Slashdot Mirror
Google Street View Moves Indoors
Hugh Pickens writes "Google is taking its Street View mapping service indoors with plans moving ahead for 360-degree Business Photos, a program that would send Google photographers to various businesses to snap professional photos for their Places Page. 'This experience, using Street View technology, includes 360-degree imagery of the business interior and storefront,' says Google. 'With this immersive imagery, potential customers can easily imagine themselves at the business and decide if they want to visit in person.' Photographs are taken by 'trusted' photographers, though businesses can also upload their own images via Google Places. It's starting with businesses 'that we know are searched for most regularly,' like restaurants, hotels, retail shops, gyms, salons, and repair shops. Taking internal photos and posting them online brings up some security questions, but Google says its photographs will 'capture nothing different to what a customer would see by visiting the business in real life.'"
The had part: getting that car in through the front door.
The FAQ covers this
"4. How are business photos collected?
Business photos are being gathered by a team of Google trusted photographers with permission from the businesses involved. These are local photographers who service your neighborhood."
"8. Who from my business can give permission to Google to take photos?
You can only apply for a business photo shoot if you have the proper authority to allow a Google trusted photographer access to the business premises to collect photographs, and to allow Google to use those photographs in its products and services. For example, you might be the owner of the business, or a director or manager with sufficient authority to make those commitments on behalf of the business. Please note that by submitting your application for a business photo shoot you are confirming with Google that you have the authority to make that commitment."
While a store's local manager might accidentally go against the wishes of the higher ups this is true for any business decision. I think the critical point with respect to security is that this is explicitly opt-in, so the businesses can decide on the security risk for themselves.
I stole this Sig
Funny how in the last discussion on a topic like this, something about a rule against photos in a mall in Scotland, the concensus seemed to be that you have the right to take photos...
As much as I dislike Google and surveillance society, this is neither surveillance nor shocking. There is nothing that will be shown that you could not see on your own going into the store. I don't really see how in this case you having the right to take and presumably distribute photos is any different than Google doing so. Yes, they are a company and not a person, but that distinction only matters in some cases. If Google doesn't have the right to, you won't pretty damn soon yourself. Think about that.
Is it a little scary that there might be a database of interiors of buildings? Maybe; but on the other hand, almost no one seems to bat an eye at the millions of surveillance cameras that take and stream video to who knows where (other than Youtube. Funny how that works). I don't really see how static photos is in any way shocking when that is the norm. I suppose things are only scary if they are new and scary, something that just shows intellectual laziness.
Great Intellect...
Won't be too much longer before Google announces their new "virtual storefront" technology, allowing shoppers to visit stores online in a virtual fashion, picking through actual, real-time merchandise and ordering it online with their credit card (via another Google service, of course). The customer gets a richer shopping experience from the comfort of their living room, the business doesn't have to deal with as much foot traffic, and Google gets a small percentage of every transaction.
Look out, eBay, Google's coming for you.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
There are many reasons most stores do not allow customers to take photos. I predict most chains will be issuing memos to their stores reminding them of the policy against allowing photos.
I'm sure many will, but I doubt it's going to be due do any well-founded fears. Businesses—especially large chains—simply tend to be very conservative, and extremely control-freaky. They simply hate and fear anything that isn't under their control.
I had the odd experience recently of taking cell-phone picture of a shelf of books at a bookstore. Not the store in general, no people, no wide view, just a big shelf of books. Not a closeup of a cover or title page, or, well, anything; the titles are probably barely readable. But the result was that the store clerk flipped out, and threw himself in front of me to block the camera, saying no photos, no photos, etc... I asked him why, and he sort of blathered "you might post it to the internet", "it might be a copyright violation", "some titles might be recognizable", etc. Anyway, the point was that he really didn't have a reason, he was just afraid, of vague murky threats, and in this state of fear, simply wasn't very rational.
And that state of vague irrational fear is the rule more than it's the exception in this sort of situation.
We live, as we dream -- alone....
> Win-win
Actually it's win-win-win:
1) Win for Google
2) Win for the owners
3) Win for the debit cards clone artists who will be able to find stores where the pinpads are easy to access without having to send Ahmed or Jamal all over town (too bad for Ahmed and Jamal, it was a cool gig and they had the chance to drive the BMW and listen to loud eurodance)
lucm, indeed.