Are you really in the habit of signing property contracts sight unseen? In that case, can I interest you in some waterfront property in New Orleans?

My brother-in-law, who is Japanese, says the same.

With the introduction of Google Maps, the product (houses) is not as marketable as it once was. Now the product has to be improved and it’s going to cost some rundown areas a truckload of cash.

I feel that this crusade against Google Maps is small business / home owner led – real reason: To hide rundown areas and maintain houseprices and rent levels.

If they want people to move there, then they should clean the area up. A company doesn’t improve on a product only after people start buying it – They’ve got to make a product that sells off the bat. How is real estate any different? If you want people to move to your neighborhood, make it look presentable.

The number of people caught on Street View doing something they would rather not be seen is a tiny, tiny number. Even if you are seen, as long as you are discrete then it will be difficult to see that you are doing something private. If you are not being discrete then you shouldn’t mind being photographed.

Maybe the question should be “Why don’t love hotels have more discrete entrances ?” Clearly, in the photo you can see a huge red sign.

If the images were constantly updated then that would be an invasion of privacy but we’re talking about a static image taken once every few months? years?

I think Street View is extremely useful in a country like Japan. There is no threat to security.

Also, selling houses or letting appartments becomes more difficult if you live in a rundown area, or the property backs onto a Pachinko parlour or a school – or any number of negative attributes. With Google-Maps, the buyer / renter can see the area without even going there, register their disapproval and dismiss the property.

Google Maps is going to piss off Real Estate and Letting agencies, not to mention the owners of the properties. This might even extend to pissing off shopkeeper, just because there are negative features in their vicinity which can be viewed through Google-Maps. It means that with the ongoing availability of Google Maps gradually the area will become more and more run-down, because no one wants to move there.

Saying that this is an invasion of privacy or is harmful to people is a load of crap. I have published hundreds of photos on the internet with random people in the background and this is no different. It’s just a photo taken one time in a public place. And if you are worried about getting caught going to a love hotel then maybe you just shouldn’t go.

Every time this issue comes it really cracks me up. I just hope the loud voices who are angry over this are not representing the majority of Japanese.

I think the point is that people here cannot find any good use of the street view service whereas they have to endure the invasion of privacy for that good for nothing service.

People do not complain about surveillance cameras because they contribute to crime prevention. People do not complain about Jutakuchizu (street maps), for the map guide you to the place you are going to. Street view does not guide you to anywhere.

Can you find any good use of the service?

As expressed above, there are many places in Japan and other cities around the world, where continuous CCTV surveillance is in operation. Also, it is easy to find out data about peoples’ addresses and locations by all kinds of other means.

Street View is only a problem if you happen to be in the picture taken when the Street View data gathering car went by, which is very unlikely. The couple above, are only in trouble if one of them is married to someone else and they are recognised.

Removing the picture from Googlemap does not mean removing it from the internet.

There are LIVE cameras all over Tokyo with live streams on the web. http://www.nabit-ch.jp/street/live/aoyama/index-win.html

I think that’s much worse.

Can you detect my sarcasm? Hopefully.

…claiming that images taken on public streets are an invasion of privacy

Aren’t those ideas at odds with each other? How is a photo taken on a public street an invasion of privacy?

If you don’t want people to see you walking into a love hotel, don’t walk into a love hotel. It’s the easiest solution.

As mentioned above, stalking is a definite concern. Restraining orders cover physical proximity, but what about virtual proximity?

Didn’t you read the book? After 1984 there IS NO REAL PRIVACY.

Always someone out there to try and ruin the fun… good thing this group probably doesn’t stand a chance, and just wants attention.

All that privacy fuss annoys me a lot because it’s mostly the people who supply there personal data virtually everywhere that oppose this.

For me the service has already been helpful a few times for orientation and I don’t quite get why we don’t see all the businesses having a GSV link on their website.

I’m looking forward to when the german street data is being integrated in the service, Google cars where already being spotted in various towns here in Germany in the summer.

Personally, I think Street View is a gimmick – and that isn’t worth the risks it poses.