Apple Maps street-level imagery vans hitting Connecticut for first time

Posted:
in General Discussion edited May 2017
Apple has updated its street-level vehicle-mounted photography site, and in addition to efforts continuing all over the U.S. and overseas, vehicles associated with the project are now cruising streets in Connecticut.




First spotted by MacRumors, Apple's "Street Team" has expanded its efforts to the New England state for the first time, making it the 34th state that the company is known to have collected data in. As with all the other locations it has patrolled, Apple will blur faces and license plates on imagery it takes prior to publication.

It is not clear what Apple will ultimately use the data for. Apple's mapping vans have appeared in locations prior to expansion of transit data in Apple Maps, so it's possible that Hartford or New Haven, Conn. may see addition of the data in coming months.

Speculation exists that the data is being collected to aid in Apple's autonomous driving project. However, Conn. has a ban on autonomous vehicles, so it would seem more likely that a focus for early driving system intelligence gathering would be in states that allow autonomous cars to be tested on its roads.

The Apple site listing mapping van patrolling locations was last updated on April 10. It appears to be getting updates about once a month.

The vehicles will be in Fairfield, Hartford, Litchfield, Mittlesex, New Haven, New London, Tolland, and Windham counties between May 8 and May 21. Its efforts in other states and internationally continue as well.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 22,828member
    Transit mapping does sound like the most likely reason for Apple vans to be in the area.
    JanNL
  • Reply 2 of 14
    JanNLJanNL Posts: 307member
    gatorguy said:
    Transit mapping does sound like the most likely reason for Apple vans to be in the area.
     :)   Or to measure the distances between stations  ;)
  • Reply 3 of 14
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,262member
    I wonder if they're collecting private WiFi data & passwords like Google did?
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 4 of 14
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 22,828member
    I wonder if they're collecting private WiFi data & passwords like Google did?
    Like Google sweeping open publicly accessible Wi-Fi networks "unintentionally" intentional several years ago? Probably not, tho it's something that others do in neighborhoods around the world. Leaving your wi-fi network public isn't the best idea. 
    edited May 2017 stantheman
  • Reply 5 of 14
    Have you noticed the location of the imaging sensors? Around head height, right? Any chance that this will be a new Maps feature called Eye-level?  B)
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 14
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,262member
    gatorguy said:
    I wonder if they're collecting private WiFi data & passwords like Google did?
    Like Google sweeping open publicly accessible Wi-Fi networks "unintentionally" intentional several years ago? Probably not, tho it's something that others do in neighborhoods around the world. Leaving your wi-fi network public isn't the best idea. 
    Correct, it's not smart to not put security on your network.  But it was never clear that Google only collected that data that was deemed by the owner to be "pubic".  Particularly back then, the most common network security offered the protection of a screen door to a serious hacker.

    You may be victim blaming when you blame the owner of the data for somebody like Google stealing it.


    patchythepirate
  • Reply 7 of 14
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 22,828member
    gatorguy said:
    I wonder if they're collecting private WiFi data & passwords like Google did?
    Like Google sweeping open publicly accessible Wi-Fi networks "unintentionally" intentional several years ago? Probably not, tho it's something that others do in neighborhoods around the world. Leaving your wi-fi network public isn't the best idea. 
    Correct, it's not smart to not put security on your network.  But it was never clear that Google only collected that data that was deemed by the owner to be "pubic".  Particularly back then, the most common network security offered the protection of a screen door to a serious hacker.

    You may be victim blaming when you blame the owner of the data for somebody like Google stealing it.


    There was no possible "hacking" claimed anywhere that I've read about. Insinuating there was is kinda FUD-ish isn't it? 

    I don't personally think there was any reason to collect snippets of transmissions lasting at best a few seconds in the first place (bad Google), but not even the Germans said there was any efforts to "hack" into private networks by Google. If there was any question of that whatsoever they'd have mentioned it. 
    edited May 2017 stantheman
  • Reply 8 of 14
    dayedaye Posts: 18member
    I use Apple Maps on my IOS devices, But I am hoping Apple updates the map images frequently. My house was rebuilt 5 years ago and the apple map image today still shows the image of the house been demolished. Reported this to Apple 3 times. Both Google and Bing maps have the updated image. 
  • Reply 9 of 14
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,262member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I wonder if they're collecting private WiFi data & passwords like Google did?
    Like Google sweeping open publicly accessible Wi-Fi networks "unintentionally" intentional several years ago? Probably not, tho it's something that others do in neighborhoods around the world. Leaving your wi-fi network public isn't the best idea. 
    Correct, it's not smart to not put security on your network.  But it was never clear that Google only collected that data that was deemed by the owner to be "pubic".  Particularly back then, the most common network security offered the protection of a screen door to a serious hacker.

    You may be victim blaming when you blame the owner of the data for somebody like Google stealing it.


    There was no possible "hacking" claimed anywhere that I've read about. Insinuating there was is kinda FUD-ish isn't it? 

    I don't personally think there was any reason to collect snippets of transmissions lasting at best a few seconds in the first place (bad Google), but not even the Germans said there was any efforts to "hack" into private networks by Google. If there was any question of that whatsoever they'd have mentioned it. 
    Your confidence in Google's protection of people's private information is admirable, but very foolish.

    If there was, as you claim, no reason for them to collect private transmissions, then why did they not only collect them, but then store those terabytes of information (back when a terabyte was a lot of storage) -- and then claim it was all the work of "rogue programmer" -- while STILL retaining all those terabytes of stolen information on their servers?

    Sorry, Google's claims of innocence may fool the foolish.   But that's about it... 
  • Reply 10 of 14
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 22,828member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I wonder if they're collecting private WiFi data & passwords like Google did?
    Like Google sweeping open publicly accessible Wi-Fi networks "unintentionally" intentional several years ago? Probably not, tho it's something that others do in neighborhoods around the world. Leaving your wi-fi network public isn't the best idea. 
    Correct, it's not smart to not put security on your network.  But it was never clear that Google only collected that data that was deemed by the owner to be "pubic".  Particularly back then, the most common network security offered the protection of a screen door to a serious hacker.

    You may be victim blaming when you blame the owner of the data for somebody like Google stealing it.


    There was no possible "hacking" claimed anywhere that I've read about. Insinuating there was is kinda FUD-ish isn't it? 

    I don't personally think there was any reason to collect snippets of transmissions lasting at best a few seconds in the first place (bad Google), but not even the Germans said there was any efforts to "hack" into private networks by Google. If there was any question of that whatsoever they'd have mentioned it. 
    Your confidence in Google's protection of people's private information is admirable, but very foolish.

    If there was, as you claim, no reason for them to collect private transmissions, then why did they not only collect them, but then store those terabytes of information (back when a terabyte was a lot of storage) -- and then claim it was all the work of "rogue programmer" -- while STILL retaining all those terabytes of stolen information on their servers?

    Sorry, Google's claims of innocence may fool the foolish.   But that's about it... 
    Collected yes. Stolen? Not so much since it was publicly broadcast and available to anyone. And no, if you read what I wrote it should be apparent I don't think some folks at Google did so by accident either.  They weren't innocent, and it wasn't a mistake. 
  • Reply 11 of 14
    mackymotomackymoto Posts: 34member
    I saw one this past Saturday May 6th on Quinsey Drive in Bridgeport.
  • Reply 12 of 14
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,262member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I wonder if they're collecting private WiFi data & passwords like Google did?
    Like Google sweeping open publicly accessible Wi-Fi networks "unintentionally" intentional several years ago? Probably not, tho it's something that others do in neighborhoods around the world. Leaving your wi-fi network public isn't the best idea. 
    Correct, it's not smart to not put security on your network.  But it was never clear that Google only collected that data that was deemed by the owner to be "pubic".  Particularly back then, the most common network security offered the protection of a screen door to a serious hacker.

    You may be victim blaming when you blame the owner of the data for somebody like Google stealing it.


    There was no possible "hacking" claimed anywhere that I've read about. Insinuating there was is kinda FUD-ish isn't it? 

    I don't personally think there was any reason to collect snippets of transmissions lasting at best a few seconds in the first place (bad Google), but not even the Germans said there was any efforts to "hack" into private networks by Google. If there was any question of that whatsoever they'd have mentioned it. 
    Your confidence in Google's protection of people's private information is admirable, but very foolish.

    If there was, as you claim, no reason for them to collect private transmissions, then why did they not only collect them, but then store those terabytes of information (back when a terabyte was a lot of storage) -- and then claim it was all the work of "rogue programmer" -- while STILL retaining all those terabytes of stolen information on their servers?

    Sorry, Google's claims of innocence may fool the foolish.   But that's about it... 
    Collected yes. Stolen? Not so much since it was publicly broadcast and available to anyone. And no, if you read what I wrote it should be apparent I don't think some folks at Google did so by accident either.  They weren't innocent, and it wasn't a mistake. 
    LOL...  That's a bit like the bank robber blaming the robbery on the bank by saying that they didn't protect their money well enough...
  • Reply 13 of 14
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 22,828member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I wonder if they're collecting private WiFi data & passwords like Google did?
    Like Google sweeping open publicly accessible Wi-Fi networks "unintentionally" intentional several years ago? Probably not, tho it's something that others do in neighborhoods around the world. Leaving your wi-fi network public isn't the best idea. 
    Correct, it's not smart to not put security on your network.  But it was never clear that Google only collected that data that was deemed by the owner to be "pubic".  Particularly back then, the most common network security offered the protection of a screen door to a serious hacker.

    You may be victim blaming when you blame the owner of the data for somebody like Google stealing it.


    There was no possible "hacking" claimed anywhere that I've read about. Insinuating there was is kinda FUD-ish isn't it? 

    I don't personally think there was any reason to collect snippets of transmissions lasting at best a few seconds in the first place (bad Google), but not even the Germans said there was any efforts to "hack" into private networks by Google. If there was any question of that whatsoever they'd have mentioned it. 
    Your confidence in Google's protection of people's private information is admirable, but very foolish.

    If there was, as you claim, no reason for them to collect private transmissions, then why did they not only collect them, but then store those terabytes of information (back when a terabyte was a lot of storage) -- and then claim it was all the work of "rogue programmer" -- while STILL retaining all those terabytes of stolen information on their servers?

    Sorry, Google's claims of innocence may fool the foolish.   But that's about it... 
    Collected yes. Stolen? Not so much since it was publicly broadcast and available to anyone. And no, if you read what I wrote it should be apparent I don't think some folks at Google did so by accident either.  They weren't innocent, and it wasn't a mistake. 
    LOL...  That's a bit like the bank robber blaming the robbery on the bank by saying that they didn't protect their money well enough...
    Hardly comparable, but it's obvious you already had your mind made up and nothing will be changing it. Sorry for intruding on your FUD. As you were soldier. 
    edited May 2017
  • Reply 14 of 14
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 9,262member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I wonder if they're collecting private WiFi data & passwords like Google did?
    Like Google sweeping open publicly accessible Wi-Fi networks "unintentionally" intentional several years ago? Probably not, tho it's something that others do in neighborhoods around the world. Leaving your wi-fi network public isn't the best idea. 
    Correct, it's not smart to not put security on your network.  But it was never clear that Google only collected that data that was deemed by the owner to be "pubic".  Particularly back then, the most common network security offered the protection of a screen door to a serious hacker.

    You may be victim blaming when you blame the owner of the data for somebody like Google stealing it.


    There was no possible "hacking" claimed anywhere that I've read about. Insinuating there was is kinda FUD-ish isn't it? 

    I don't personally think there was any reason to collect snippets of transmissions lasting at best a few seconds in the first place (bad Google), but not even the Germans said there was any efforts to "hack" into private networks by Google. If there was any question of that whatsoever they'd have mentioned it. 
    Your confidence in Google's protection of people's private information is admirable, but very foolish.

    If there was, as you claim, no reason for them to collect private transmissions, then why did they not only collect them, but then store those terabytes of information (back when a terabyte was a lot of storage) -- and then claim it was all the work of "rogue programmer" -- while STILL retaining all those terabytes of stolen information on their servers?

    Sorry, Google's claims of innocence may fool the foolish.   But that's about it... 
    Collected yes. Stolen? Not so much since it was publicly broadcast and available to anyone. And no, if you read what I wrote it should be apparent I don't think some folks at Google did so by accident either.  They weren't innocent, and it wasn't a mistake. 
    LOL...  That's a bit like the bank robber blaming the robbery on the bank by saying that they didn't protect their money well enough...
    Hardly comparable, but it's obvious you already had your mind made up and nothing will be changing it. Sorry for intruding on your FUD. As you were soldier. 
    Sorry if it logic and truth disrupt your Alternative Reality....
Sign In or Register to comment.