Nicaragua Raids Costa Rica, Blames Google Maps

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Nicaragua Raids Costa Rica, Blames Google Maps

Posted by Soulskill on Friday November 5, 2010 @12:45AM from the i-was-just-following-my-gps dept.

Garabito writes "An error on Google Maps has caused an international conflict in Central America. A Nicaraguan military commander, relying on Google Maps, moved troops into an area near San Juan Lake along the border between his country and Costa Rica (Google translation of Spanish original). The troops are accused of setting up camp there, taking down a Costa Rican flag and raising the Nicaraguan flag, doing work to clean up a nearby river, and dumping the sediment in Costa Rican territory."

211 of 285 comments (clear)

Yeah... by John+Pfeiffer · 2010-11-05 00:46 · Score: 1

Well, I guess it was only a matter of time before stuff like this happened. ;P

--

Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
1. Re:Yeah... by jgagnon · 2010-11-05 00:51 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  A classic case of misinformation being worse than no information. However, Google does have a disclaimer on the service about possible errors.
  It shouldn't, but it amazes me how a military force from one country can take action based on information from a free service offered by a company in another country. It boggles the mind.
  
  --
  Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
2. Re:Yeah... by Toe,+The · 2010-11-05 00:52 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Indeed. I almost rode my bike to a seemingly nearby park I had never explored. Then I double-checked it on the park authority's site and found it was over 100 miles away from where the Google map showed it.
  So I 100% feel what this Nicaraguan commander felt. I mean; out situations were basically identical.
3. Re:Yeah... by HungryHobo · 2010-11-05 01:04 · Score: 1
  
  100km???
  any chance of a reference, I'd like to compare it with some other mapping services.
  I haven't played with the GPS aspect of it but the maps around my area seem pretty close to the reality.
4. Re:Yeah... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2010-11-05 01:05 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  My understanding is that minor-but-with-alarming-possibilities-of-escalation operational cartography fuckups have been occurring since approximately the invention of boundary stones, well back in the BCs...
  
  The main amusement here is that A)Google gets mentioned by name and B)the ease of use of a mass-market civilian product leads a military user(who presumably has access to better information, from some sort of national mapping/geospatial intelligence/GIS wonk service; but probably with a lousier interface) to rely on it.
5. Re:Yeah... by jgagnon · 2010-11-05 01:12 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Which is a good thing considering how messed up the world would be if every country cherished war like the US does. :p
  
  --
  Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
6. Re:Yeah... by Toe,+The · 2010-11-05 01:12 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  100 miles. When I saw it, I reported it to Google using right-click->"Report a Problem." And wouldn't you know... now that I look, it is no longer there.
7. Re:Yeah... by dnahelicase · 2010-11-05 01:13 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  So that's why the Google EULA says "Not responsible for inadvertent war." I never understood that before...
8. Re:Yeah... by The+Raven · 2010-11-05 01:16 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Imagine the resources of a nation like Nicaragua, then imagine the quality of their IT infrastructure... does it really surprise you that much that Google has a better and usually more accurate mapping service than they can get from their government?
  
  --
  "I will trust Google to 'do no evil' until the founders no longer run it." Hello Alphabet.
9. Re:Yeah... by boristdog · 2010-11-05 01:18 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  but it amazes me how a military force from one country can take action based on information from a free service offered by a company in another country.
  Something tells me you haven't traveled to many 3rd world countries. Google has probably dodeca-tupled the intelligence gathering capacity of most 3rd world countries.
10. Re:Yeah... by hosecoat · 2010-11-05 01:19 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  "taking down a Costa Rican flag", should have been another big clue
11. Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-11-05 01:20 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  I am a US resident, and I don't find the parent post trolling. It is rather apt.
12. Re:Yeah... by operagost · 2010-11-05 01:37 · Score: 1
  
  Google will show roads going over bridges that have been out for years. They'll even have street view for some of these, where you can see the white line passing right through the "ROAD CLOSED" barrier.
  
  --
  
  Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
13. Re:Yeah... by bickerdyke · 2010-11-05 01:44 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Since I found the "must not be used for running nuclear facillities" in the WinNT Eula, I'm definitly not sure if you're joking or not....
  
  --
  bickerdyke
14. Re:Yeah... by poetmatt · 2010-11-05 01:49 · Score: 1, Redundant
  
  It's beyond hilarity that they even mention google. This shows you how far people go to aim at the easy target.
  Instead of "maybe we should have had better intel" it's "this is because google maps is inaccurate".
15. Re:Yeah... by poetmatt · 2010-11-05 01:50 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  you don't have to be of any party affiliation to be tired of the pointless fucking wars the US has been waging for 40 years, and I haven't even been alive that long.
16. Re:Yeah... by c6gunner · 2010-11-05 01:59 · Score: 1, Troll
  
  You don't have to be of any affiliation to be tired of the pointless anti-American trolling that idiots have been waging for 40 years, and I haven't even been alive that long.
17. Re:Yeah... by SJ2000 · 2010-11-05 02:00 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Cross Border incidents happen to the best of people. Australia during East Timor conflict...
  
  The first incident was apparently due to the local Indonesian authorities persisting in the use of 1933 Dutch maps and the Australians using more recent Indonesian maps. The Dutch map indicated that the Mota Bicu river formed the border. However, the 1992 Indonesian map used by the Australians showed the border as being 500 metres to the west of that position. Apparently, the Indonesian map reflects a post-1975 decision to make the border a fixed provincial border not dependent on the river as a landmark, with the result that as the river changed course over time and as the villagers moved with it, the village of Motaain would shift its location from East to West Timor and vice versa....
  http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/57JQZ2
18. Re:Yeah... by BStroms · 2010-11-05 02:00 · Score: 1
  
  you don't have to be of any party affiliation to be tired of the pointless fucking wars the US has been waging for 40 years, and I haven't even been alive that long.
  I'll agree to this. I'm fiscally very conservative, and typically vote Republican. Nevertheless, I wish the US would stop trying to police the world. I also consider the defense budget to be a juicy target to start the spending cuts I'd like to see.
19. Re:Yeah... by SirGarlon · 2010-11-05 02:00 · Score: 1
  
  It shouldn't, but it amazes me how a military force from one country can take action based on information from a free service offered by a company in another country. It boggles the mind.
  It's possible that you're mistaking a pretext for the actual cause of the "mistake."
  
  --
  [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
20. Re:Yeah... by LWATCDR · 2010-11-05 02:05 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Actually I doubt that do have better information than Google does. Not that many nations have the resources to spend on that type of tool that the US, NATO, Russia, China, Japan, Brazil, and so on do.
  A lot of nations will get that type of Data from the US or Russia depending on who they are friends with at the time.
  Heck for a long time U2 pilots where buying handheld GPS units because the U2 was still waiting for it's official upgrade. Later the units bought them as a COTS rescue aid but used them for navigation.
  I actually read about B-1 units wiring in unofficial GPS antennas and using notebooks for navigation while waiting for that plane to get it's update.
  Nothing is unusual about this except that in this case it came back to byte them.
  BTW Google maps are not that accurate in many places so if you are going to use them to navigate and RPV I would double check them.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
21. Re:Yeah... by Cougar+Town · 2010-11-05 02:07 · Score: 1
  
  That's hilarious. I'd love to see this. Have a link to an example?
22. Re:Yeah... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2010-11-05 02:11 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Given that Maps/Earth is a free service, and Google isn't exactly a charity, it would actually not at all surprise me if the quality of Google's offerings for a given area is strongly correlated to that area's level of wealth, IT development, and existing national mapping services and/or 3rd party information providers.
  
  Consider, most of what Google does, it does either as an experiment/long term investment, or as part of its core ad-selling business. Now, their mapping services have been around for a while, and don't seem to be an experiment(and the concept of geographically localized advertising is obviously attractive), so it seems very likely that they are ancillary to the core business.
  
  Consider: Where are ads most valuable, per impression, and consumer data/metrics most valuable? In wealthy, populous, areas with good internet penetration and lots of electronic commerce.
  
  Where is good mapping data cheapest: Where some existing national, regional, and/or local mapping/planning authority exists, and has already collected decent records in a standardish format, at public expense and available for no or nominal money.
  
  Therefore, you would strongly expect Google to have the best starting data in relatively wealthy, stable, well-governed areas, and have the greatest incentive to do the labor-intensive data cleaning process of sending out GPS-carrying surveyors and streetview cars and things in dense, wealthy areas. The further from either of those you go, the more likely it is that Google's "data" are whatever satellite or aerial photos they managed to pick up cheaply and georectify well enough that there aren't visually obvious gaps and tears. Because modern sensors are good, such data are actually likely to be perfectly OK for things like physical geography lessons; but there isn't actually a big black line painted along most national borders, satellites aren't going to see that. And, given that this incident occurred in what sounds like a relatively sparsely populated Latin American border region, I'm guessing that the place isn't crawling with streetview cars...
  
  If what you care about are things like national borders, military installations/posts, and geographic features where some kind of army engineering corps is doing work, the national mapping service is probably actually the place to go. Unfortunately, they are probably not set up with a very nice user interface. Paper maps or some ghastly 80's GIS frontend, usable after a few months of specialized training, are a definite possibility. Google, on the other hand, has virtually no incentive to care about such things(at least in their free civilian offering, I don't know if they have a government/intelligence version); but has a decent interface, and produces results with a lovely air of apparent accuracy most of the time.
  
  Consider some history: During British colonial rule(first via East India company, later direct) The Great Trigonometric Survey (1802-early 20th century) produced some quite accurate maps of the entire subcontinent, and some pretty hostile terrain, using nothing more than hand tools, dead trees, and pre-computer math. Surveying, like civil engineering, is nontrivial; but you can actually do an excellent job with quite primitive tools. Satellites and GPS enabled everything sure makes the job easier, and computers sure make the interface nicer; but there is nothing except disorganization stopping even a country with early 19th century technology from producing excellent maps.
23. Re:Yeah... by acohen1 · 2010-11-05 02:11 · Score: 1
  
  I recall seeing that in the first Java EULA I accepted back in like 94 or thereabouts. I was just a kid and thought it was pretty funny.
24. Re:Yeah... by snookerhog · 2010-11-05 02:13 · Score: 1
  
  obligatory xkcd
  you asked for it
25. Re:Yeah... by heathen_01 · 2010-11-05 02:16 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Why do you typically vote Republican then?
  
  "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results". - Albert Einstein
26. Re:Yeah... by clone53421 · 2010-11-05 02:24 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  I once got driving directions that told me “turn left”... off an overpass. (It’s fixed now.)
  
  --
  Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
27. Re:Yeah... by countertrolling · 2010-11-05 02:29 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You can go back another 200 years. The US has never not been at war, or some military adventure. Actually the US has always been a just been a continuation of European expansion throughout its history.
  
  --
  For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
28. Re:Yeah... by phlinn · 2010-11-05 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  The sad thing is, the role of world policeman used to be a democrat policy, but the neo-conservatives (in the original usage) brought it into the republican party with them.
  
  --
  "Pulling together is the aim of despotism and tyranny! Free men pull in all sorts of directions" -- Havelock Vetinari
29. Re:Yeah... by Schadrach · 2010-11-05 02:33 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Spending cuts from wherever it's not absolutely necessary (and I hate to say this, but defense has a significant bit of fat to trim -- I'm not saying anything extreme and ridiculous like that we don't need a military, or our troops don't need body armor or something, just that we go to excess in the name of funneling money into defense contractors currently).
  Make all the "welfare" programs into "workfare" -- there's always some public work somewhere we can throw people at, and if all else fails let smaller governments (as in local) as well as nonpolitical nonprofits (churches, charities, and the like) request laborers from the pool; the whole point being to make them work for their living, even if their on the government dole. Specifically we don't want it to be nice work (we want people to prefer having a "legitimate" job), we want it to be a "I have no other choice, but at least picking litter off the interstate is better than going hungry."
  No tax cuts, at least not for a while. Cutting expenses doesn't help reduce debt if you also cut revenue. Devise a specific plan for debt reduction, and do not reduce taxes until we've got it back under control.
  Require a budget be balanced on average. Running a deficit during a recession helps recovery, but it's only a good endeavor if you then pay down the deficit once the economy has recovered. Persistent debt is not desirable in any way.
30. Re:Yeah... by BStroms · 2010-11-05 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  Why do you typically vote Republican then? "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results". - Albert Einstein
  Because there are far more issues than the one at stake, and if you look back at history as recent as Bill Clinton, you'll see that even Democrats aren't saints in this regard.
  
  My largest concern is making sure power doesn't become too centralized. I'm a strong believer of the laboratory of democracy model where you try something out at the state level and see what unintended consequences come along before you roll it out to the national level. Plus, if you really don't like what your state is doing, you can simply move to another one.
  
  So of course I am very determined not to let the UN get too much power, and while the Republicans aren't always very good at limiting the power of the federal government, I trust them more than the Democrats not to try to sign any power over to the UN.
  
  More recently, it's been largely due to my strong opposition of the Energy Bill. I find it hard to believe it's so similar to the Spanish plan after seeing what their plan did to them. I can support some funds going to help build solar/wind farms, but I'll pass on regulation and carbon taxing.
  
  I think we could have a greater impact on the climate at a lower cost by pushing for simple changes such as painting the roofs of buildings white, using single ply toilet paper, and encouraging people to have few pets and children.
  
  Not to mention that trying to reduce the birth rate would address overpopulation, an issue I consider to be a far greater threat to civilization than climate change.
31. Re:Yeah... by john82 · 2010-11-05 02:54 · Score: 1
  
  Which is a good thing considering how messed up the world would be if every country cherished war like the US does. :p
  What in the world led you to that idiotic conclusion?
32. Re:Yeah... by Hoi+Polloi · 2010-11-05 02:59 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Every president, regardless of party, gets their war. It is in the contract I think.
  
  --
  It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
33. Re:Yeah... by corbettw · 2010-11-05 03:01 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  If you're fiscally conservative and want to end the all-war-all-the-time state of things, there's only one party you should be voting for.
  
  --
  God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
34. Re:Yeah... by Hoi+Polloi · 2010-11-05 03:02 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I'd mod this insightful. You'd think that if they were properly trained soldiers they would have the wherewithall to check a real map once they saw a Costa Rican flag. That would've set off all sorts of bells for me. Not sure what they were doing depending on Google Maps in the first place though.
  The fact that they took the Costa Rican flag down and replaced it with their own though makes me wonder if this was a "mistake". Sounds like they raised a middle finger along with their flag.
  
  --
  It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
35. Re:Yeah... by ikkonoishi · 2010-11-05 03:06 · Score: 1
  
  The place that I work has this problem a lot (though on a lesser scale). The location of a number of businesses are jumbled around the area, and a good number of them wind up near us. We constantly get people coming in, and asking us for directions. I've reported the problem to Google a few times, but that most likely only helps them while all the GPS devices still have the incorrect information.
36. Re:Yeah... by trapnest · 2010-11-05 03:07 · Score: 1
  
  Since the "not for the creation of weapons of mass destruction" in the iTunes EULA, I'm really not sure if either of you are serious or not...
37. Re:Yeah... by rgviza · 2010-11-05 03:14 · Score: 1
  
  Totally agree. I hate both parties because it took both of them to allow the last 2 wars to start. Liberals seem to have amnesia when it comes to this... The house and senate were nearly unanimous when they voted on starting these wars. The neocons (GOP) were and are a bunch of yes-men to whatever a republican president says. Liberals will say "well bush lied". They could have demanded to see the evidence. As it was they were bloodthirsty after 9/11 just like the neocons and the rest of this country, and wanted to punish _someone_. The fact that none will accept responsibility for it and most are still in office boggles the mind. Even liberals I knew, at the time, wanted bush to bomb the fuck out of iraq. They all changed their tune to "Blame Bush" when the war became unpopular. The ONLY war we had any business engaging in in the last 40 years was the first gulf war, where Kuwait and the UN specifically asked us for help to stop hussein and boot him out of Kuwait. SH should have been captured and executed for war crimes at this point in time.
  
  --
  Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
38. Re:Yeah... by clone53421 · 2010-11-05 03:14 · Score: 1
  
  Real real translation: YHBT. HTH. HAND.
  (You have been trolled. Hope this helps. Have a nice day.)
  
  --
  Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
39. Re:Yeah... by c6gunner · 2010-11-05 03:21 · Score: 1
  
  Translation: Bumper-stickers are an excellent source of factual information!
40. Re:Yeah... by mdarksbane · 2010-11-05 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  Not to mention that anything that get officially procured for the military has to go through a prolonged design and approval process, has to withstand extreme temperatures and weather, all that.
  Which in practice means that you will be late to getting all of the cool consumer-style tech gadgets, and the ones you get will be slower. Which can make sense... you don't want a consumer product failing in the middle of your engagement because some sand got into it or it doesn't work in the snow -- but it also means that theres a definite niche for bringing in a cheap consumer product as as a secondary system to whatever your tried and true military stuff, because it'll be a lot nicer when it does work.
41. Re:Yeah... by knarfling · 2010-11-05 03:26 · Score: 1
  
  I used to vote for the person I thought was more honest and better reflected my views. Now I tend to vote for the one who is better at covering up his/her lies.
  In politics, it is impossible to vote for the lesser of two evils. There is no such thing as "lesser evil" in politics.
  No matter who wins the elections, the voters are the ones that lose.
  
  --
  Great civilizations have lived and died on false theories. Don't mess up mine with a few facts.
42. Re:Yeah... by shugah · 2010-11-05 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  The Globe and Mail had a story a while back about a woman following GPS mapping instructions in Belleville Ontario who kept driving into a swamp until the water started pouring in the doors of her car and it stalled.
  "I just feel so stupid" said the 25 year old Federal Corrections office .... (sigh)
  
  --
  If you aren't part of the solution, then there is good money to be made prolonging the problem
43. Re:Yeah... by delinear · 2010-11-05 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  Actually I doubt that do have better information than Google does. Not that many nations have the resources to spend on that type of tool that the US, NATO, Russia, China, Japan, Brazil, and so on do.
  This is not about having some kind of advanced mapping and GPS capabilities, it's about having a note about where the borders of your own country are and someone who can read a bearing. I would have thought they'd have at least that. At the point when their military were taking down neighbouring nation flags and dumping waste over the border it might have been a good idea to ask HQ to check that their co-ordinates were the right side of the big red line drawn around the map on the General's wall. I smell a FUD excuse for an illegal military excursion (maybe they were hoping not to get caught, hence the weak excuse).
44. Re:Yeah... by jameskojiro · 2010-11-05 03:32 · Score: 1
  
  You're forgetting the war in Bosnia in the 90's that everyone's favorite cigar fornicator got us involved in.....
  
  --
  Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
45. Re:Yeah... by mdarksbane · 2010-11-05 03:36 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  See, the fun thing about these enforced work program ideas is that they only work if no one is doing the job already. That "public work somewhere we can throw people at" is currently done by salaried government employees (who are probably unionized) and who will heartily object to being replaced by people who were too lazy to sign up for that job under their own free will.
46. Re:Yeah... by clone53421 · 2010-11-05 03:40 · Score: 1
  
  Everyone was trolling, or was trolled. Including me and you. /thread
  
  --
  Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
47. Re:Yeah... by couchslug · 2010-11-05 03:42 · Score: 1
  
  "Not every country considers war that important to waste so much money as the americans do. Even less so when it's entire population is just 6 million."
  I agree...
  Old Sarge mode on:
  Land navigation is among the most basic of military skills. Maps are cheap (hint, use the proper military topo map), plastic laminate is cheap, and grease pencils are cheap. Maps don't need batteries, and were around long before the Internet. Even Boy and Girl Scouts can use a map and compass.
  The officer in charge fucked up and now has a peacetime learning experience (as opposed to getting himself and his troops killed). Nice.
  
  --
  "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
48. Re:Yeah... by socz · 2010-11-05 03:50 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Sometimes, there's a good reason why people can't work. For example, some people hurt their backs pretty bad. They can't work a "normal job" because they can't stand up for more than a little while, or sit down for a little while, or even sleep because of the pain.
  
  I used to be of the same mentality as yours, but then I learned more about why there are people like that.
  
  Unfortunately, there are also people who fake a lot of things and lie in order to get benefits. That is a real shame because you take away from many things that money is needed for, and also those people who are legitimately hurt or unable to work as a "normal person" and don't have another source of income.
  
  One thing I tell people, is that not all people in Skid Row are crack heads. You see families and better than homeless dressed people out here. These are people who have lost their jobs, then their homes, and finally their ability to get work.
  
  --
  My abilities are only limited by my imagination
49. Re:Yeah... by LWATCDR · 2010-11-05 03:54 · Score: 1
  
  They could by why bother? They had Google Maps probably on some nice small mobile device.
  Have you ever tried to check a GPS display with a map?
  I have to wonder if this wasn't part of some ongoing boarder issues. Just about every boarder was drawn before GPS and let's face it that part of world has some pretty think jungles.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
50. Re:Yeah... by couchslug · 2010-11-05 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  They failed to download enough Free Stuff:
  http://www.scribd.com/doc/2436983/Army-FM-325-26-Map-Reading-and-Land-Navigation
  
  --
  "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
51. Re:Yeah... by Overzeetop · 2010-11-05 04:00 · Score: 1
  
  I'm going to respond to a sibling post here, as it gets to my problem with work-fare:
  1) Most of those people are nearly unemployable. They have no skills, are utterly unreliable, and are often incapacitated (by disability or the need to care for offspring)
  2) If you put them to work you'll probably not be taking jobs away from government workers, but from private industry. Much work in gov't is done through private contractors, and many "productive" jobs you could get the people to do are being done by regular companies. There are only so many jobs to do, and you'd just be shuffling the chairs.
  I agree with you that cuts probably need to be made in entitlements and fixed spending, because we'll never dig out way out using only discretionary spending - not even if we doubled taxes.
  Personally, I have no fear that the tax for those above $250k will affect the economy. I also have no fear about somehow being "cursed" enough to end up in that bracket. I'm already in the top 10%of earners, but I never expect to hit that income level. If someone want's to pitch me into that level, though, I think I'll be able to manage. ;-)
  
  --
  Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
52. Re:Yeah... by Omestes · 2010-11-05 04:14 · Score: 1
  
  At least that one wasn't unilateral aggression (i.e. we did it for the UN), and we may have committed forces for an actual reason (unlike Iraq or what we turned Afghanistan into).
  Not saying that the liberals are rosy on that front either, just a bit better than the Republicans or recent memory. Not that it is really hard to be better than Bush II, with his two pointless, mismanaged, expensive, wars that are being fought for no reason that I can discern.*
  * I'm not anti-war. I am anti-stupid. I agreed with invading Afghanistan, up until the point where we started making things worse and not better (meaning the second we actually got there).
  
  --
  A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
53. Re:Yeah... by sckeener · 2010-11-05 04:22 · Score: 1
  
  I always thought it was interesting that when it comes to the economy at the federal level we help the largest electorate first and then sprinkle out economic help just enough to get buy in from other representatives.
  There's no progressive economic incentives such as having large military bases or other major federal buildings (such as NASA) located in economically challenged regions.
  When it comes time to vote on keeping the current budget, they want the states with the most reps to have a vested interest in keeping the status quo or increasing it. It doesn't matter if we'd save money elsewhere. It doesn't matter if it would do more economic benefit to have federal offices located somewhere else. All that matters is keeping the votes you have and possibly expanding it. Want to guess why NASA hasn't been hurt worse over the years? or why it has been a slow painful cutting? It has offices in most of the states.
  So if you are from one of the major states, such as California, Texas, or New York, how likely are you to want to cause economic trouble for your state?
  
  --
  "Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
54. Re:Yeah... by Tablizer · 2010-11-05 04:23 · Score: 1
  
  LHC: Not responsible for accidental extinction or harmful mutation of humanity or other chordates; or for the release of harmful species or elements from unknown dimensions or different temporal eras."
  
  --
  Table-ized A.I.
55. Re:Yeah... by Omestes · 2010-11-05 04:25 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  WTF did the IS do with Somalia? The genocides in Rwanda and Durfar? Oh yeah, we let it happen.
  We invaded a country for no actual reason whatsoever, in hopes of political benefits, oil, family grudges, and/or posturing. None of which are worth the slightest loss of life, American or otherwise. Why invade Iraq, and not step for actual atrocities like the ones you mention? Oh, there is no money in it, no mythical glory.
  There is no glory in being the aggressor. I am proud of America, but it is damn hard to be proud of our actions sometimes. Sometimes I wonder if we are the bad guy, the international Skeletor. Questioning our policies is NOT anti-American. Being against some of the boneheaded stuff we do is also not Anti-American. There is no shame in saying "Hey guys, you might be doing something stupid.".
  Just because other people are sometimes stupid or wrong doesn't mean they lose the right to question others. There is something strange in that. We can be evil as long as we aren't as evil as someone else? This makes no sense to me.
  "Yes I'm stupid, but thats okay because I'm not as stupid as you! nyah nyah nyah!" Meanwhile everyone walks off a cliff, but at least we get the distinction of walking off a slightly lower (yet equally fatal) one.
  
  --
  A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
56. Re:Yeah... by Arancaytar · 2010-11-05 04:47 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, I always thought that referred to their translation service. Using that in diplomatic channels might have disastrous effects.
57. Re:Yeah... by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-11-05 04:49 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I'm not saying anything extreme and ridiculous like that we don't need a military, or our troops don't need body armor or something, just that we go to excess in the name of funneling money into defense contractors currently).
  What I find interesting is that you guys spend absolutely insane amount of money on big shiny toys like F-22, but your basic Army stuff - like the standard infantry rifle - still has known problems compared to most other designs in service of other countries, and, despite those problems being well known for a while now, and several attempts to do something about it, there is still no fix in sight.
  It's almost as if big military projects are primarily about what you call "pork barrel spending", rather than about making your soldiers safer...
58. Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-11-05 04:51 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  That certainly seems true. Mainly because the US appears to require war in order to function properly. If you're not destroying some foreign company, you're declaring silly things like "War on Drugs".
59. Re:Yeah... by budgenator · 2010-11-05 05:11 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  A nation has three pillars of influence, diplomatic, economic and military; It used to be the the real purpose of War was to insure that countries would be preferentially amenable to the other two pillars of influence. Unfortunately the world is getting increasingly stupid and stubborn and unresponsive to diplomatic and economic pressure, and to be entirely honest the "pointless fucking wars the US has been waging for 40 years" have mostly been UN wars where the US and Great Britain have been stuck doing the heavy lifting and the 40 years would be more like 50 or 60 now.
  
  --
  Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
60. Re:Yeah... by clone53421 · 2010-11-05 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  you guys spend absolutely insane amount of money on big shiny toys like F-22, but your basic Army stuff - like the standard infantry rifle - still has known problems compared to most other designs in service of other countries
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_Individual_Combat_Weapon_program
  The whole problem is that it’s horribly expensive and that means you can’t put one in the hands of every soldier, which works out a lot better with planes than it does with combat rifles.
  
  --
  Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
61. Re:Yeah... by cascajal · 2010-11-05 05:31 · Score: 1
  
  It is an illegal military excursion, the Costarican government pointed this error to them directly an thru the OEA and asked them to remove their military forces from Costa Rica immediatly, they refused!! When Costarican aircraft make flybys near the area, Nicaraguan soldiers point their guns at the aircraft. Things are getting quite serious here, and most of it is because the president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega (google him) wants more votes in the upcoming election.
62. Re:Yeah... by ZaphDingbat · 2010-11-05 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, sure, go after Intel instead.
63. Re:Yeah... by dave420 · 2010-11-05 05:34 · Score: 1
  
  I'd say it's not the wealth of the area that affects how well-mapped it is, but the wealth of the people who are interested in said area.
64. Re:Yeah... by clone53421 · 2010-11-05 05:38 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  “turn left”... off an overpass. (It’s fixed now.)
  The map, or the side of the bridge?
  
  --
  Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
65. Re:Yeah... by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-11-05 05:49 · Score: 1
  
  The very first phrase in that article:
  The Objective Individual Combat Weapon or OICW was the next-generation service rifle competition that was under development as part of the United States Army OICW program; the program was eventually discontinued without bringing the weapon out of the prototype phase.
  There was more, actually - US SOCOM ran their own program, and they even ended up with something - though even there they took the new gun to complement their M4 rather than replace them (they took the 7.62x51 version of the gun, and passed on the 5.56 one).
  
  The whole problem is that it’s horribly expensive and that means you can’t put one in the hands of every soldier
  It's horribly expensive to research, quite likely, but the research is already done, with multiple fine weapon systems available - XM8, HK416, and now SCAR. You only need to buy.
  The cost to buy is not "horribly expensive" at all. Civilian (semi-auto) versions of SCAR go for ~$2,500 these days. I'd imagine that US govt buys theirs for ~$3K or so.
  Now you don't really need them in the hands of every soldier - only for those folk who are stationed in the war zone, and even then only those who are likely to take part in a real firefight where their life depends on the reliability of their weapon. This means that all reserve units can keep their M16/M4, and most support units stationed in Iraq & Afghanistan can do as well, with gradual upgrades as finances permit - same as it was when you transitioned from M14 to M16. So, we're only really talking about frontline troops who need it here and now.
  Now, I don't know how many that is, but it's definitely way below 500k, so let's take that figure for now - so it comes out to $1.5B to equip all US soldiers presently engaged on the front lines with SCAR 16. That's the cost of 10 F-22s. It uses the same ammunition and the same magazines as M16/M4, so there's no waste on those. Then there's also training which isn't free, of course, but I doubt it's anywhere close to the figure of the purchase.
  So, when given the choice between 10 F-22s (which aren't even used in either Iraq or Afghanistan!), or rearming all your front-line troops with an infantry rifle that is proven in testing to be four times as reliable in the environmental conditions they have to deal with, which one is a better way to spend money?
66. Re:Yeah... by Khashishi · 2010-11-05 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  It doesn't really help our moral authority that we gave Iraq all sorts of warnings and then invaded anyway after they caved into all our demands.
67. Re:Yeah... by jbengt · 2010-11-05 05:54 · Score: 1
  
  In politics, it is impossible to vote for the lesser of two evils. There is no such thing as "lesser evil" in politics.
  I tend to vote for the lesser evil - it's not impossible, it's easy. Just vote for the loser. They have less power and are therefore less able to maintain their evilness.
68. Re:Yeah... by jbengt · 2010-11-05 05:57 · Score: 1
  
  Make all the "welfare" programs into "workfare" -- there's always some public work somewhere we can throw people at,
  
  Sounds good at first glance, but, you know, most of the people on welfare are children.
69. Re:Yeah... by clone53421 · 2010-11-05 06:02 · Score: 1
  
  it comes out to $1.5B to equip all US soldiers presently engaged on the front lines with SCAR 16
  I seriously doubt that could happen under Democrat control. Republican... maybe, and only if enough people knew and cared.
  I somewhat agree, though, that improvements should be made overall, not just on the high-profile stuff like jets. They are trying, which was the point of why I posted the link about the OICW... and I’d like to see better tech in the combat rifle too; it just tends to fall through the cracks, I guess.
  
  --
  Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
70. Re:Yeah... by InvisibleSoul · 2010-11-05 06:02 · Score: 1
  
  If you ever go to RMA a Hitachi hard drive, they have the following:
  
  By clicking the "I agree" button, I agree that Hitachi GST products will not be used for the design, development, manufacturing, testing, stockpiling, or use of biological, nuclear, missile or chemical weapons”
71. Re:Yeah... by Manos_Of_Fate · 2010-11-05 06:04 · Score: 1
  
  This one I've seen, and that makes me worry about the other two...
  
  --
  Isn't enough that I ruined a pony, making a gift for you?
72. Re:Yeah... by bickerdyke · 2010-11-05 06:44 · Score: 1
  
  Well I bet for that they have the 100 times more expensive "military hardened" version in store.....
  
  --
  bickerdyke
73. Re:Yeah... by robotkid · 2010-11-05 06:45 · Score: 1
  
  Or in this case, "not responsible if your passive-aggressive neighbor decides to clean up your river for you".
  Am I the only one noticing that these troops did not seem to have a military objective but were in fact on some sort of conservation mission?
  Or maybe this is like when you disagree where your yard boundry is and you "accidentally" mow down your neighbor's rose bushes while tidying up your lawn. . .
74. Re:Yeah... by Wyatt+Earp · 2010-11-05 06:48 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Not everything, they started a COTS program either right before or right after 9/11. There was a report right after the Invasion of Iraq was over by the Marine Corps which talked about things Marines bought themselves and brought for the war and which of those things the Marine Corps should buy outright off the shelf. Down to "we shouldn't buy Camelbak water packs because civilian models update faster so we should just do a reimbursement if Marines want newer models, or buy them in smaller lots."
  I wish I had it here to link to, but its on a laptop at home.
75. Re:Yeah... by John+Hasler · 2010-11-05 07:41 · Score: 1
  
  > Why do you typically vote Republican then?
  Eespecially since, as we have all seen over the last two years, electing a Democrat President and giving the Democrats control of both House and Senate instantly ended all the wars.
  BTW do you happen to recall who was President when the USA entered WWI? WWII? The Korean war? Vietnam?
  
  --
  Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
76. Re:Yeah... by Trailwalker · 2010-11-05 07:45 · Score: 1
  
  Not to mention that trying to reduce the birth rate would address overpopulation, an issue I consider to be a far greater threat to civilization than climate change.
  War is a good start on reducing overpopulation. Add in a bit of famine, unchecked disease, and destroyed housing, and the problem is solved. Read history, and you will see that this is an old and proven solution.
  
  As resources dwindle, there will be more war and more destruction. Sic transit in aeternitas.
77. Re:Yeah... by fishbowl · 2010-11-05 07:45 · Score: 1
  
  If you go through the controversial health insurance reform act, you will find that Republicans support, item by item, the provisions in that act. The party leaders claim to want to repeal the whole thing, but they won't say directly that they want to allow insurers to drop children who develop asthma, or to take away the 35% tax credit that businesses get from the act, or going back to allowing the insurance companies to simply drop your coverage with no justification, notice, review or appeal, or the premium benefits for people aged 55-64 who want to retire early (a nice big chunk of the Republican base lives there!), allow lifetime limits that are far below a typical person's lifetime health care costs, accountability for rate hikes, and the list goes on and on and on, of things that the reform act does that are totally lost in all the rhetoric of "Repeal Obamacare". The Republican Party has successfully painted a very capitalistic, completely market-based system as "socialism" to a pretty broad spectrum of people.
  Personally, it's the *absense* of socialism in the reform plan that upsets me. I wanted to see a system like the British National Health, and I would really like it to go much, much further than just that. I'd actually like to see the whole "health insurance" concept go away entirely, to make healthcare into *the* fundamental human right, and to fund the industry to the same volume that we currently do for the military. (And yeah, I'm saying, fund that industry *instead* of the military.)
  
  --
  -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
78. Re:Yeah... by AF_Cheddar_Head · 2010-11-05 07:47 · Score: 1
  
  Bush gave you a tax cut that everyone agreed would expire in 2012. Now you want to cry foul because the date is arriving. I would bet you also like to rail against the deficit. The Bush tax cut sure made that deficit one hell of a lot bigger and before you try to tell me that lower taxes make the economy better and the federal government take in even more money you need to check the facts.
  Kennedy tax cuts wound up in a huge deficit.
  Reagan tax cuts wound up in a huge deficit
  Bush tax cuts would up in a huge deficit.
  Yes I know spending went up too but a huge part of the deficit was reduced revenues.
  Face it supply side does not work.
79. Re:Yeah... by fishbowl · 2010-11-05 07:50 · Score: 1
  
  They don't actually know they are opposing those things. They aren't thinking at that level of detail. All they know is that the plan equals "socialism" and that socialism is bad and must be fought to the last American standing. I'm serious. There are a lot of people out there whose only understanding of healthcare reform is that it's somehow going to send them into poverty for someone else's benefit. They don't think about enough or even know about it in sufficient detail to understand that they would agree with every single provision in the reform act if it had been penned by their own party leaders, which ironically enough, it substantially was.
  
  --
  -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
80. Re:Yeah... by AF_Cheddar_Head · 2010-11-05 07:50 · Score: 1
  
  You sir are wrong.
  Supply side does not work.
81. Re:Yeah... by fishbowl · 2010-11-05 08:00 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  When we go to war, one overriding and fundamental change should occur:
  All industrial production, all natural resource extraction and development, and all labor in this country shall be devoted 100% to the war effort for its duration.
  I'm not saying that the government should take over all means of production, but I am saying that no military contractor should be allowed to take any kind of profit beyond operating costs for the duration. They can be paid in bonds that are redeemable at the end of the war, but they certainly should not profit. Anyone who is engaged in any endeavor that is not directly part of the war effort should find themselves very unpopular for doing so.
  If this sounds extreme, that's because it is. It should be the barrier that the government faces when it chooses to go to war, and it would provide the motivation for the entire country to end that war, and no profit motive for anyone at all for there to be any interest in artificially prolonging the war.
  I find it disgusting that there is a "defense industry" that is based on greed, instead of a reluctant one that is based on desperate need.
  From the instant we go to war, no person should be engaged in *anything* except the war effort, until that war is over. All commodities should be rationed. All industrial profits should be bonded for the war effort. And every able bodied man and woman should make it his or her personal duty to contribute.
  If we have an issue that doesn't persuade the whole country to be willing to make that sacrifice, we don't have an issue worth going to war over.
  
  --
  -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
82. Re:Yeah... by Philomage · 2010-11-05 08:01 · Score: 1
  
  Consider, most of what Google does, it does... as an experiment/long term investment.
  Hmmm... I wonder what the percentage is in having two nations go to war? ("Don't be evil"?)
  (KIDDING! Google has no plans to control the world and is NOT part of the Illuminati global conspiracy. Really.)
83. Re:Yeah... by Schadrach · 2010-11-05 08:05 · Score: 1
  
  Hence the comment about letting nonprofits and/or local gov't have them on request. If you think local gov'ts have salaried people doing everything that needs done, I can tell you haven't been in small town anywhere anytime recently. There's always litter to pick, meters to read, groundskeeping, or something that isn't kept up to par.
  Even then, the goal isn't entirely about getting too much useful work out of them, but rather about making seeking legitimate employment preferable because it's bound to be easier and/or better pay than what we're offering as welfare.
84. Re:Yeah... by MichaelSmith · 2010-11-05 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  Back when Australia occupied East Timor as the UN peace force an Australian unit got into a fire fight with an Indonesian unit close to the East Timor - Indonesian border. After a couple of minutes banging away at each other officers on both sides held a sit down meeting right in the middle of the road between the disputing parties and compared maps. The Aussies claimed to have the official Indonesian survey maps of the region, and the story is that the other side were not so well equipped and relied on local knowledge about the location of the border.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
85. Re:Yeah... by Schadrach · 2010-11-05 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  There's a difference between legitimate disability and "welfare families", and I've personally known people in both cases.
  You work around disabilities where possible and include them in the program to whatever degree they are physically capable of. If they are honestly "totally disabled", at that point it's OK to exclude them entirely, but that's the exception, not the rule.
86. Re:Yeah... by Schadrach · 2010-11-05 08:28 · Score: 1
  
  Yes yes, churches toe the line dangerously closely to being a political organization most of the time. They still aren't *really* a political organization in any sense, and can actually lose their tax-exempt status for directly pushing a political agenda (rare, but it has happened).
87. Re:Yeah... by indi0144 · 2010-11-05 08:58 · Score: 1
  
  No country should rely on "google Maps" for military intel, now, is not that Nicaragua is some sort of peacefull friendly citizen of the caribean, they have LOTS of trouble with neighbors because they claim land/sea that are not from them. They actually get inside Colombian territorial waters now and then, they even captured Colombian fisherman on our own territorial waters not long ago.
  
  Google Maps caused all this? Thats what you tell on public broadcasting, I wonder WHATS really going on over there. Maybe they, in fact, want to invade Costa Rica. Wich sucks since that part of the caribean is so beaten by natural disasters and this retarded militia and politicians seem to care about other stuff.
88. Re:Yeah... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2010-11-05 09:42 · Score: 1
  
  I suspect, that with the exception of tourism dollars and military/clandestine adventurism, most of the money to be made with location-assisted advertising is made from transactions that occur fairly close to home and/or on the basis of consumer metrics that are gathered about consumers fairly close to home.
  
  Obviously, poor Caribbean islands with nice climates and coastlines are probably over-surveyed compared to their GDP per capita for the first reason, and dusty middle eastern hellholes for the second; but I suspect that the bulk of Google's efforts correlate pretty strongly with the value of the local consumers in an area.(aside from any hush-hush contracts they may or may not have to supply some sort of Google Search Appliance on steroids to the spooks to help them sort through their giant pile o' badly sorted leads, which isn't going to show up in Google maps)
89. Re:Yeah... by sjames · 2010-11-05 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  Make all the "welfare" programs into "workfare" -- there's always some public work somewhere we can throw people at, and if all else fails let smaller governments (as in local) as well as nonpolitical nonprofits (churches, charities, and the like) request laborers from the pool; the whole point being to make them work for their living, even if their on the government dole. Specifically we don't want it to be nice work (we want people to prefer having a "legitimate" job), we want it to be a "I have no other choice, but at least picking litter off the interstate is better than going hungry."
  Why? Has an unemployed person done something wrong that deserves punishment? What if we just happen to be in the enviable position of having more labor available than we need? Why not just offer decent jobs to any who want one or reduce everyone's work hours proportionally to the unemployment rate and drive private sector demand for employees?
90. Re:Yeah... by T+Murphy · 2010-11-05 10:46 · Score: 1
  
  Or in 2007 when Switzerland invaded Liechtenstein. Of course, they seem to just have gotten lost instead of following a bad map.
  
  --
  My webcomic
91. Re:Yeah... by AJWM · 2010-11-05 10:55 · Score: 1
  
  Nothing works if spending is not checked. You can't run up a deficit if you're not spending (or worse, giving away) money.
  (And yes, I realize that there are some necessary levels of expenditure. We're way beyond that.)
  
  --
  -- Alastair
92. Re:Yeah... by AJWM · 2010-11-05 11:02 · Score: 1
  
  Alas, too many libertarians (neo-libertarians?) forget that big corporations are also a product of government. I'd be happier with the Libertarians if one of their planks was establishing that corporations are not people, and should not be allowed to exercise the rights thereof (although OK for the individuals in the corp to exercise those rights -- and yield up the limits on liability that the corp provides.)
  
  --
  -- Alastair
93. Re:Yeah... by drinkypoo · 2010-11-05 23:22 · Score: 1
  
  and to be entirely honest the "pointless fucking wars the US has been waging for 40 years" have mostly been UN wars where the US and Great Britain have been stuck doing the heavy lifting and the 40 years would be more like 50 or 60 now.
  When you say "UN wars" then you have to pin the blame on the members of the UNSC, and the USA is the strongest. So you come right back to American imperialism. How many of those "UN wars" resulted in the installation of a US military presence?
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
94. Re:Yeah... by belmolis · 2010-11-06 05:33 · Score: 1
  
  Hunh? Some US wars have been imperialistic or pointless, but the idea that all US wars have been imperialistic in nature is ridiculous. To take the most prominent recent examples, the US saved the European democracies from the Nazis in WWII, and prevented South Korea from falling to the North Korean Communists, one of the world's worst regimes, in the Korean War. And the intervention in Bosnia kept a lot of innocent people (mostly Muslim, by the way) from being massacred.
95. Re:Yeah... by budgenator · 2010-11-06 06:03 · Score: 1
  
  yes China, France and Russia, just roll over and play dead when we snap our fingers.
  
  --
  Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
omgz it's started by iONiUM · 2010-11-05 00:47 · Score: 5, Funny

This is how google takes over the world! Soon there will be a very small dot somewhere in google maps called "googleland", and then over time the borders will expand. But nobody will question it, because it must be right.
1. Re:omgz it's started by TheGratefulNet · 2010-11-05 00:55 · Score: 1
  
  there's more land, still.
  (after the 'jump')
  
  --
  
  --
  "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
2. Re:omgz it's started by snspdaarf · 2010-11-05 01:09 · Score: 1
  
  That little place there, "Ottisburg"? That's mine.
  
  --
  Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
3. Re:omgz it's started by Culture20 · 2010-11-05 01:11 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  This is how google takes over the world! Soon there will be a very small dot somewhere in google maps called "googleland", and then over time the borders will expand. But nobody will question it, because it must be right.
  translate.google.com says that German for "Googleland" is Liechtenstein. Start looking! If you find it, tell everyone you know!
4. Re:omgz it's started by jgreco · 2010-11-05 01:30 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Otis didn't have the nuts to say anything so bold.
  Lex: Otisburg .. Otisburg?
  Otis: Miss Tessmacher, she's got her own place.
  Lex: Otisburg??
  Otis: It's a little bitty place...
  Lex: Otisburg?!?!?
  Otis: Okay, I'll just wipe it off, that's all. It's just a little town.
5. Re:omgz it's started by digitig · 2010-11-05 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  And it will be Alliance v. Horde all over again when it overlaps Bingland.
  
  --
  Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
6. Re:omgz it's started by MBGMorden · 2010-11-05 01:49 · Score: 1
  
  I thing Google vs Bing would be more like the Burning Legion vs the Defias Gang than Alliance vs Horde.
  
  --
  "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
7. Re:omgz it's started by CFBMoo1 · 2010-11-05 02:02 · Score: 1
  
  Yes and soon you'll see their troops move to take over other nations in gadget filled vans and wearing multi color helmets... oh wait!
  
  --
  ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
8. Re:omgz it's started by countertrolling · 2010-11-05 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  And there will be war against the Axis of Evil, consisting of Oracle, Apple, and Microsoft.
  "We've always been at war with Cupertino"
  
  --
  For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
9. Re:omgz it's started by countertrolling · 2010-11-05 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  Begun, the Bing war has..
  
  --
  For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
10. Re:omgz it's started by hcdejong · 2010-11-05 04:25 · Score: 1
  
  Eric: "Gee, Sergey, what do you want to do tonight?"
  Sergey: "The same thing we do every night, Eric--try to take over the world!"
11. Re:omgz it's started by Manos_Of_Fate · 2010-11-05 06:06 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not sure why or how, but that sounds dirty to me.
  
  --
  Isn't enough that I ruined a pony, making a gift for you?
12. Re:omgz it's started by sharkey · 2010-11-05 10:31 · Score: 1
  
  J-J-J-J- Just like the bad guy from Lethal Weapon 2
  I've got diplomatic immunity so Hammer you can't sue
  I can write graffiti, even jaywalk in the street,
  I can riot, loot, not give a hoot, and touch your sister's teat!
  
  --
  
  --
  "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
doing work to clean up a nearby river? by hxnwix · 2010-11-05 00:51 · Score: 1

how DARE they!
1. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by Dunbal · 2010-11-05 01:36 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  The clueless summary gets it wrong. I live in Costa Rica - the problem isn't dredging the river, it's that Nicaragua is dumping all the gunk on the Costa Rican side of the river and destroying protected forests.
  
  --
  Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
2. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by dkleinsc · 2010-11-05 02:23 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Which suggests that the "Google Maps" explanation is probably a BS excuse for accidentally-on-purpose dumping stuff in Costa Rica.
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
3. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by canuco · 2010-11-05 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  Plus, Nicaragua is not exactly a pacific country.
  So, let me get this straight, the military relies on Google Maps to define their borders, and they take action on it. That's BS, if you ask me. ... or perhaps, evil Google is cooking the WW3?
  I wonder what Venezuela's Hugo Chavez might be saying: "The Empire is making these two brother countries fight each other!"
4. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by IorDMUX · 2010-11-05 04:44 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe you should deploy your military to guard your borders...
  From Wikipedia:
  
  In a ceremony in the Cuartel Bellavista, Figueres broke a wall with a mallet symbolizing the end of Costa Rica's military spirit. In 1949, the abolition of the military was introduced in Article 12 of the Costa Rican Constitution.
  That's right, Costa Rica is one of the few countries in the world (and the first, in modern times) to have completely re-purposed its military force and budget. Costa Rica split their formerly massive military budget between education, internal policing, and culture, years ago. (This is why Costa Rica is home to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights as well as the UN University for Peace.)
  
  Unfortunately, this liberal approach leaves them a bit unprepared to deal with "uppity" neighbors.
  
  --
  >> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
5. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by phantomfive · 2010-11-05 04:47 · Score: 1
  
  What's Costa Rica going to do? It's not like they have an army; Nicaragua really can push them around here if they want to.
  
  --
  Qxe4
6. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by ColdWetDog · 2010-11-05 05:24 · Score: 1
  
  Unfortunately, this liberal approach leaves them a bit unprepared to deal with "uppity" neighbors.
  No problem, really. All Costa Rica needs to do is align itself with Google (maybe just drop XP and Office, pick up Google Docs). Snuggle up to Sergey, maybe give the Google Air Force a special hanger or two (Really Sergey, both a 757 and a 767??). One false move and Nicaragua is just offline....
  
  This is the 21st Century, folks.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
7. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by Colin+Douglas+Howell · 2010-11-05 06:42 · Score: 1
  
  From the article it sounds like Costa Rica is quite disturbed about this. Depending on how much Nicaragua cares about its image, it seems to me that simply having some civilians camping out in the area with guns and cameras might be enough to dissuade further shenanigans. If Nicaragua is rash enough to challenge them, it ends up looking like the bad guy and possibly enraging its neighbor into amassing a large citizens' militia for war.
8. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by Colin+Douglas+Howell · 2010-11-05 07:02 · Score: 1
  
  Unfortunately, this liberal approach leaves them a bit unprepared to deal with "uppity" neighbors.
  To be fair, they did that after a civil war, and their democratic government has since been stable for the last 60 years. Considering the tendency for Central American militaries to get involved in government, Costa Rica seems to be doing pretty well. If worse comes to worse, they could always raise a citizen levy. Might not be as effective as a professional force, but their motivation might more than make up for that...
9. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by dkleinsc · 2010-11-05 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  What's Costa Rica going to do?
  That's easy - call up their pals at the US State Department, who will likely tell Nicaragua to knock it off.
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
10. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by phantomfive · 2010-11-05 17:11 · Score: 1
  
  Nicaragua doesn't care about their image. They have an image of being poor as dirt, even among central American countries. They have a president who is focused on becoming a dictator. They have problems with property rights; no one knows who owns what after the communist takeover in the 80s.
  
  There are a lot of problems in Nicaragua, image is one of the smallest by far.
  
  --
  Qxe4
11. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by drinkypoo · 2010-11-05 23:28 · Score: 1
  
  If they don't ask for help from the USA, we'll charge in there anyway to attack the evil Nicos. Just watch. Costa Rica is important to United Fruit Company, er Chiquita... errrrrr, Bonita. You go over the border from Panama and it's bananas for days... or at least for some minutes
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
12. Re:doing work to clean up a nearby river? by phantomfive · 2010-11-06 06:18 · Score: 1
  
  The chochos just have to be careful how they do it; as long as they don't disturb Chiquita or whatever, they give them extra land or something, they're good.
  
  --
  Qxe4
Great new way to annex your neighbor by jgreco · 2010-11-05 00:52 · Score: 1

Just get Google Maps to incorrectly show the border, right?
Whatever did we do in the days before Google Maps? Didn't the military used to use paper maps that were actually vetted and verified?
1. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by Arimus · 2010-11-05 00:58 · Score: 1
  
  They used paper maps... as for the v&v part, well depended on who was doing the v&v, after all Germany probably had paper maps with Poland hastily scribbled over...
  
  --
  --- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
2. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by NJRoadfan · 2010-11-05 01:03 · Score: 1
  
  The real worrying thing is...why would ANY military agency even be looking at Google Maps in the first place. Then again this isn't the first time this has happened. The US military forces used tourist maps to plan the invasion of the island of Grenada in 1983. Granted, there was very little cartography of the island available... but to resort to tourist maps?
3. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by robot256 · 2010-11-05 01:10 · Score: 1
  
  It's not like Nicaragua is known for having the most technologically advanced military in the world, and these guys were not on a combat mission...maybe it was just a budget-cutting measure?
4. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by bluefoxlucid · 2010-11-05 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  What's wrong with resorting to better intelligence than you have in any case? That sounds innovative to me. "We don't know what the fuck we're doing" "Well the kiosks there hand out maps like candy, go there with a camera and a hawaiian shirt and flip flops and buy one for 25 cents. Hell, buy 6."
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
5. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by TDyl · 2010-11-05 01:28 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  The real worrying thing is...why would ANY military agency even be looking at Google Maps in the first place. Then again this isn't the first time this has happened. The US military forces used tourist maps to plan the invasion of the island of Grenada in 1983. Granted, there was very little cartography of the island available... but to resort to tourist maps?
  Didn't that lead to a hospital being targeted and destroyed?
  
  --
  Todd: I hope it proves as delicious as the farmers that grew them
6. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by NJRoadfan · 2010-11-05 01:50 · Score: 1
  
  Most tourist maps aren't even good at their intended purpose. They are almost never drawn to scale and lack any meaningful detail.
7. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by TheLink · 2010-11-05 02:00 · Score: 1
  
  To get an excuse for doing something they know is wrong?
  
  There was a Costa Rican flag there... So I don't buy the bullshit that it's "Google Maps".
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
8. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by bluefoxlucid · 2010-11-05 02:09 · Score: 1
  
  So, vaguely knowing where you're going, versus "well we have an idea that somewhere in this country is some target. I think it's here, about, in the middle! Just start wandering around, I dunno about any landmarks but you'll find it eventually. Ask some of the locals, they might know."
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
9. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by c6gunner · 2010-11-05 02:11 · Score: 1
  
  The real worrying thing is...why would ANY military agency even be looking at Google Maps in the first place.
  Well, considering that the entire population of Nicaragua is about 3/4 the size of New York City, I'm guessing that their military intelligence branch probably consists of three guys with a protractor and a compass, funded by the tip-jar at the local coffee shop. Google probably spent more developing street-view that the entire Nicaraguan military budget for the last decade.
  Oh, and Costa Rica doesn't have a military at all. So it's not like Nicaragua is particularly worried about a massive confrontation.
  
  Granted, there was very little cartography of the island available... but to resort to tourist maps?
  Because you work with what you have? This is like saying "granted, naval technology wasn't very advanced in the time of Columbus, but to resort to wooden sailing ships???"
10. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by lamber45 · 2010-11-05 03:38 · Score: 1
  
  From the article, the boundary is based on an 1858 treaty, and both countries have large-scale paper maps that agree with each other and not with Google. I don't see why anyone would rely on a Google for that border; there are places where it's obviously a hundred feet or so from the river that it ought to be following, and 50% of the satellite photos are covered by clouds.
11. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by c6gunner · 2010-11-05 04:01 · Score: 1
  
  In this case, they probably "relied" on it in order to justify something they wanted to do anyway.
12. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by ColdWetDog · 2010-11-05 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  Didn't that lead to a hospital being targeted and destroyed?
  Nope, they went there to rescue some medical students. They picked up some heavier resistance than expected, but didn't blow up a hospital.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
13. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by Mark+J+Tilford · 2010-11-05 06:09 · Score: 1
  
  I'm reminded of a story from the Crimean War:
  A soldier wrote to his family "Go to _____ store in London, buy me some maps of the Crimea and send them out here. They have better maps than the army gives us."
  
  --
  -----------
  100% pure freak
14. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by tibman · 2010-11-05 06:51 · Score: 1
  
  It's possible for rivers to move too.
  
  --
  http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
15. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by TDyl · 2010-11-05 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  I finally found a reference:
  
  WASHINGTON, Oct. 31 - The Defense Department said today that at least 12 people were killed when a United States Navy plane bombed a civilian hospital in the early hours of the invasion of Grenada last week. The officials, acknowledging earlier press reports of civilian casualties at a hospital, said the building was not marked as a hospital and was in a milimarked as a hospital and was in a military complex from which gunfire was being directed at American troops. They said they were unable to confirm reports that the hospital was for mental patients. Until today, American military officials had been saying they knew of no civilian casualties anywhere in Grenada. American troops were said to be using ''surgical care'' and ''limited force'' in taking strong points. Destruction to buildings was reported to be minimal.
  
  --
  Todd: I hope it proves as delicious as the farmers that grew them
16. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by mobby_6kl · 2010-11-05 11:34 · Score: 1
  
  >Granted, there was very little cartography of the island available... but to resort to tourist maps?
  You go to war with the maps that you have, not the maps that you might want to have!
17. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by NJRoadfan · 2010-11-05 17:40 · Score: 1
  
  According to my source an air attack destroyed a mental hospital. The book is "How to Lie with Maps" by Mark Monmonier, ISBN 0-226-53421-9. Well worth a read, although it could use an update covering today's mapping advances.
18. Re:Great new way to annex your neighbor by TDyl · 2010-11-05 21:49 · Score: 1
  
  Thnx for the ISBN. Just ordered a copy from Amazon UK.
  
  --
  Todd: I hope it proves as delicious as the farmers that grew them
LOL by js3 · 2010-11-05 00:54 · Score: 1

Mark one for incompetence. If you can't afford your own territorial mapping system maybe you shouldn't be in the taking down another countries flag business.

--
did you forget to take your meds?
1. Re:LOL by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2010-11-05 01:10 · Score: 1
  
  Odds are they do have their own territorial mapping system(it may still be some clunky paper nightmare, possibly even inherited from their avaricious ex-colonial-masters; but it is probably there). I'm guessing that this is a case of ease-of-use and perceived authority winning the day.
  
  Google maps, and Google Earth, are trivial to use(unless you get into serious Google Earth Fu, which is still easier than serious ArcGIS Fu), produce good looking results, and are available from nearly any internet connected device. I'm guesing that even a fully functional territorial mapping system cannot say the same. Its accuracy may be better, and it may actually have much more relevant detail of things like infrastructure, hydrology, etc; but it probably has some horrible interface, rather esoteric usability, and is thus avoided...
2. Re:LOL by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-11-05 04:55 · Score: 1
  
  Odds are they do have their own territorial mapping system(it may still be some clunky paper nightmare, possibly even inherited from their avaricious ex-colonial-masters; but it is probably there). I'm guessing that this is a case of ease-of-use
  Indeed. In the 2008 South Ossetia war, both Russians and Georgians were heavily using cell phones for communication, because, while the traditional military radio was there, it was much less convenient, and they've had reception problems in some mountainous areas.
A simple resolution by Palestrina · 2010-11-05 00:55 · Score: 2, Interesting

Why not just change the real borders to match what Google Maps says?
There is precedent for this. For example, ISO approved a standard that redefined leap year calculations to match a bug in Microsoft Excel.
1. Re:A simple resolution by kiwimate · 2010-11-05 01:09 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The blog post you link doesn't mention that Excel did it because it had to be compatible with Lotus 1-2-3, which introduced the bug.
  I realized your post (and that blog post you link) is debating whether the ISO standard should've reflected this in the first place. But intimating it's Microsoft's fault is disingenuous.
2. Re:A simple resolution by Palestrina · 2010-11-05 01:29 · Score: 1
  
  If you look at Lotus Symphony today, you see that it doesn't replicate this bug. Maybe Microsoft should try to be compatible with the real world? Just a thought.
3. Re:A simple resolution by AndrewNeo · 2010-11-05 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  So Google's plan to take over the world all along was to do it through Google Maps? It all makes sense!
4. Re:A simple resolution by sandman_eh · 2010-11-05 01:36 · Score: 1
  
  I completely disagree.
  There is no reason for the OOXML specification to use date formats based on the old .xls format. The issue about keeping bug for bug compatibility is about in-memory representation, the standard specifies on-disk representation. They do not have to be the same you know...
  Microsoft have specified a new on-disk representation which continues to have a madness just to simplify their load/save implementation. The fact that it is due to compatibility with an ancient bug from a competitor is completely irrelevant. They could have specified the OOXML standard to be clean and dealt with any issues in their save/load code, or elsewhere in excel.
  
  --
  Master of Peng Shui.Ancient oriental art of Penguin Arranging)
This is why.. by MooMooFarm · 2010-11-05 00:57 · Score: 5, Funny

we can't have nice things.
Don't blame Google maps by digitaldc · 2010-11-05 00:58 · Score: 1

Blame your ignorant, power-hungry, paternalistic military leaders who don't do any fact checking, and don't even care!
What's worse, they destroyed forest in a protected area and dumped the waste in to the river. How stupid and destructive can these guys be?

--
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Flags by Himring · 2010-11-05 00:58 · Score: 5, Funny

We stole countries with the cunning use of flags. Just sail around the world and stick a flag in. "I claim India for Britain!" They're going "You can't claim us, we live here! Five hundred million of us!" "Do you have a flag ? "What? We don't need a flag, this is our home, you bastards" "No flag, No Country, You can't have one! Those are the rules... that I just made up!...and I'm backing it up with this gun, that was lent to me from the National Rifle Association." --Eddie Izzard

--
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
Irony... by Chris_Stankowitz · 2010-11-05 00:58 · Score: 5, Funny

"(Google translation of Spanish original)."
How can I trust it now?
1. Re:Irony... by RealGrouchy · 2010-11-07 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  The translation said that Bing Maps' border matched that of the local authorities. Something must be wrong.
  - RG>
  
  --
  Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
Map rejected: No confidence interval given by Musically_ut · 2010-11-05 01:01 · Score: 1

Google Map is correct, give or take 3000 meters.

--
Never trust a spiritual leader who cannot dance -- Mr. Miyagi
1. Re:Map rejected: No confidence interval given by delinear · 2010-11-05 03:46 · Score: 1
  
  The Nicaraguans just decided they'd take, rather than give, in this instance.
2. Re:Map rejected: No confidence interval given by istartedi · 2010-11-05 07:20 · Score: 1
  
  Bob, what are you doing in my house, on my farm, and why did you slaughter and roast that cow?
  Bob: It's my house. The map is correct. Give or take 3000 meters.
  
  --
  For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
trust issues by tverbeek · 2010-11-05 01:02 · Score: 1

You know, all things considered, I'm not sure I want to trust a Google translation of the Spanish news article.

--
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Next up, from our digital overlords... by durrr · 2010-11-05 01:04 · Score: 1, Funny

Yesterday at noon, a disgruntled google employee disbanded the unit states of america, the territory was renamed to the pants of canada in google maps, rising widespread global confusion.

The white house reacted quickly to solve the problem and re-inaugured obama as the president of the pants of canada.
1. Re:Next up, from our digital overlords... by not-my-real-name · 2010-11-05 03:38 · Score: 1
  
  The white house reacted quickly to solve the problem and re-inaugured obama as the president of the pants of canada.
  This would have been an excellent time to mention Bill Clinton.
  
  --
  un-ALTERED reproduction and dissimination of this IMPORTANT information is ENCOURAGED
Colonel Pastora, I'm very disappointed in you by elrous0 · 2010-11-05 01:14 · Score: 4, Funny

See, it's stuff like this that's going to give South American military juntas a bad name.

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
What's that on that flagpole? by snspdaarf · 2010-11-05 01:19 · Score: 4, Insightful

Who is commanding this chicken-shit outfit? Simons? How could they not know something was wrong when they find the wrong flag on the flagpole? "Hey! Those bastards snuck over and put up their flag on our land! This land here...that we never had before..." This sounds like a land grab, and if someone notices, blame Google for a "map error."

--
Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
1. Re:What's that on that flagpole? by swillden · 2010-11-05 01:39 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  How could they not know something was wrong when they find the wrong flag on the flagpole?
  The original article says that they raised the Nicaraguan flag, but not that they took down a Costa Rican flag. I'm not sure where that "information" came from.
  
  --
  Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
2. Re:What's that on that flagpole? by swillden · 2010-11-05 02:03 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure two flags on a pole is some sort of faux pas.
  What makes you think there was a Costa Rican flag at all? Or even a flagpole before the Nicaraguans set up their camp?
  
  --
  Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
3. Re:What's that on that flagpole? by Thelasko · 2010-11-05 02:06 · Score: 1
  
  This sounds like a land grab, and if someone notices, blame Google for a "map error."
  If Costa Rica doesn't like it, what are they going to do about it?
  
  --
  One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
4. Re:What's that on that flagpole? by fishbowl · 2010-11-05 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  Well, on day one they could revoke the blanket work visa they extend to the Nicas, and end their tax exempt status. They could also stop exporting food to them. The few wealthy people in Nicaragua would put pressure on their own government to work it out. They don't want to deal with refugees, with food shortages, or with having access cut off to their seaside villas.
  
  --
  -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
5. Re:What's that on that flagpole? by nxtw · 2010-11-05 12:18 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure two flags on a pole is some sort of faux pas.
  not entirely uncommon. I've seen the state beneath the US flag, for example, sometimes with a corporate flag too (below or above the state flag, I can't remember).
6. Re:What's that on that flagpole? by flonker · 2010-11-06 03:51 · Score: 1
  
  Etiquette dictates that all national flags displayed be level with each other, and that state flags not be higher than national flags. Putting two national flags on the same flagpole would make one national flag lower than another. The corporate flag on the bottom follows the same logic, as the corporation is (theoretically) subordinate to the state.
  Although it is common sense really. Putting one flag above another on the same flagpole would indicate that the lower nation is subordinate, and people get offended by that kind of thing.
anyone remember "tomorrow never dies"? by circletimessquare · 2010-11-05 01:20 · Score: 2, Informative

the bond film?
the bad guy is basically rupert murdoch (played by jonathan pryce)
he brings china and the uk to the brink of war by hacking the gps satellite's signals, making a british warship think it is in international territory when it has actually strayed into chinese waters. launch a few missiles... china thinks the uk is firing on them, the uk thinks china is firing on them: all in a plot to sell more newspapers (well, it is 1997, when newspapers were still relevant)
reality is beginning to resemble the plots of bond movies
i'm waiting for dr. no to become reality

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2010-11-05 01:26 · Score: 2, Insightful

Comment removed based on user account deletion
Court martial? by Peeteriz · 2010-11-05 01:28 · Score: 1

I assume that the commander has seen court martial for his stupidity?
Countries and militaries have their own official maps which they should use, and if he relies on google, then it's his neck on the line.
For a related anecdote - in USSR times *all* the civilian maps were deliberately distorting data, especially in the border areas. I still have the maps and had relatives living there - pretty much all of the sea-side roads in maps were completely wrong, but the same in all maps. Only the military topographical maps showed the true structure - now they're declassified and often used for outdoors activities due to their high resolution and quality, despite being 20 years old now (well, the forest usually doesn't change that fast).
1. Re:Court martial? by Dunbal · 2010-11-05 01:39 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  No, the stupidity is in not recognizing that this google maps story is just BS and they have every intention of seizing this island.
  
  --
  Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Looks to be an advertisement bing vs google by slmdmd · 2010-11-05 01:29 · Score: 2, Insightful

The article looks like an advertisement to me. Just like Verizon vs Att. Here bing/yahoo vs google in the lines of Nigerian scam.
Central American Conflict by Anonymous Coward · 2010-11-05 01:30 · Score: 2, Funny

There's a map for that.
The flag might have been the first big indicator.. by DarthVain · 2010-11-05 01:31 · Score: 1

"taking down a Costa Rican flag and raising the Nicaraguan flag"
I mean come on really?
"We were just walking along and we tripped, and as we we falling grabbed onto some sort of flag to keep from falling, but it wasn't strong enough so it got ripped down.... luckily I had our own flag in my back pocket, so I thew that up the flag pole just so I wouldn't hit the ground!"
"Then we burned the other flag because it was all broken and shit."
"The we cleaned a river for some reason, and dumped all the dirt and such in another country, er I mean... ah whatever screw you Costa Rica!"
so? by llamapater · 2010-11-05 01:35 · Score: 1

most map makers put flaws like this in on purpose so other map makers don't steal there maps
Slogan by debilo · 2010-11-05 01:36 · Score: 1

Don't be evil, my ass!
Happens even with accurate data by benwiggy · 2010-11-05 01:39 · Score: 5, Informative

It doesn't really matter whether the data is accurate. There are all sorts of diplomatic incidents from soldiers not reading the map correctly.
For instance, in 2002, the UK Royal Marines accidentally invaded Spain, because of a map reading error.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1827554.stm
Hence the old joke: "What's the most dangerous thing in the British Army? -- An officer with a map."
1. Re:Happens even with accurate data by c6gunner · 2010-11-05 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  Eh. There was no diplomatic incident from that "invasion", it was mostly a case of the UK blushing while Spain had a nice hearty laugh.
  Also, that was a tiny mistake. They were only a couple hundred meters from where they were supposed to be. I once took part in a beach-assault where, despite the use of GPS, our guides somehow managed to bring us in more than 3 kilometers away from the designated landing. Luckily, we weren't near a neighbouring nation.
2. Re:Happens even with accurate data by C0C0C0 · 2010-11-05 03:21 · Score: 1
  
  I suspect that's universal. In the U.S., it goes something like this: What are the three most dangerous things in the world? A general with an idea, a lieutenant with a map, and a private with a paint brush.
  
  --
  You are totally blocking my view of the wall. - Dogbert
3. Re:Happens even with accurate data by donscarletti · 2010-11-05 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  I once took part in a beach-assault where, despite the use of GPS, our guides somehow managed to bring us in more than 3 kilometers away from the designated landing.
  Having never done military training, I am very interested to know if when stuff like that happens, do you ever think about that if it was a real war, your unit would have probably been cut to pieces? I can imagine experiencing a situation like that and seeing how quickly something like that can go wrong would be a frightening feeling.
  
  --
  When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
4. Re:Happens even with accurate data by c6gunner · 2010-11-05 11:39 · Score: 1
  
  Not really. Usually when something like that happens everyone is too pissed off to be frightened. But everyone reacts differently. Even under combat conditions you get a wide range of reactions, which is why you'll hear about some guy who spent the entire battle hiding in the bottom of his trench, while another guy rushed a machinegun nest and beat 5 enemy soldiers to death with a shovel. When things go badly in training, we mostly just try to make sure it's discussed in detail during the debrief so we can learn from it.
Don't use Google Translate either. by denzacar · 2010-11-05 01:41 · Score: 1

Using Google Translate to read about a Google Maps fuckup. Irony ensues.

What's worse, they destroyed forest in a protected area and dumped the waste in to the river. How stupid and destructive can these guys be?
http://searchengineland.com/nicaragua-raids-costa-rica-blames-google-maps-54885

The troops are accused of setting up camp there, taking down a Costa Rican flag and raising the Nicaraguan flag, doing work to clean up a nearby river, and dumping the sediment in Costa Rican territory.

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
The commander's twitter update: by pinkushun · 2010-11-05 01:44 · Score: 2, Funny

Today I used Google maps (instead of the official ones, with hopes no one would notice), to justify raiding neighboring land. If General finds out he's gonna be sooo pissed! FML.
- Nicaraguan commander, Eden Pastora
1. Re:The commander's twitter update: by delinear · 2010-11-05 04:07 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  He also went over his 140 character limit. It's really not his week.
2. Re:The commander's twitter update: by pinkushun · 2010-11-07 20:16 · Score: 1
  
  Touche!
not the first time by Paradise+Pete · 2010-11-05 01:52 · Score: 2, Informative

That border area has been under dispute for some time. I'm sure they knew exactly what they were doing.
In fact the entire Guanacaste region used to be part of Nicaragua.
Re:By some measures, the world's most violent coun by Anonymous Coward · 2010-11-05 02:09 · Score: 1, Insightful

There is. Get an account and volunteer for metamoderation.
Totally plausible by mr100percent · 2010-11-05 02:19 · Score: 1

I'm not that surprised. Here in Grenada the google maps are still in a developing state. There are roads on the map but none of them are named etc. Google is allowing edits, but the going is slow
In their defense by stickytar · 2010-11-05 02:20 · Score: 1

Nicaragua did at one point own that portion of land before they gave it up to Costa Rica officially in 1958. http://www.mycostaricalink.com/blog/costa-rica/545/annexation-of-guanacaste-july-25th/

--
believing the big bang requires a certain amount of supernatural faith
1. Re:In their defense by cascajal · 2010-11-05 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  That is somewhere else, on the west coast, the current conflict is in the east coast
Yet another reason to tear down ALL the borders! by countertrolling · 2010-11-05 02:37 · Score: 1

They're nothing but trouble, aside from the benefit for the war profiteers and slave trade.

--
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Eeh... by captainpanic · 2010-11-05 02:48 · Score: 1

A classic case of misinformation being worse than no information. However, Google does have a disclaimer on the service about possible errors.
Funny how the first thing that pops into some people's minds is the disclaimers, and possible lawsuits.
Regardless of the disclaimer - I do not think that any country would sue Google for misinformation which lead to a war. The claim would be astronomical... and unrealistic. :-)
It would be hilarious (and stupid) if a foreign company with a free service would be held accountable for military actions.

It shouldn't, but it amazes me how a military force from one country can take action based on information from a free service offered by a company in another country. It boggles the mind.
Typically, these countries have little budget for their military. And military commanders may say that Google maps information - although sometimes wrong - is still better than no information at all.
If you think this is bad.... by lazlo · 2010-11-05 02:50 · Score: 1

If you think this is bad, just wait until you hear what happened next with an inadvertent combination of autocomplete and "I'm feeling lucky". There were no survivors.

--
Pound! Bang! Bin! Bash! is this a shell script or a Batman comic?
A sig from usenet days... by Sooner+Boomer · 2010-11-05 03:17 · Score: 1

"Vikings? There ain't no Vikings here, just us honest farmers. The town was burning, the villagers were dead. They didn't need those sheep anyway. That's our story and we're sticking to it."

--
Chaos maximizes locally around me.
Pilots using handheld GPSs by Anonymous Coward · 2010-11-05 03:31 · Score: 1, Interesting

The recently retired US Navy F14 Tomcat was designed pre-GPS. Those pilots and RIOs stuck with the unmodified aircraft carried commercial GPSs. Same can probably be said for all aircraft designed before 1985?, 1990?, and never retrofitted. The Navy is probably a little sloppier in this respect than the Air Force or Army. From what I saw, the philosophy was: You got 2 engines, 3 tires, and weapons? Fly the mission. Don't worry 'bout them little 'lectronicy things.
Hmm by Stooshie · 2010-11-05 03:34 · Score: 1

From the article:

" ... An error on google maps has caused an international conflict in Central America ... "
And " ... (Note: I'm using the Google Translation of this original article) ... "

Now is that wise given the content of the article?

--
America, Home of the Brave. ... .and the Squaw.
Nicaragua can't employ surveyors? by swb · 2010-11-05 03:45 · Score: 1

I would think the border in Nicaragua would be well known and would be well-surveyed by now, with accurate GPS coordinates. I don't think it requires a trillion dollars and a level of technology that on the US military can possess. Surveying and finding & marking boundaries is something people have been doing for centuries.
Even getting up to date maps to the military shouldn't be that hard -- maps with well-marked borders are probably one of the most important tools for any military, even the Nicaraguan military.
What doesn't surprise me, though, is that some Nicaraguan field commander was too ignorant/lazy to bother with paper maps.
1. Re:Nicaragua can't employ surveyors? by Xarin · 2010-11-05 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  I would think the border in Nicaragua would be well known and would be well-surveyed by now
  As mentioned in a previous post, borders may be defined by a river whose course may change from time to time. Also, two countries may have conflicting claims over what the coordinates should be.
2. Re:Nicaragua can't employ surveyors? by LWATCDR · 2010-11-08 00:42 · Score: 1
  
  Actually part of the border looks like it is defined by a river. Some of the rest of it is going through lakes and rivers. Not the easiest border to deal with for sure.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:Get your own satellite, Nicaragua! by couchslug · 2010-11-05 03:49 · Score: 1

Since actual topo maps can be COMPARED with most-recent Google photos, it's practical to get useful info FROM THE PHOTOS.
(Just take a screencap of the satellite view, I do this all the time when giving people directions.)
BUT, that doesn't mean you shouldn't use a verified military topo MAP for military ops. It's as basic as it can get.
Get map, get pics, laminate both (maps get wet), premark known points on the photos, bring all of it to the mission.

--
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Map & Compass by Infonaut · 2010-11-05 03:58 · Score: 3, Informative

I concur. This wasn't a mistake. Map & compass has worked well for a long, long time. Soldiers were able to navigate the jungles long before the arrival of GPS, Google Maps, and checkin apps. In a country like Nicaragua that has a small military budget, land navigation training has to be part of the core training, at least for NCOs, and certainly for officers. I can't think of a single nation that has done away with land nav training; doing so would be like forgoing marksmanship training.
The only other explanation is that the guy in charge of the mission was a complete incompetent, and his subordinates either weren't paying attention or didn't have the balls to tell him he was fucking up.

--
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
1. Re:Map & Compass by plcurechax · 2010-11-08 08:28 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe the US army? Well, I'm not sure, but I believe both the US and British navies (navy plural) have dropped star (sextant) navigation training. Although given the growing reliance of most NATO and US-friendly countries on GPS (et all Sat nav), it wouldn't surprise me if land based navigation is no longer taught. Map and compass is hard to learn with an iPhone for a map. Most working maps are digital, and increasingly only viewed in digital form.
iRaq, iRan, inVade, what's the diff? by Tablizer · 2010-11-05 04:06 · Score: 1

Bush is kicking himself right now for not thinking of that excuse.

--
Table-ized A.I.
Absolute beginners by SpaghettiPattern · 2010-11-05 04:11 · Score: 2, Funny

Didn't even bother to check the absolute source of truth, Wikipedia. Newbies.

--

I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
Idiots all around by meerling · 2010-11-05 05:12 · Score: 1

They have official maps that both countries agree on, yet the military moron uses an unauthorized map to run his little maneuver. Something that has been standard for centuries is that countries know they have to make border agreements using same freaking maps because all the many different versions out there have conflicting info. This really isn't a new protocol the military idiot ignored, and yes, it is something the military is in on, not just the head honchos in the capital.

Ok, so now the bozos from another country camp in your territory and replace your flag, that really pisses off countries, but what did they do?
They cleaned up one of your rivers and left the trash in a pile, still in your territory. What, should they have taken the trash back to their country? Naw, you'd probably blame them for stealing your trash if they did that.

All in all, it's something that will surely infuriate the politicians and military, but other than that, it's a total meeting of the morons...
1. Re:Idiots all around by cascajal · 2010-11-05 07:15 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Its not trash its sediments, Nicaragua unilaterally decided to clean the sediments from the bottom of the river. Where they left the "trash" is a protected are due to its biodiversity. Costa Rica told them, "hey thats Costa Rica, get off" they answered, "no, we stay here" Keep in mind Costa Rica doesnt has an army
Politicaly incorrect Choices by budgenator · 2010-11-05 05:15 · Score: 1

Watching our local and state election campaigns unfold, I saw numerous, very negative adds on TV made by third parties. It occured to me that the negative adds were paid for by establishment types trying to protect their status quo. I'm not particularly fond of the status quo in politics right now so I decided to not vote for the lesser of two evils like the establishment wanted but for the greater of two evils! Honestly nobody can be as evil as the PAC commercials make out the other guy to be. The next person I vote for for president is going to be the kind of person that clubs baby harp seals to death, trips little old ladies as they push their walkers down the isle and eats Sweetbread and Fava beans in front of Hanable Lecter without sharing; at least according to the PACs

--
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
1. Re:Politicaly incorrect Choices by danlip · 2010-11-05 05:22 · Score: 1
  
  Me too, I was tired of voting for the lesser of two evils, so I voted for Cthulhu
Re:Yet another reason to tear down ALL the borders by countertrolling · 2010-11-05 10:32 · Score: 1

Yep... Only pirates, criminals, and smugglers need borders

--
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
I seem to be having this tremendous difficulty... by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · 2010-11-06 06:57 · Score: 1

"I seem to be having this tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle"