The Google Deer Hunt!

[EvilAerosolCan]

It makes perfect sense what Google did. I doubt Google pays hundreds of people to go through the millions/billions (however many) pictures and manually inspect each one. They probably have some kind of recognition software for faces and license plates. I'd bet the deer just got clipped, which would explain why it wound up on the opposite side of the road. If it didn't damage the vehicle much, the driver probably thought it would be better to not bring it up.

Also, a deer being hit by a car is not tragic.

[Mumbo]

I don't see the big deal myself. It's a deer...they get hit by cars or shot, or eaten all the time.

Originally Posted by Hagan

I thought this company was supposed to go over their content and blot out faces ans such before making it live? How did this get past their 'quality assurance team'... or where they having a break at the time?

Do you really think that Google has people sitting in a room looking at every image that is taken to make sure it passes standards to be posted? They have automated programs that go through the images and blot out faces and other things that they aren't allowed to show. That's why some images have the KFC logo blotted out.

[Sensational]

Originally Posted by Retodon8

I'm with Hagan on this.
It makes no sense Google did what it did.

That's the thing though, it's probably automated. Or perhaps they only screened the first picture of the set. Or perhaps the guys just didn't give a shit because they had worse things to worry about, like which rifle to buy for when they go hunting.

Originally Posted by Retodon8

It's not about the dead deer, it's about the death of the deer, about the deer dying.

Yes, and the carefactory started producing massive amounts of careboxes as soon as they heard.

Originally Posted by Retodon8

Why do you say he's exaggerating?
I'm pretty sure you don't know the deer, so you can't judge.

Sure I do, it's a deer. The difference beetween a deer and a stone is that the deer wants to have sex, and I'm pretty sure I "know" most of the stones on our planet. They roll when you push them, they fall when you drop them. Sure, a deer is a bit more complex than a stone, but nothing worth crying over in the same way that a plant is not worth crying over when it gets hit by a car.

I'm sure (Well, almost sure) that you wouldn't give a shit if a boat with a camera mounted on it hit some ugly fish and killed it. Even if google let it slip through their filters. And no, dolphins don't count, they're cute and help retarded children.

Originally Posted by Retodon8

Not to mention the fact that this kind of thing is very subjective.

Everything is to someone, people deny facts because they've been told to believe in a guy who lives in the clouds, loves us all and takes us to eternity if all we do is follow his rules. Still, a deer? I never imagined that Hagan would be the type of guy to scream violently as Bambi dies.

[Maruso]

It is quite upsetting to think they never bothered to check over the photos that were taken on that particular street due to what is found. Granted its not extremely graphic, but there are sensitive people who would be very disturbed by this and for the sake of keeping them from vomiting, crying, or anything of that nature, Google should be held completely responsible for whatever is being shown and made public on their behalf. </semi-rant>

[QforQ]

To clear up some things:

The deer did not die. The deer ran off before the police came after the accident.

The google employee did call the police and he called Google when it happened. Again, the deer ran off before the police came.

[Mia]

Semi-related:

gBust! Field of Pot Discovered via Google Earth

http://www.pcworld.com/article/15862...e_earth.htm l

[Hagan]

Awesome, the deer isn't dead. Now it can grow up and become deer 20 steaks instead. Mmmm, i'm hungry now.

Still, that kind of makes this a little worse. Think about it, they knew about it and didn't bother removing it? Its lead to misunderstandings (like this thread) and a more wider outcry amongst the animal fanciers.

Mind you, I suppose it could be worse. I know of a few people who are planing to 'moon' the google car as it goes through Wigan... a crowd pleaser if ever I heard of one.

[Mumbo]

A picture might be worth 1000 words, but it does still help to read the article.

"Well, no sooner had sharp-eyed netizens spotted this outrage and expressed their horror and disgust across cyberspace, than Google pulled the offending images."

[Retodon8]

Originally Posted by Sensational

That's the thing though, it's probably automated.

The uploading and stuff like that, sure, maybe even the camera, but I'm pretty sure the car was driven by a person.
This person should have noticed (s)he hit a deer and made a note about it, and as QforQ mentioned, (s)he did.
Because of the reason Maruso mentioned, Google shouldn't have used those pictures.
I've seen a whole country go stupid over less (Janet Jackson nipple slip on live TV in the USA).
Something else that comes to mind is people openly (and stupidly) complaining about how the film "The Two Towers" was named after the then recently collapsed Twin Towers.

Originally Posted by Sensational

Sure I do, it's a deer. The difference beetween a deer and a stone is that the deer wants to have sex, and I'm pretty sure I "know" most of the stones on our planet. They roll when you push them, they fall when you drop them. Sure, a deer is a bit more complex than a stone, but nothing worth crying over in the same way that a plant is not worth crying over when it gets hit by a car.

Not sure where the stones come from, but what you do with them I wouldn't call "knowing".
After looking up the meaning of the word "tragedy" (not the play kind), I suppose it is a bit much, which means I hear lots of people use it when it's not really warranted.
When you talk about "crying over" though, I do hold my opinion.

Following your reasoning, I could argue that I know your mother, sister, girlfriend, or somebody else close, because I know how humans in general work.
I could argue they are a bit more complex than a deer, but nothing worth crying over if they got run over by a car.
At least the deer I've seen pictures of, discussed on a forum.
I may not know the deer, but at least I know of the deer.
I'm pretty sure if someone close to you died it would impact you a lot more.
Like I said, it's very subjective.

Originally Posted by Sensational

I'm sure (Well, almost sure) that you wouldn't give a shit if a boat with a camera mounted on it hit some ugly fish and killed it. Even if google let it slip through their filters. And no, dolphins don't count, they're cute and help retarded children.

I would've cared about that too.
I admit "complexity" does influence how much I care, but it's certainly not the only thing.
If my sister's dog died I would care a lot more than if it was some random person in the street.
I cared when the family pet rabbit died, even if it was just a rabbit.

Originally Posted by Sensational

Everything is to someone, people deny facts because they've been told to believe in a guy who lives in the clouds, loves us all and takes us to eternity if all we do is follow his rules.

Actually one thing that annoys me about some religious people is that they believe humans are not animals, but something completely different, better.
First of all, looking at it scientifically it is simply nonsense.
Secondly, if they reason being better somehow gives them some responsibility when it comes to animals, that's good, but some consider animals just tools to be used, worthless otherwise.

Just to be clear, if the deed would've died, I wouldn't have cried myself.
Sometimes I do tend to take a somewhat more extreme point of view than is typical of me, to illustrate my point.
Let's put it like this: I am glad there are groups of people caring enough for animal rights to actually do something about it on a greater scale, even if I personally don't.

[Sensational]

Originally Posted by Retodon8

Not sure where the stones come from, but what you do with them I wouldn't call "knowing".


Following your reasoning, I could argue that I know your mother, sister, girlfriend, or somebody else close, because I know how humans in general work.
I could argue they are a bit more complex than a deer, but nothing worth crying over if they got run over by a car.

Yes, you certainly could, and you'd be right on a grander scale. In the end we're just animals as well, but to us, other humans usually are worth crying over. And to some, deers are.

Originally Posted by Retodon8

I would've cared about that too.

Very well, I'm not saying that you shouldn't, just that I don't and that most people are hypocrites when it comes to this issue. When Bambi dies they care, when a little insect gets stomped on they don't give a shit.

Originally Posted by Retodon8

Actually one thing that annoys me about some religious people is that they believe humans are not animals, but something completely different, better.
First of all, looking at it scientifically it is simply nonsense.

We are animals but also better. Using other animals for our purposes is a part of nature. It's not like the lion cares if the gazelle has to suffer while he sinks his teeth into it's neck. In the same way, it's not like we're actually trying to make animals suffer when we slaughter them (Well, most of us wouldn't), and while we are more complex, more intelligent, it would seem that caring about lesser animals is not part of our basic programming. I'd say it's more of a culture thing TBH.

I wouldn't qoute myself on that though, but most people I know of don't give a crap, and the ones who do do so because it's what they've been taught to believe in by their parents, some organization or their new boyfriend's militant vegan friends.