MAPS-L Archives

Maps-L: Map Librarians, etc.

MAPS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Maps-L Moderator David J. Bertuca" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Fri, 6 Mar 2009 08:56:28 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (139 lines)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Re: Censoring Satellite Imagery
Date:   Fri, 06 Mar 2009 09:55:10 -0500
From:   David J. Bertuca <[log in to unmask]>
To:     [log in to unmask]
References:     <[log in to unmask]>



one final note from me...

During World War II, the Americans found that the Sherman tank was
vulnerable to German anti-tank rounds. So as a method to counter this, they
welded on "plates" of steel over the most vulnerable spots on the tank's
hull.

What this did in reality was to tell the Germans EXACTLY where to aim, and
they did this with great effect.

But, in all, Paige's comments on the "horse already being out of the barn"
are the most eloquent to counter the insanity of trying to put out
potential fires with gasoline...

I hope they don't want me to go over our maps with 'white-out' to cover the
critical bits of geography now...

David J. Bertuca, Map Librarian
225 Capen Hall
University at Buffalo
Buffalo, NY 14260-1672

716-645-2947 x229
[log in to unmask]

--On Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:18 AM -0600 Maps-L Moderator for Ken
Grabach <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:        RE: California Assemblyman wants to censor Satellite
> Imagery
> Date:   Thu, 5 Mar 2009 12:09:35 -0500
> From:   Grabach, Kenneth A. Mr. <[log in to unmask]>
> To:     [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
> References:     <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
> Seems to me that any blurred image would be as if a red dot saying 'Hit
> this building, it's sensitive.'  Foolish, indeed.  But I recall having to
> destroy a USGS CD a few years ago because of the sensitive nature of the
> information.  It contained an inventory of surface waters in the US.  A
> most valuable resource tool for environmental research, hydrology, etc.
> But there was concern that they would be targets of intentional
> contamination of drinking water sources, so ...
>
> Ken
>
> Ken Grabach                           <[log in to unmask]>
> Maps Librarian                         Phone: 513-529-1726
> Miami University Libraries
> Oxford, Ohio  45056  USA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maps-L Moderator for Toby
> Main
> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:09 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: California Assemblyman wants to censor Satellite Imagery
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:        Re: California Assemblyman wants to censor Satellite
> Imagery
> Date:   Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:05:01 -0500
> From:   Toby Main <[log in to unmask]>
> To:     [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> And of course nobody knew what that blurred out image in the middle of
> the Naval Observatory in DC was, now did they? What foolishness.
> TM
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: "Maps-L Moderator for Linda Zellmer"
>     To: [log in to unmask]
>     Subject: California Assemblyman wants to censor Satellite Imagery
>     Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 09:24:49 -0600
>
>
>     -------- Original Message --------
>     Subject: California Assemblyman wants to censor Satellite Imagery
>     Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 08:46:16 -0600 (CST)
>     From: Linda R Zellmer
>     To: Map&AirPhotoDiscussionList
>
>
>
>     Hello,
>
>     This was in the Map Room when I checked this morning. Note that
>     this would be at the state level, not the Federal. Linda Zellmer
>
>     Republican California Assemblyman Joel Anderson has introduced a
>     bill to censor online satellite imagery of public buildings. ?His
>     bill would restrict the images such Web sites could post online.
>     Clear, detailed images of schools, hospitals, churches and all
>     government buildings ? what he calls soft terrorism targets ?
>     would not be allowed. ? His bill would make it illegal in
>     California to post close-up images of such buildings. Instead, the
>     images would have to be blurred.? Note to terrorists: Everything
>     blurred is worth bombing. And, since transportation infrastructure
>     is also clearly a soft terrorist target, all imagery of roads
>     should be blurred too.
>
>     --
>     Linda Zellmer
>     Government Information & Data Services Librarian
>     415 Malpass Library
>     Macomb, IL 61455
>     [log in to unmask]
>     Phone: 309-298-2723
>     Fax: 309-298-2791
>
>
>
> Toby Main
> State Library of New Mexico
> 1209 Camino Carlos Rey
> Santa Fe, NM 87507
>
>
> --
> Be Yourself @ mail.com!
> Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
> Get a *Free* Account at www.mail.com <http://www.mail.com/Product.aspx>!
>
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2