Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

karp.id.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 41 posts

Re: Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

#31

Post by wyager »

Symbiote wrote: post #9
jMyles wrote: post #8

Reading into the details of these kinds of "privacy implications" (particularly the desire to force publication delay and the force blurring of people or license plates), I'm left thinking that the "implications" are more stark for freedom than they are for privacy . Are there really privacy implications of any sort in publishing a series of photos of people and cars on a street that aren't already implicated by the…

> We can opt either ... or Or, we can have a compromise, since the world isn't black and white, and we needn't restrict ourselves to a binary choice. That's how the European rights work, on life, expression (speech), privacy and so on.

And that's worked great, with Merkel prosecuting a comedian for insulting Ergodan or Germany engaging in the political imprisonment of non-violent radicals.

While there are many problems with the USA, its legal protections of e.g. freedom of expression are vastly superior to those found in European nations.

Re: Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

#32

Post by colejohnson66 »

maxerickson wrote: post #11
jMyles wrote: post #8

Reading into the details of these kinds of "privacy implications" (particularly the desire to force publication delay and the force blurring of people or license plates), I'm left thinking that the "implications" are more stark for freedom than they are for privacy . Are there really privacy implications of any sort in publishing a series of photos of people and cars on a street that aren't already implicated by the…

The US constitution doesn't say much about privacy. The 4th amendment restricts the government from doing things that would (in part) violate privacy of individuals, but it doesn't say much about what other citizens can do in public places.

You're right about the Consitution. However, the law isn't restricted to the Legislative Branch. Case law is law too, and the courts have ruled repeatedly that you have no expectation of privacy in public.

Re: Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

#33

Post by jMyles »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #30
jMyles wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> child pornography is just a time series of pictures right? But presumably it's not the capturing of the photons that is criminal in the case of child pornography. Even if you used a fake camera, it's still illegal, right?

I'd assume that's just child exploitation/molestation, not pornography. But that's just me.

Right right.

Well, then, I suppose what I'm saying is: in an information-age society, it's the child exploitation/molestation that's properly a crime; capturing the same as a piece of media is no modifier.

Re: Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

#34

Post by hx87 »

icebraining wrote: post #28
hx87 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone compromises--it's just that Europe tends to err on the side of privacy, whereas the US usually errs on the side of freedom. From my American point of view though, Europe seems a lot more eager to "export" its preferences abroad through legal means.

Europe seems a lot more eager to "export" its preferences abroad through legal means. What do you mean?

I was a bit too broad--by "Europe" I meant France, as when French courts tried to apply the Right to be Forgotten principle to information about French citizens that was stored outside of Europe.

Re: Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

#35

Post by mastazi »

lorenzhs wrote: post #6
mastazi wrote: post #5

How do you actually use openstreetview.org? All I could see was a map, no imagery. At first some roads were highlighted in pink but as soon as I zoomed and panned a little bit, the pink lines disappeared...

It's under heavy load at the moment (probably some scaling issues), so responses are a bit slow. You click on the pink lines (and wait).

Oh yes, it works now. It was probably HN's hug of death.

Re: Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

#36

Post by [deleted] »

jMyles wrote: post #33
colejohnson66 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd assume that's just child exploitation/molestation, not pornography. But that's just me.

Right right. Well, then, I suppose what I'm saying is: in an information-age society, it's the child exploitation/molestation that's properly a crime; capturing the same as a piece of media is no modifier.

[deleted]

Re: Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

#37

Post by [deleted] »

jMyles wrote: post #33
colejohnson66 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd assume that's just child exploitation/molestation, not pornography. But that's just me.

Right right. Well, then, I suppose what I'm saying is: in an information-age society, it's the child exploitation/molestation that's properly a crime; capturing the same as a piece of media is no modifier.

[deleted]

Re: Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

#38

Post by xyzzy123 »

jMyles wrote: post #33
colejohnson66 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd assume that's just child exploitation/molestation, not pornography. But that's just me.

Right right. Well, then, I suppose what I'm saying is: in an information-age society, it's the child exploitation/molestation that's properly a crime; capturing the same as a piece of media is no modifier.

But the media itself is illegal to posess. Some images / videos are Ok, some are not. Moral judgement is involved.

What I am saying is, if society wants to, it can totally declare that some pictures / videos are ok and some are not. This already happens all the time.

Re: Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

#39

Post by jMyles »

xyzzy123 wrote: post #38
jMyles wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right right. Well, then, I suppose what I'm saying is: in an information-age society, it's the child exploitation/molestation that's properly a crime; capturing the same as a piece of media is no modifier.

But the media itself is illegal to posess. Some images / videos are Ok, some are not. Moral judgement is involved. What I am saying is, if society wants to, it can totally declare that some pictures / videos are ok and some are not. This already happens all the time.

Maybe that's not really OK anymore. I tend to be of the belief that, for freedom to prevail in the information age, information freedom must be absolute.

Re: Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView

#40

Post by sdoering »

moron4hire wrote: post #17
sdoering wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're out in public, you agree to be seen. True. Seen and enshrined in some (or more) peoples fleeting memory. Not captured for (nearly) all eternity and the whole world (who were not present at that exact moment and place) to see. That is also the reason I oppose ubiquitous public surveillance. Even if it can only be seen by some amount of government actors. I am glad, that I grew up in a time without constant…

That's not entirely true. Photographers have long had very broad rights about shooting in public [0]. If you're in a high-traffic area, it's fairly likely you could end up in someone's photo. You might be lost in the sea of people, but you'll probably also be lost in the sea of mass data collection. My point is not that "if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear". There is perhaps a corollary, "just w…

I know of the rights a photographer has (at least here in Germany). It is not so clear cut as it sounds. for example, if I wear a big pink hat in a sea of suits and a photographer does make a photo of me within this sea, even being among maybe hundreds of people, I am clearly the center of attention and he has to obtain the right to use (and show) the image in any way.

You are right, if me being merely some pebble in a sea of pebbles - so to speak.

So there is still some privacy implication left - even in your example.

Post reply on HN