Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Evan Zimmerman <evan.zimmerman AT gmail.com>]

> wow.  Do I bitch enough that people remember I hate(d) Google?

Probably just me, it was the first message when I joined INW, so I
feel obliged to give you a hard time, sorry.  ;-)

> Seriously, though, this video thing makes me wonder... consider video
> surveillance

I agree with you on that to a point. I came across a link somewhere
awhile back, can't find it now apparently, of a search one could do
that was a signature part of wireless security cam urls' web access
feed -- so anybody who bought the things out of the box, slapped it on
a wall and plugged it in was broadcasting their home or business'
daily activity to anyone who cared to look. Scary.

> If an attorney suspects that Google might have accessed or stored 
> surveillance images that were
> otherwise destroyed, can the Court subpoena Google or serve a warrant?

Google as neutral witness? An interesting idea -- I'd be curious if
it's been tested yet in court. I bet it has somehow. I have to say
though, the idea just doesn't bother me much, though I'm sure it
probably should if I followed the "what if" reasoning all the way out.



On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:11:14 -0500 (EST), Alan MacHett
<machett AT ibiblio.org> wrote:
> In reference to Evan Zimmerman's message:
> > http://video.google.com/
> >
> > I know yahoo has this going on now too.  I did a vanity search on
> > "Evan" out of curiosity and it pulls down clips from various sitcoms
> > etc that are running from any number of channels so ... Google is
> > apparently recording a cross section of all tv channels all the time?
> > Alan, surely now google has won your heart, right? ;-)
> >
> 
> wow.  Do I bitch enough that people remember I hate(d) Google?  Hey, I'm
> still impressed with Google Scholar -- http://scholar.google.com/
> 
> Seriously, though, this video thing makes me wonder... consider video
> surveillance.  Most of it is on a closed circuit, but I'm sure a fair
> share of it is also ... not necessarily public, but, say, sniffable.  Is
> Google collecting that?  Hell, some of it IS public: the DOT webcams for
> RTP, for instance (poor example, but it comes to mind).  Might there be a,
> possibly surreptitious, picture of you stored at Google?  And what of
> surveillance expiry?  What if the alert for So-n-So's surveillance webcam
> states that images will be deleted after X period of time...?  Unless
> Google sucked them up, in which case the AI drones will be digging them
> out of a glacier a thousand years from now.  If an attorney suspects that
> Google might have accessed or stored surveillance images that were
> otherwise destroyed, can the Court subpoena Google or serve a warrant?
> 
> just brainstorming...
> Alan
> 
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!  
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> You are currently subscribed to InterNetWorkers mailing list
> To unsubscribe visit 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/internetworkers
>