The Guardian:
“You’re having a dispute with your neighbour,” he hypothesised. “How would you feel if your neighbour went over and bought a commercial observation drone that they can launch from their back yard. It just flies over your house all day. How would you feel about it?”
Mr Schmidt, do you actually know what Google Maps and Google Earth do?
And as Peter Cohen said on Twitter, “I think it’s hilarious that the guy whose company is making self-driving cars has a bug up his ass about drones.”
Eric Schmidt always has a bug up his ass.
Does this guy ever remove his foot from his mouth?
Google also bought 7 robot company.
coincidently DOD has a autonomous robot contest.
Previously it was self driving car that DOD had a contest for.
So it looks like what ever contest DOD holds, Google will be entering that field. Hopefully it is autonomous something.
Nope. Every time he opens his mouth is a time he is going to say something stupid.
Eric Schmidt is most likely trying to deflect privacy concerns to drones while the company he works for is busy burrowing its way into every detail that is available through your online activity. Personally, I think Google is creepier than any drone right now.
Further, his remark about banning drones to stop terrorists from getting their hands on them is ridiculous. Its like terrorists are going to say “darn, now I can’t use drones because they are banned”. I’m sure banning guns will stop terrorists from using those too.
What happened to the anti-privacy creepy old guy that we have come to know that with quotes such as:
“Google policy is to get right up to the creepy line and not cross it.”
“With your permission you give us more information about you, about your friends, and we can improve the quality of our searches. We don’t need you to type at all. We know where you are. We know where you’ve been. We can more or less know what you’re thinking about.”
“If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.”
I don’t agree with him but there is a difference between a car going around the world once a year to take pictures and drones continuously driving overhead. And what do self-driving cars have to do with anything?
You’re comparing the licensing of satellite imagery to the act of someone flying a drone above a neighbor for the sole purpose of harassment or intimidation…. I don’t think they compare at all.
Completely different things there. Months old images don’t compare to real-time video.
“Mr Schmidt, do you actually know what Google Maps and Google Earth do?”
Glad to see people here standing up to this ridiculous comparison. I guess the better question would be:
Mr. King, do you actually know what Google Maps and Google Earth do?
The robot project has potential for robots delivering packages from self-driven cars. This is pure speculation from a story this week but I believe that’s where he’s coming from.
Someone should tell him, “Pot meet kettle.”
Schmidt == Ballmer on Valium. Same type of mental goliath.
You realize Apple Maps uses the same kind of technology, right, Mr. King? I can zoom in on my house in Apple Maps just as well as Google Maps. And if Tim Cook disagrees with drone surveillance, does that make him a hypocrite too?
He in all likeliness wouldn’t agree though– not just because that kind of surveillance is wrong, but because he knows satellite mapping imagery and fucking low-flying robots with cameras mounted on them are not the same goddamn thing.
Does Eric Schmidt say stupid things? Definitely, the man has said very bizarre stuff. But this time you sound more like you’re spiting him for spite’s sake. You should have plenty of normal material to go off of without needing to reach like this.
He’s a maniac!
Dear Mr. Schmidt, people can’t invade their neighbors’ privacy by using drones because YOU were the clown that proposed ‘If you have something you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it’
If you don’t want to feel being watched by drones – don’t leave your house! And shut the curtains!
Schmidt is obviously considering running for public office.
I’m pretty sure that Google would happily make live google maps if it were possible.
Pretty sure, eh? I’m sold!
Yeah, I can’t imagine the tech being available and Google saying “No, we don’t want to even try to do that because of our concern for our users privacy.” I’m sure Apple would use it in their maps too.
I also didn’t say I had a problem with it, I’m pretty sure it’s just a matter of time before we have that anyway. I welcome it.
But any comment from Google about privacy concerns always comes off as disingenuous.
I could be wrong but I have yet to see them violate privacy so I have zero concern over privacy comments.
The US wouldn’t allow real-time video and I highly doubt Google or Apple would do it. They know the greater implications of a system like this. Heck, they blur out people/license plates now [to the best of their ability of course] and they know the images will be months old before published.
http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/12/technology/google-privacy-settlement/index.html
Google’s entire business is set up to profit from their users personal data. The whole point of Gmail is to scan your emails & provide targeted ads based on their content.
I could be wrong too, maybe we’ll never get real time satellite imaging. We already have tons of webcams all over the world, I just figured it’s a matter of time google maps, the. Real time street view.
I want it.
Majority is ad based, yeah, but you didn’t provide a response to Google violating user privacy. The street car thing was over their cameras not misuse of data; I should have clarified my comment.
If it lessens the crime rate, I wouldn’t mind a certain level of real-time, public imagery but there would have to be some rules.
That article that I linked had nothing to do with cameras and everything to do with data.
“…the company admitted to collecting information like passwords and e-mails from unencrypted Wi-Fi networks its cars were passing by.”
I know the situation. They collected data they didn’t intend on collecting and never used it. The data was never violated, people’s privacy was.
I was incorrect thinking this was the camera one but it was the wifi data one.
Who knows if they used it or not?
Anyway you said you hadn’t seen them violate privacy. That is a clear violation of privacy & not just their users privacy, but anyone they drove past.
Also, you can’t accidentally do that. I’ve driven by hundreds if not thousands of houses/apartments and have never collected people’s passwords & emails. They intended to do this.
Yes, I said privacy but meant Google user data; based on you spitting the “sells user data for a living” soundtrack.
Maybe they did intend. No one knows.
Have a good one.
They profit from it. I never said they sold it.
Clearly I’m off my game today and not reading well. You’re correct, you didn’t. Bad assumption on my part to lump your comment w/ what other naysayers around these parts immediately jump to.
My fault.
They did intend on collecting it!
I too gave them the benefit of the doubt when the Wifi-snooping was was unveiled, but in the following investigations it was found that the engineer responsible for the Wifi-Logging part of the software implemented the collection of ALL data and also mentioned this to his colleagues and superiors, afaik even in an email.
His argumentation was that maybe they would find a way to benefit from the data and that it would be better to collect it and realize that there’s no way to benefit from it than mapping all the streets of the world (except Germany :/) and THEN realizing that they could have improved one of their services with such data-snippets.
Citation required.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/apr/30/google-street-view-breach-fcc
“The FCC said that the engineer intended to collect and store the data for possible use in other Google projects. On at least one occasion, the engineer reviewed payload data to identify frequently visited websites, according to the report.”
Evidently you don’t know what Google Maps and Earth do. They’re not live satellite streams, you know.
Thx for the link. So one engineer did something and the data was never used. Thx for helping make my point.
Oh and sorry for the late response; I was traveling.
It was no accident, the engineer designed the software in that way and his superiors and colleagues knew about this – and nobody stopped him!
You can’t say that every bad thing that Google did was just the work of ‘one engineer’.
Agreed. You also can’t say the bad thing Engineer Doe did without much oversight [so says your link] is Google as a whole being evil.
It was wrong, simple as that. They paid the price for it.