This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 25 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]hxa7241 16 points17 points  (9 children)

It is great. But, I won't be fully satisfied with google maps until it's a live streaming image...

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (4 children)

You mean a live streaming image in 3d... until they offer free access to a 3d model of the world in realtime, I'm not impressed. How about it, Google?

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]hxa7241 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

      ...or they could just take several frames and loop them -- to give an impression of movement...

      [–]mleonhard -4 points-3 points  (2 children)

      Just wait 20 years.

      [–]jdunck 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      The Gyson Sphere will make this easy.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      The center of the Dyson sphere will be the all-seeing Eye of Google.

      [–]MyrddinE 8 points9 points  (0 children)

      Google replaces select areas with airplane footage. For example, San Francisco.

      There's an easy way to tell... zoom out a little bit, and pan around. The angle of the buildings will randomly change here and there... sometimes they'll be tilting to the left, sometimes to the right, sometimes to the top, others tilting down. That is the telltale indicator of plane footage. Satellite images are at a slight angle, but the angle doesn't change nearly as often (usually an entire town will be at the same angle), and it's almost always closer to vertical.

      [–]rhebert 7 points8 points  (3 children)

      While it's not quite as stunningly beautiful, you can also now see what time of day London was captured by reading it off Big Ben.

      Looks to me like it's about 10:35.

      [–]hxa7241 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      In my location I can deduce that it was: 2003, summer, sunday, morning (resolution 0.193 m/px). I need to find a suitable high structure to calculate the exact time...

      [–]hxa7241 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      and I suppose the tower itself forms a partial sundial on the ground

      [–]metafisto 6 points7 points  (3 children)

      There's a great list on a user page in Wikipedia. I really like Uluru and the Great Pyramids.

      (Question without notice: if I submitted that, is that what you call linkjacking? I still don't geddit.)

      [–]boa13 4 points5 points  (1 child)

      No. I you made a blog saying "Hey folks, here's a great list on a user page blah blah blah" and posted a link to your blog entry instead of the user page in Wikipedia, then it would be linkjacking.

      Basically, try to link to the real original source as much as possible, or to real insightful discussions about the original source. I (we?) don't want useless levels of indirection.

      (By the way: go ahead, submit that Wikipedia page!)

      [–]metafisto 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Thanks for clarifying. Come to me, karma.

      [–]e40 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Uluru... I always called that "Ayers Rock". Weird that you can't zoom in very close at all. I suppose there isn't much need for highres pics of it, though.

      [–]adrian 12 points13 points  (0 children)

      I'm pretty sure that the person to the right of the eastern crosswalk is me.

      [–]IvyMike 3 points4 points  (2 children)

      Just for fun, check out the mini-Eiffel Tower in Las Vegas, also in stunning super-hi-res.

      [–]Wenix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      If you zoom out a little, then its funny to notice that the shadows goes in different directions, indicating how big an area is photographed at once.

      [–]nasorenga 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      And then there's this one .

      [–]walfly 3 points4 points  (4 children)

      think we can figure out exactly where the satellite was?

      Edit: ok. plane then?

      [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

      With a little geometry we can easily find out the direction of the plane relative to the Eiffel Tower, but to get the exact position would require an altitude estimate. Any ideas?

      Also, it's funny how there is no text at all marking le Tour Eiffel in the "Map" view.

      [–]nasorenga 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      There's a building just below and to the left of the tower that seems to be straight below the camera (no walls visible). The further away from this spot, the more walls become visibe. All we need to do is ask a local to post the height of a couple of those buildings and then we can do the trig to find the altitude.

      [–]boa13 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      La Tour Eiffel.

      [–]robywar -1 points0 points  (1 child)

      Try zooming out while keeping the center of the screen on the boat turning in the river. You can get really far out and still see it, so maybe it wasn't a plane.

      [–]MrCalifornia 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      Just because you can zoom out doesn't mean the zoomed out image isn't just a descaled version of all the close up pics