images. After 45 minutes or so, they run low on battery, and fly back to the van for replacement and download. You make the route planning automated, the drivers spend a couple minutes every hour doing maintenance, and now everything Google uses is owned by them rather than licensed from some 3rd party.
Please amend "Do No Evil" to read "You'd better 'Do No Evil' or we'll get you!"
When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
Pull the trigger and it's garbage.
Sounds like an idea for a website, send in your photos of your downed Google drones, with you standing there holding it up like a 10 point buck. Googlefail.com or some such.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Can't you just place a robots.txt file on your property to tell the GoogleDrone not to index it?
One? I expect very high resolution aerial views of the Googleplex office compound then.
Yes, the drones can carry long wavelength cameras to see through walls. They could also carry nuclear weapons. Irrational paranoia aside, Google is probably just trying to compete with Bing's Birds-Eye map capabilities.
...more efficient, and faster to get up to date imagery for maps than to wait and pay for satellite imagery. Military has these planes that fly by themselves to take pictures to update maps. This looks like it's just the civilian sector following lead. I can only imagine that aligning and presenting imagery data from an aircraft is a lot easier and requires less compute/man hours than satellite imagery. Especially if the need is only for new imagery of a small area.
In fact, there are several. Aside from an RC plane of some sort, all you need is about $100 in parts and some electronics know-how to build your own (basic) UAV.
Of course, it won't be as sophisticated as a multi-million dollar micro-UAV or one of the Air Force's Predator drones, but medium range (several miles) surveillance, automated take-offs and landings, GPS waypoint tracking, infrared cameras, etc. are not outside the realm of the hobbyist.
Check out http://www.diydrones.com/ to see what I mean.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
I thought that was facebook...
No privacy issues here!
It's useful because you can, ah, make sure your roof is still in good shape and doesn't need shingles?
Yeah.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I am really surprised news organizations have not started using these to cover situations.
Live from Irag/Afghanistan/Mogadishu/Pakistan ...
I could see this as an alternative to Bing Bird's Eye photos. Yes, there are privacy issues. virtualglobetrotting.com has tracked down high profile homes and viewing them in Bing Bird's Eye is surreal.
"Is it just me, or is Google entering dangerous airspace here?" Yes, it is just you. Move along. Nothing to see here.
Home of The Suki Series
That's a coincidence! I happen to be testing homemade Patriots in my backyard.
They Live.
And of course there will be situations where government uses private services to snoop on your private property, which are sort of in the middle.
Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
Welcome to Google! "We know more about you than your own mother"
Search terms: | What is my girlfriend doing right now? |
...
...
Query returned: 2 results (3.793932 seconds for observation drones to move into position)
Result#1: Drone39103 (IR Camera, MMwavelength, NV Camera, Stereo camera) in position over 1722 Walnut St., Stalintown IN, residence of Ms. Wendy Smith, SSN 232-28-8821, google person number 399925800-1F
Result#2: Drone00192 (NV Camera, BFLaser) in position over 1722 Walnut St., Stalintown IN, residence of Ms. Wendy Smith, SSN 232-28-8821, google person number 399925800-1F
PS friendly message from your friendly google monitor: "ur gurlfrend is hawt lol! XOXO" END OF TRANSMISSION
SPONSORED ADVERTISEMENT: Vaporize your enemies! New, with google BigBrother! All drones are being outfitted with...
If this was the CIA, DoD, a major law enforcement agency, or hell a small one, this wouldn't even be up for debate. It would be Bad.
If it were Microsoft, HP, Halliburton or Blackwater/Xe, it would be Terrible.
If this was a Bush administration plan, it would be the End Times for Civil Liberties.
Google should not get the benefit of the doubt about it's intentions and uses for surveillance drones, it should be raked over the coals and everyone and their cousin should be hitting up the regulatory agencies managing the permits and licences of these aircraft.
I cannot wait to hear what Alex Jones has to say about this. He already thinks Google and the NSA are the same thing. (his words). He's going to have a coronary.
Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.
Not really, Germany has quite high number of guns per capita - which, while not translating directly to "percentage of population" (for example: any self-respecting hunter will have minimum two after all), does mean there's quite enough people with guns. Plus since, IIRC, large portion of them are indeed those with hunting licenses - there will be enough guns of most appropriate type.
Still, I wouldn't expect such sillinesss taking place...
One that hath name thou can not otter
Don't forget that some people don't have the same government as yourself, therefore I cannot comment on what your government has/hasn't done with this technology.
Mind enlightening us on your particular government's use/non-use of UAV's?
Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
I can't help but think they only got this just so they would have a cool toy to play with at their Mountain View campus
In the original German article, they mention how some of the drones they've sold have been equipped with IR and thermal imaging technologies, and give you a teaser that you can come back on Monday to read about the companies that already use the technologies.
Sounds to me like Google is merely trying to vastly improve Google Maps and Google Earth's satellite views with cheap yet efficient technologies, and Wirtschaftswoche is just trying to sell magazines. Of course, who am I to be a naysayer of the tinfoil hat wearing among us...
"Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
However, I will give you two examples of two other small businesses that were banned from Adwords. The first is this one, a small local pest-control company Reno. If anyone can find anything objectionable about that site, definitely let me know! Read their story here. (Scroll down to the 6th reply.)
Here's another company banned from Adwords, in this case a company in LA that has helped non-profits obtain grants for the past 35 years. You can read their story here.
Its time.
Lets begin an effort to thwart airborne eavesdropping.
I propose a home based monitoring system followed by a seeking-intercept-rocket to stop these drones.
Instructable, please join in.
So you don't have a problem with them taking a picture of your backyard party and posting it if you have a privacy fence so its not visible from the street?
I have a problem with it, and yes i realize its 'air space' but they are crossing a moral line if they start doing that.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I bet they will be a bit high for shooting at, but would be a good test for that home built heat seeking missile project.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
If not, I'll be picking up the pieces of one of these drones real soon now. If Google wants it back they are welcome to come and get it.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
You know Google is going to "accidentally" forget to turn off their wifi sniffers on these guys too.
You can crack open a clam with a rock. Or you can crack open another persons skull.
You can warm yourself and cook meals with fire. Or you can torch someones house down.
You can shoot food for your family with a gun. Or you can shoot a family.
Just because the tools become more advanced does not change the moral dilemma that has faced mankind with the proper use of all tools. They can be used for good, or evil.
The tool itself is just a tool. This article is just hype for the sake of hype.
*DrugCheese rants*
I know exactly what you mean. There are two places I used to live that have drastically views from street view to satellite view.
At one place, the satellite view is years old. It's not a very interesting place to look though.
Then there's this one (West corner of Doran and Isabel). The satellite view is from within the last year. The street view is from at least 2 years ago, but probably longer.
I lived there several years ago. I stopped by a couple years ago, and the house had been torn down, and they had just began construction on condos.
The really annoying part was, that could have been a beautiful house. It was beautiful inside. The house was built in 1924, and had a notable history. The owner bought it and the house next door. We were renting it while he secured the necessary permits to build the condos. We were there for a year. Someone else moved in after us, and sometime after that it was gone. Most of the historical homes in that area were torn down, because the property was worth more with condos on it.
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
'Pods from God...
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
The need to put a bunch of these things on our border to catch illegal aliens.
Carve a 1 mile wide no mans land strip along the border manage it by DOD and anyone entering a limited Access DOD Area is considered a Terrorist....
THATS RIGHT
THEY ARE KILLING MORE PEOPLE WITH HEROIN FROM AFGHANISTAN THEN THEY DID ON 911
It needs to stop
I was doing papers at university in Satelite imagery in 2001 at time of the trade Towers attack. Our dept had its own image server and direct image purchase ability to many institutions including the satelite owners. We could buy images like you can buy stock photography images of image stock websites.
The Kronos satellite(50cm greyscale resolution, 100cm truecolor) was turned to snap images of the twin towers and we had those images within some 35 minutes of the 9/11 attacks.
The point I make is, when there is the capability, and when the desire is there, pretty much anything is achievable. Someone at Kronos Satellite took it upon themselves to abandon the current photography job and turn the satellite to the twin towers.
Was that person authorised? I have always wondered.
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
We have the right to bear arms, in part, to defend our rights. Bringing down a privacy-invading drone with a dose of bird shot sounds perfectly within the constitution to me.
This reminds me of a reference in a Shadow Run novel to people who ran around zapping any drones that they saw with the equivalent of a supercharged taser. This was in the context of a world where many such drones were seen daily, used by law enforcement, private companies, etc. If such usage becomes common in reality, might a section of the tin-foil hat crowd or "American Militia" movement behave similarly?
This Slashdot post connected a few dots for me. I was reading about Wikileaks this weekend and now this post reminds me of another post a year or so back about how Google is censoring it's Google-maps for various Governments.
It occurs to me now that censoring Google-maps is a bad idea for governments unless your only trying to block attempts by poor amateur crackpot terrorists. If you have the money you could no doubt get a hold of an uncensored world photo database and then all you would need to do is compare them with Google-maps and you would know all the sensitive areas in the world. Ironically only camouflaged and non censored areas can be top secret and not just sensitive.
Other random correlations. Holographic research has no doubt been getting a lot of funding recently. And with private industry poised to take over the space industry it's no wonder my Government wants to influence who has launch capabilities and what gets into space. And totally random - the best way to take a satellite out of commission would be to wrap it in a blanket thereby avoiding space junk; kind of like the earlier post about deobiting satellites.
OK, I'm thinking these things will qualify as "smart-skeet" and will be welcomed with open arms wherever rifle racks are standard equipment...
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
Alive and well, just a few years late.
I can't wait to try and shoot one of these down with my own drone aircraft.
Take what ye can. Give nothing back!
They can carry night-vision cameras or even 'see-through-walls' Far IR cameras.
Seriously? If we're gonna talk about equipment that hypothetically *could* be attached to the drone, you might as well say "They could be equipped with toxic case, small bombs, and laser guns. They could launch GPS-guided sharks at unsuspecting people in swimming pools below. The sharks could be injected with adrenaline and be dunked in human blood just prior to being launched."
They could do all that, or they could just attach a damn camera to it and take some damn photographs for Google Earth.
If this was the CIA, DoD, a major law enforcement agency, or hell a small one, this wouldn't even be up for debate. It would be Bad.
The are already doing this.
If it were Microsoft, HP, Halliburton or Blackwater/Xe, it would be Terrible.
You know why? These companies have already proven themselves to do bad stuff, in the name of getting more money. Google have not done that yet.
It is like find a serial killer at the door, or a girl scout selling cookies. If we are to react as you would, you would treat them both exactly the same. There is a reason you listed those particular companies, as opposed to say Ben and Jerries, Dupont and Kmart.
How is this news?
How long it will take for someone to hack the control system used by these drones once (If?) they go live.
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
There are no CIA, DoD or law enforcement agencies with drones operating in public areas of the United States imaging civilians.
There are drones over the US borders, but that's not the same as having small drones in urban areas.
As for Google not doing bad stuff for money, exactly how has Google been "better" than Microsoft or HP? This is a company whose CEO says time after time that Google is an enemy to privacy .
Letting such technology lose may have consequences both good and bad that we can not hope to predict. For example suppose an eye in the sky was able to catch all kinds of thieves and burglars at work and then the public finds out that we do not have the money to put people in prison. That could cause real chaos as more and more people figured that the law lacked the financial capacity to punish them.
There is more to the world then residential neighborhoods. They can do national parks, city parks, amusement parks and buildings.
Seems like the perfect response, especially if you could get one of the newer types that just fires a bunch of .22LRs. "Newer" is relative, of course. I don't think anyone has actually made volley guns for general sale in at least 50 years, probably much longer.
There are no CIA, DoD or law enforcement agencies with drones operating in public areas of the United States imaging civilians.
I admire the confidence of this statement.
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
"Pull!"
I eagerly await the photographic proof of the existence of bigfoot!
Angry, pissed-off bigfoot.
Of course, doubters will point out the pictures are all blurry, but that's only due to them trying to swat down these noisy annoying drones
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Easier way (if you are lucky enough to live where you can still posses a firearm): lock and load, find drone and dispatch drone to the great aerodrome in the sky.
--- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
I was wrong, a couple PDs have gotten FAA certificates for drones, but it's unclear if they are even operating.