Google Street View Shoots the Same Woman 43 Times 106
Geoffrey.landis writes "Terry Southgate discovered that his wife Wendy appears on the Google Street View of his neighborhood not once or twice but a whopping 43 times. From the article: 'It seems as if the Street View car simply followed the same route as Wendy and Trixie. However, Wendy was a little suspicious that the car was doing something on the "tricksie" side. Several of the Street View shots show Wendy looking with some concern towards the car that was, well, to put it politely, crawling along the curb. "I didn't know what it was doing. It was just driving round very, very slowly," Wendy told the Sun.' The next best thing to being a movie star — a Street View star!"
This Gang Warfare Must Stop (Score:5, Funny)
Google Street View Shoots the Same Woman 43 Times
I knew that gang violence had gotten bad in some parts of the world but now even Google vans have become roving death squads spewing bullets. What? Was there a Bing van behind her or something? Forty three shots! How many clips is that and will they be holding Brin and Page accountable?
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Shut up and die.
TrisexualPuppy suffers three times the amount of normal puberty angst!
It's alright, TP, I still love you.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Depends on the handgun but probably 4 clips. Then again it was probably 2 if they used an AR-17 but it could have just been 1 if Google paid for the 100 round mag...
I agree that things must be bad now that Google feels the need to take out Bring users in the middle of the day. What if children had been near by!
Do no evil... right... Maybe Google should think of the children and call off there holly war...
Re: (Score:2)
Consider that it's vehicle based, and they drive an awful lot. To get that much shooting done, they're using a belt fed gun. Magazines are for portability. Belts are for throwing lots of ammunition down range. :)
Re:This Gang Warfare Must Stop (Score:4, Funny)
My thought in response to this new information - "Only 43 times?"
Re: (Score:1)
Re:This Gang Warfare Must Stop (Score:4, Funny)
That's a strong justification for government mandated gun control. Every bullet should hit its target. The people need to be trained better.
Re: (Score:2)
Well considering how much money Google has I'm surprised they haven't upgraded their van's to use laser turrets that run off small but powerful nuclear batteries...
They could just drop the vans and vaporize human target from space! Lets all hope they never get that Google moon base fully operational!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
They wouldn't use nuclear power. They have Naquadah generators. Small, powerful, and if you overload it, strong enough to level a city. Oh, what they would do to Beijing.
Re: (Score:2)
I had a Calico M-100 with a hundred round clip but it was .22LR. They also made 9mm but that only went up to 50 round.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
AR-17? You mean AR-15, right
Woooosh!
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Google Street View Shoots the Same Woman 43 Times
Bet she's getting tired of that.
Re:This Gang Warfare Must Stop (Score:4, Funny)
I'm picturing a team of Googlers driving by in a black van, holding out their cameras sideways while busting some pictures now. :P
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but when you say magazine, don't most people get confused and think you are talking about pornography?
Re: (Score:2)
What about En-Bloc clips for the M1 Garand? Holds a bunch of cartridges (and seriously, you can't be all pedantic about clip vs magazine and then get the cartridge/bullet thing wrong :) ), slides into the gun. Thoughts?
I've seen it defined (IMHO better) thus:
Clips hold rounds, but typically at least a part of each round protrudes from the clip;
Magazines encase rounds.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people might say, they both hold bullets, what does it matter?
Don't forget, they also hold casings, primers, and powder, in addition to the bullets. These cool, modern inventions are called "cartridges".
Re: (Score:1)
Update of the classic (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I think it's "Wenda" not Wendy.
In case anybody missed it... (Score:3, Interesting)
Update of the classic Where’s Waldo [google.com]
Blocked streets? (Score:5, Insightful)
In a country known for the government being big brother they are blocking streets so google can't take pictures? What?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
America
Canada
Australia
India
Yeah that planned worked really well for the British. The funny thing is that they never learned their lesson, and just keep pissing-off the colonists.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's easy. Everyone knows Big Brother is there for their own protection. He sees all to make sure we're safe. we all trust Big Brother to protect us. Well, unless Big Brother sees we did something he didn't like, then there's nowhere to hide.
Google, on the other hand, is just invading our privacy by taking pictures.
Photography is illegal, or so I was told when I was taking photographs from a public road. It's amazing how quick you can get the sheriffs department and H
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
However, arguing with a mall rentacop over the finer points of law is downright fun. After the real cops arrive then you get all polite and stuff (and do what they say, because they have handcuffs, guns, and Miranda cards, and while in theory you will get your property (camera) back, in reality this is not always the case).
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I wouldn't say illegal, but it can be downright unhealthy. I've never been on the unhealthy side of a taser, CS gas, nor pepper spray, but I've experienced them as parts of various trainings. Well, only the direct contact stun gun, not the projectile version. None were very pleasant.
I don't particularly like the idea of spending extensive time with a LEO where they're trying to find any reason to take me in. "Have you been drinking" is never best responded with "I hav
Re: (Score:2)
It is illegal when they claim it is against "national security" to take pictures. "National security" is a vague enough concept that they can claim just about anything is in the interest of "national security."
Re: (Score:2)
That's the difference between what law enforcement says, and what the real law says. When a uniformed DHS officer is standing in front of you saying that you're endangering national security you have two choices. You can say "Sorry sir, I won't take any pictures and I will be leaving now.", or you can argue the point, end up in handcuffs and be taken away to jail so your lawyer can (hopefully) argue that there was nothing illegal about doing it. When the representative of the government says "It was fo
Re: (Score:2)
Coming soon: Google House View - See the inside of every house.
Re: (Score:1)
The saddest thing is, the have been news about exactly that.
Putting cameras in bars and people's homes. Naturally the 'foot in the door' is the 'stop crime blahblah' but what will stop them from going full monty?
Ya know, it is just to protect the children against the NaziZeoniteIslamofashistCommunist threat.
Re: (Score:2)
Ahhh, someone actually remembered the previous story. That's why I said it.
In reality, we already have a look into quite a few homes. Look at all the places people post pictures of themselves at.
Some people are kind enough to put wireless web cams in, on unsecured wireless networks. You can simply park in front of their house, and see inside. Some people use wireless cameras which simply broadcast out the signal if you have the appropriate receiver. Google Maps [google.com] is nice
Re: (Score:2)
Big Brother does not tolerate competition. It also does not like giving people ability to see what Big Brother sees, I wouldn't be surprised if they forbade Google from doing this altogether at some point.
Re: (Score:2)
In a country known for the government being big brother they are blocking streets so google can't take pictures? What?
I don't know about you, but if I absolutely _had_ to choose someone to take pictures of me, I'd much rather prefer it was the government that I can hold accountable, instead of a multinational corporation. I'm intrigued about your reasoning, though.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe the police have pointed out to people who suggest they're going to do that, that it would be a criminal offence. I think the offence is still called "Obstructing the Queen's Highway" or it might just be "Causing an Obstruction".
This is a new record! (Score:5, Funny)
Followed the same route? (Score:2)
How do we know that the “concerned” woman wasn’t following the street view car, rather than the other way ’round?
In fact, it sort of sounds like that’s what happened... she followed the suspicious vehicle around for a while, and then she turns up in Google’s street view. Surprise!
Followed? I don't think so. (Score:3, Informative)
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=96+cross+st,+mid+suffolk,+united+kingdom&oe=utf8&safe=active&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=96+Cross+St,+Elmswell,+IP30+9,+United+Kingdom&gl=us&ei=Gu7VS82_EpLmswPGtujFCQ&ved=0CAoQ8gEwAA&ll=52.232355,0.913327&spn=0.000941,0.002835&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=52.232378,0.913198&panoid=mqYHojIBcpgVM_XiBp0gMw&cbp=12,102.99,,0,16.42 [google.com]
Looks to me like she was walking her dog, and the Google Car drove by, pa
Re:Followed? I don't think so. (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah. That’s what happened. Nobody followed anybody, their routes just happened to intersect a few times.
I knew it was kind of silly anyway, because Google street view is always going to take half a dozen pictures of the same thing as it drives down the street. 43 seems much, but if it passed her a few times it’s not surprising.
For those interested, it starts with the Street view car approaching her, first sighting her here [google.com] and driving past, turning onto Cooks Rd. (there’s one step at which she isn’t in the picture because it was filmed when the car returned to film the rest of Cross St.), and she’s still visible from a good distance down Cooks. Then the car turned off to other streets and when it returned to film more of Cooks Rd, there she was [google.com]; the car turned onto Thedwastre Close and she’s barely still visible [google.com] but once again the street view car hits some side streets and when it drives past she’s caught up to it again [google.com].
I wasn’t counting, and I don’t really care to look through the whole neighbourhood to find out whether she ran into the car a few more times...
Re: (Score:2)
For a fuzzy blurr , she's kind of hot.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I've seen the street view car a couple times in my city, and trust me, you can't keep up with it without sprinting. She doesn't appear sprinting in any of those pictures.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but it has to hit the side streets as well. She caught up to it again at least twice.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually went to the address provided by the article.
96 Cross Street, Mid Suffolk, England, United Kingdom
She's barely in the initial panorama. But she's out ahead of the location of the Google Van. You have to "step" forward several times before anything other than her back is visible.
She just happened to be slowly walking her dog on the day that the Google van drove by.
Re: (Score:2)
It passed her by, but it diverted off on some side streets and she caught up to it a few more times as it drove around. So she does appear quite a few times.
Links here [slashdot.org], I’m too lazy to repeat it.
Now they' done it. (Score:5, Funny)
Another way to play with the paranoid (Score:2)
This should be done more often as a very excellent prank. Bonus points if you catch someone doing something embarrassing.
Re: (Score:2)
Bonus points if you catch someone doing something embarrassing.
I thought that was what YouTube was for.
Re: (Score:2)
Direct Link (Score:1, Informative)
Is that a police car behind google? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It is a police car. And “Google Street View Shoots Police Car 43 Times” would be equally amusing, IMHO.
Wardriving (Score:2)
TFA asks if 43 is the record... (Score:1)
(Although he might have been aware of that...)
I know others (Score:3, Informative)
Happened to a few people I know, not surprising, the same vehicle drives several nearby streets throughout the day.
If it's a nice day, and you're running around, you're likely to get a few photos taken.
Re: (Score:2)
Who's walking down the streets of the city (Score:2, Informative)
Smiling at everybody she sees
Everyone Knows It's Wendy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NobLudmMRSU [youtube.com]
The lady was the stalker (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
What impresses me most is the two deck-chairs and the umbrella by the side of the road. I wonder how long they were waiting for it.
It's a brilliant marketing ploy. (Score:1)
But the real question is... (Score:2)
Why not 42?
43? More like 5 (Score:1)
I guess if you count all the photos at each location, you might get 43, but I can see the lady and her dog from only 5 locations. Start at Anonymous Coward's Direct Link [google.com], back up a couple of steps, go north on Cooks road, rotating to look south, and back up a couple more steps. The cop car keeps following for a little while, but the lady disappears.
That's because... (Score:2)
She's slow.