Google's Street View cars collected names, addresses, telephone numbers, URLs, passwords, email, text messages, medical records, video and audio files

Australian Financial Review 7 May 2012:

Google could face new investigations by the Privacy Commissioner over its harvesting of personal information using Street View cars after a 17-month investigation by US authorities found it wasn’t the act of a “rogue” engineer.

From 2007 to 2010, Google’s ­specially designed Street View cars travelled the world taking detailed photos, recording wi-fi details and sucking up data carried on open wireless networks.

The report by the Federal Communications Commission found that “Google’s Street View cars collected names, addresses, telephone numbers, URLs, passwords, email, text messages, medical records, video and audio files”. When the snooping was discovered the search giant apologised for the collection and said it was due to a “rogue” code inserted by an engineer without permission.

But the FCC found that management was, in fact, told about the proposal in a series of documents and said Google obstructed its investigation. The company claimed its management didn’t read the proposal.

Authorities in Australia, the UK and Germany are examining the FCC’s report and considering further action. Privacy Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim told The Australian Financial Review his department would analyse the FCC report over the next three weeks to see if new investigations were required.

In 2010 Mr Pilgrim’s department found Google guilty of breaching the Privacy Act. But when the issue was referred to the Australian Federal Police (AFP), it said there was evidence that the breach was “inadvertent” and that there was little chance of a conviction because gathering evidence would be too hard.

Has the Heartland Institute finally gone too far?

Heartland Institute media release:

May 03, 2012

Jim Lakely

May 3, 2012 – Billboards in Chicago paid for by The Heartland Institute point out that some of the world’s most notorious criminals say they “still believe in global warming” – and ask viewers if they do, too.

Heartland’s first digital billboard – along the inbound Eisenhower Expressway (I-290) in Maywood – is the latest effort by the free-market think tank to inform the public about what it views as the collapsing scientific, political, and public support for the theory of man-made global warming. It is also reminding viewers of the questionable ethics of global warming’s most prominent proponents.

“The most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists,” said Heartland’s president, Joseph Bast. “They are Charles Manson, a mass murderer; Fidel Castro, a tyrant; and Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber. Global warming alarmists include Osama bin Laden and James J. Lee (who took hostages inside the headquarters of the Discovery Channel in 2010).

Bast added, “The leaders of the global warming movement have one thing in common: They are willing to use force and fraud to advance their fringe theory.” For more about the billboards and why Heartland says people should not still believe in global warming, click here……

The next day a statement from one sponser, Microsoft, distanced itself:

Microsoft believes climate change is a serious issue that demands immediate, worldwide attention and we are acting accordingly. We are pursuing strategies and taking actions to reduce our own impact as well as the impact of our products. In addition, Microsoft has adopted a broad policy statement on climate change that expresses support for government action to address climate change.

The Heartland Institute does not speak for Microsoft on climate change. In fact, the Heartland Institute’s position on climate change is diametrically opposed to Microsoft’s position. And we completely disagree with the group’s inflammatory and distasteful advertising campaign…….

Two days later The Guardian U.K. stated:

The London-based drinks giant, which owns brands such as Guinness, Smirnoff, Johnnie Walker and Moët & Chandon, said this year that it was "reviewing any further association with Heartland" following the release online of internal Heartland documents which revealed its corporate donors as well as a plan to promote an alternative climate change curriculum in US schools. Following the widespread outcry triggered by Heartland's billboards, a Diageo spokeswoman told the Guardian: "Diageo vigorously opposes climate scepticism and our actions are proof of this. Diageo's only association with the Heartland Institute was limited to a small contribution made two years ago specifically related to an excise tax issue. Diageo has no plans to work with the Heartland Institute in the future."…..

On 7 May E&E Publishing revealed another sponsorship withdrawal:

"It was disgusting. It was revolting," Brad Kading, president of the Association of Bermuda Insurers and Reinsurers, said of the ad in an interview over the weekend. "It was a terrible mistake."

His group, which donated $125,000 to Heartland over the last two years, told the libertarian president of Heartland, Joe Bast, that their relationship is "untenable" in a letter Friday evening.

While this letter to another sponsor was posted online as one academic fought back against Heartland’s advertising:

May 7, 2012
State Farm Insurance
One State Farm Plaza
Bloomington, IL 61710
Dear State Farm,
As per a recent conversation with Tony Ardise, my State Farm agent, I provided him two weeks’ notice that I intend to cancel all of my policies with State Farm Insurance because of its support of Heartland Institute. I have been a loyal customer for over 21 years and currently send almost $4500 per year to State Farm. I do not wish my money to be sent to Heartland Institute – a group that recently compared climate scientists and those concerned about climate change to “murderers, tyrants, and madmen” such as Ted Kaczynski (Unabomber), Charles Manson, Fidel Castro, and Osama bin Laden. Although Heartland stated that they will remove the public billboards, their official statement offers no apologies. It is obvious that the billboards represent Heartland’s true feelings.
This indefensible and un-American assault on climate science is just the latest attempt by Heartland to discourage action on climate change, but there is a long history. As has been widely reported in mainstream media, Heartland Institute has been leading the charge for years to confuse our policymakers, the general public, and our school children about well-understood climate change science.
The United States National Academy of Sciences tells us that the climate is warming, humans are responsible, and that this behavior is increasing risks across a broad spectrum of society. Every international academy of science agrees and recent studies show that 97-98% of publishing experts concur.
Who else is concerned? Military and intelligence experts warn that climate-induced crises could topple governments, feed terrorist movements or destabilize entire regions and health officials warn us that climate change could be the biggest global health threat of the 21st century. These are experts who are warning us of a serious problem. We need to listen to these experts and not to Heartland Institute.
State Farm states: “We’re working with organizations all across the country – organizations like the Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS), Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and Protecting America – to help protect you and your family from the human injuries, property destruction, and financial impact that can result from natural disasters.” Climate change has been shown to have increased the frequency and intensity of droughts, fires, heat waves, and floods. Along with sea level rise, these types of disasters have already cost your industry many billions of dollars according to financial experts. I find it quite disturbing that State Farm would send money to a group that is clearly hurting its bottom line. Would the American Lung Association send money to Philip Morris?
General Motors and AT&T have publicly stated they will no longer fund Heartland Institute. State Farm should immediately do the same. If so, I will remain a loyal customer. Otherwise, I will take my business elsewhere.
Sincerely,
Scott A. Mandia

Two months ago when the names of Heartland Institute sponsors became public knowledge, General Motors publicly withdrew from the Institute’s funding pool, according to The Guardian:

In a statement, GM said that it now runs its business "as if climate change is real and believe we have a role to play in developing new cars, trucks and technologies that can make a difference".

The U.S. Blog Forecast The Facts is currently running an online petition urging all sponsors to follow suit.

One of the fascinating instances of science and culture meshing

Humpback whales from Google Images

Science tells us that; Cetacean ancestors probably moved into water before changing their diet (and their teeth)

Ancient Australian indigenous culture tells us that whales were ancestors living on the land who moved back into the ocean; During the dreamtime period Gyian intermingled with other creatures, passing on the Laws of Baiyami. He later changed form from a bird of the land to live as he does today in the ocean as a whale. This was the birth of Gyian on Earth.

Tweets of the Week

After the 2012-13 Commonwealth Budget was handed down………….

Tim Dick ‏@dick_tim

Only budget comment heard at Campbelltown today: They're bribing me, and I like it.

Courteney Hocking‏ @courteneyh

for tony abbott, numbers are like women: he doesn't get them & he can't help coming across as pig ignorant whenever the subject comes up.

blacksheep‏ @lissjeanrosa

Pyne shorter "I trust no one and nothing and especially dirty low income families" #auspol @SwannyDPM @BreakfastNews

Nostalgia as well as a perigee moon rising over Coffs Harbour this week

http://youtu.be/WQtgVy-ggoQ

A 'Supermoon' rose over Coffs Harbour, New South Wales, Australia today, 5th May 2012 and even though it was hidden behind clouds on the horizon for a few minutes, it soon shone extra bright.
People were seen wondering the streets all night like zombies, wondering why the night was so bright.
Please note no copyright infringement is intended by the use of the Credence Clearwater song, 'Bad Moon Rising' which was used as a pun on the lunar event.

The Coffs Coast Advocate 6 May 2012

Which part was unparliamentary language? Was it "Abbott and Costello" or "The Three Stooges"?

Yesterday in the House of Representatives:  

Mr BRADBURY (Lindsay—Assistant Treasurer and Minister Assisting for Deregulation) ... I was not surprised to see reports in the papers today that there is a cunning and devious plan to parachute Peter Costello back into parliament. They figure that is about the only way they might be able to give their economic leadership a little bit of credibility.

Honourable members interjecting

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Assistant Treasurer will return to the question.

Mr BRADBURY: Unfortunately, it looks as though what was reported might not be happening—we will not be getting Abbott and Costello; we are just stuck with the Three Stooges.

Ms Julie Bishop: Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Previously that phrase has been deemed unparliamentary and I ask that he withdraw.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is correct. That has been ruled as out of order in this context, and I will ask the Assistant Treasurer to withdraw.

Opposition members interjecting

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Everybody on that side might walk the plank very quickly if they do not show some respect to the chair. The Assistant Treasurer has the call.

Mr BRADBURY: I withdraw.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER:I thank the Assistant Treasurer.

Source: Hansard, House of Representatives, 10/05/12

Image credit: perthnow.com.au

Gulaptis buys into Pacific Highway funding stoush by way of a Dorothy Dixer and gets caught out aiding a political deception

On 7 May the NSW Nationals Member for Clarence, ‘Steve’ Gulaptis, was reported in The Casino Times:

STATE Clarence MP, Chris Gulaptis, (pictured) today condemned Federal Labor for cutting $2.3 billion out of the Pacific Highway in its budget.

"I'm very disappointed to see that Federal Labor has walked away from an agreed 80:20 split on the Pacific Highway funding and cut vital funding from the Pacific Highway," Mr Gulaptis said.

Not content with that piece of political mischief, on 9 May 2012 he rose to his feet in the NSW Legislative Assembly and asked this preordained question of his leader:

My question is directed to the Deputy Premier. How does the Federal Labor budget break the Prime Minister's promise to complete the Pacific Highway upgrade by 2016?

One small problem for the Clarence MP is that records apparently show otherwise according to The Sydney Morning Herald:

Mr Baird and Mr Gay produced a letter from the former Labor transport minister, David Campbell, to Mr Albanese in 2009 saying he would ''undertake to seek a 20 per cent NSW government commitment to the additional funding''.

But Mr Albanese said: ''My reply to NSW was to reject minister Campbell's proposal for an 80-20 funding split. On the 29th of January I wrote back to minister Campbell and I said … I was very disappointed about the decision [of the NSW government] to reduce its funding further.''

This is not only confirmed in Andrew Stoner’s convoluted reply to Gulaptis according to the NSW Hansard of 9 May, but by letters published on 10 May 2012 in The Sydney Morning Herald.

These show that a federal government offer was retracted because NSW failed to act in time and one additional funding amount being made available was part of the stimulus package in response to the global financial crisis - see below.

It would appear that any hope of anything like a permanent 80:20 or 83:17 funding split in New South Wales’ favour was only ever alive in the mind of the NSW government of the day and, it was swiftly disabused of this notion.

Indeed, in 2009 the NSW Government agreed to reconsider its Pacific Highway upgrade contribution levels at a future date and, in light of that promise and in recognition of nationally hard economic times the Federal Government was more than generous when it came to monies for specific upgrade sections granted to the state.

NSW by its own admission paid only 10 per cent of the total cost of the completed Glenugie section and paid nothing towards the Kempsey By-pass section due to be opened next year. Yet Mr. Gulaptis has stated to North Coast media that these works were undertaken in an 80:20 funding split.

Mr. Gulaptis needs to realize that he first duty is to the truth and not to his party. He also needs to remember that political whoppers will almost always get found out.

NSW Minister for Transport's 2009 letter to Canberra

Federal Minister For Infrastructure's 2009 letter to NSW Government