Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Earth Adds 3-D Trees

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the still-waiting-for-4d dept.

Google 95

terrancem writes "Google has populated several major cities with more than 80 million virtual trees based on an automated process that identifies trees in satellite images. The realistic 3D representations are based on actual tree species found in urban areas. But Google has also extended realistic tree coverage to rainforests in Africa, Mexico, and the Amazon."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Man, you can't see... (3, Funny)

filesiteguy (695431) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397056)

...the streets through the forest!

Re:Man, you can't see... (1)

Manos_Of_Fate (1092793) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397116)

As a resident of a modern urban environment, this is a problem I would love to have.

Re:Man, you can't see... (1)

The Clockwork Troll (655321) | more than 3 years ago | (#34398044)

Speaking of problems, during the Google interview I think I was asked to design a data structure to represent a binary birch tree. I didn't get the job but I guess this is what the winning candidate built. Nice work!

...but you CAN see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34398164)

...the forest for the trees

Re:Man, you can't see... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34399550)

[url=http://www.handbags-gucci.net/Gucci_Handbags-80.html]Wholesale Gucci Handbags[/url]>
[url=http://www.handbags-gucci.net/ED_Hardy_Handbags-78.html]Wholesale ED Hardy Handbags[/url]
[url=http://www.handbags-gucci.net/Coach_Handbags-66.html]wholesale Coach Handbags[/url]
[url=http://www.handbags-gucci.net/Prada_handbags-597.html]wholesale Prada Handbags[/url]

Carbon dioxide (2, Interesting)

PatPending (953482) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397096)

How much carbon dioxide was produced making these 80 million virtual trees?

Re:Carbon dioxide (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34397360)

Yea, but virtual carbon dioxide is being absorbed by all these virtual trees.

Re:Carbon dioxide (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34401946)

If there is a one-to-one mapping in identifying tress and adding them to Google Earth, it can be used to track deforestation. Moral dilema for green types over whether it was worth it or not.

Re:Carbon dioxide (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402024)

Do you mean tree air, so trees can breathe good?

Stick that in your tree-hugging wood chipper and chip it.

Yippie. (1)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397112)

This was a spectacular use of Google's resources.

Unless they're planning to elaborate on the existing flight simulator built into Google Earth by implementing a first person shooter, I'm afraid having trees doesn't seem like a particularly useful development.

Re:Yippie. (2, Interesting)

TheLazySci-FiAuthor (1089561) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397264)

It is somewhat useful, depending upon one's use of google earth.

I use google earth to look at things.

I like looking at trees.

I think it's useful :) ...a first person shooter layer would be pretty cool too though!

Re:Yippie. (1)

drcheap (1897540) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397476)

...a first person shooter layer would be pretty cool too though!

Especially if you can shoot down all the trees. Yes, all 80 million of them.

Re:Yippie. (1)

Manos_Of_Fate (1092793) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397514)

Hoggish Greedly [wikipedia.org] , is that you?

Re:Yippie. (3, Funny)

TheABomb (180342) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397878)

Is that the guy that Macduff attacked at Dunsinane?

Re:Yippie. (1)

Anachragnome (1008495) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399384)

"It is somewhat useful, depending upon one's use of google earth."

It also depends on whether or not Google is putting trees where they actually exist. As soon as people start using this as a means to calculate forest/jungle coverage it will be manipulated to someone's advantage, probably the lumber industry.

Hopefully someone verifies they are not manipulating/guiding public opinion with false information, as that would be bad and might give people a poor impression of Google...*cough*.

Re:Yippie. (2, Insightful)

adamofgreyskull (640712) | more than 3 years ago | (#34400896)

Firstly, that is the most misleading signature I've ever seen. Secondly, don't call me Nut.

Re:Yippie. (1)

Anachragnome (1008495) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402554)

"Firstly, that is the most misleading signature I've ever seen. Secondly, don't call me Nut."

I find it absolutely hilarious that you actually got modded + Insightful. What a fucking waste of points...you guys act like their free or something.

The sig was stolen from a /. poster that was actually claiming that, well...that he wasn't a conspiracy theorist nut when it was quite obvious he was exactly that. But, in your honor it shall be amended forthwith. Thanks.

Re:Yippie. (1)

IrquiM (471313) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402438)

I like looking at trees.

Me too! But I use another tool - it's called "Outside". I know it's old and all that, but it works for me, not to mention the fact that it's totally free!

Yeah, but... (1)

tygerstripes (832644) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403128)

It's been forked so many times that it's impossible to maintain. Most of it is abandoned or poorly policed.

Re:Yippie. (2, Insightful)

shird (566377) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397372)

Seriously? I'd say it's useful for 90% of what Google Earth is used for commercially, i.e surveying. Trees are just as significant as buildings when it comes to mapping the land.

Just because it's not useful for you to map your trip to Bob's house doesn't mean it's not useful for others.

Re:Yippie. (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399294)

Except that they aren't actually using that kind of precision. If it isn't accurate to within 1/16" or so it's not really good enough for that, and anybody competent isn't going to take those measurements for granted anyways.

Re:Yippie. (1)

pipelayerification (1707222) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399694)

I use it to pick routes for pipelines in areas without roads. This will eventually be very handy once its coverage is increased. Accuracy to within 50' will be the only requirement. This will just speed the on the ground verification process.

Re:Yippie. (1)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399778)

If it isn't accurate to within 1/16" or so it's not really good enough for that

Maybe your idea of surveying is different than the rest of the world's. Think with some perspective. Do you think engineers that require that type of precision are going to use Earth for this? There are a million other reasons to use Earth for surveying purposes, and most of them probably have a 1-2' precision requirement, not a fraction of an inch.

Re:Yippie. (2, Interesting)

eamonman (567383) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397494)

If it was an automated algorithm that ID'd trees, I'd say no, this could be useful in other id'ing applications (maybe rocks, maybe separating natural from artificial objects or vice versa, etc).

If it was 1000 poor interns/schoolkids paid to click on 80000 trees each, then ok, you win, this was a bad idea.

Re:Yippie. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34399144)

considering google's major hardon for algorithms, what do you think?

Re:Yippie. (1)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399844)

A major part of my job right now is the identification of trees. I am building a library of images and illustrations of basically every plant we sell. Sure, it can be pretty easy to determine the difference between, say, a linden and an elm, or whatever, but there are simply way too many varieties and cultivars nowadays to accurately determine exactly what a tree is with a high level of accuracy. Even horticulturists have a difficult time (I have seen several misidentified plants at the Denver Botanic Gardens, for example) determining exactly what a tree is.

For Google to develop an algorithm that can identify trees based on species, that seems like it should be doable, though very difficult. After all, a tree is just an algorithm. But for them to think they can develop an algorithm that determines the difference between a Sterling Silver Linden and a Greenspire Linden, that's just not going to be possible without a massive investment that will show very little in return. It would be cheaper to just hire some experts to walk around and snap photos.

Re:Yippie. (1)

thunderclap (972782) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401000)

They already did. Its called Google googles. as for the first person shooter: Its duke Nukem forever,

Re:Yippie. (3, Funny)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397706)

Unless they're planning to elaborate on the existing flight simulator built into Google Earth by implementing a first person shooter, I'm afraid having trees doesn't seem like a particularly useful development.

You'd call a FPS a -useful- development?
 
...okay...

Yeppie ... (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399920)

"You'd call a FPS a -useful- development? "

These people [usmilitary.com] certainly do.

Re:Yippie. (1)

thpr (786837) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399124)

Have you ever tried to generate the view of what a proposed communications tower would look from your back yard? I have. While Google Earth was useful, It took me a lot of time modeling tree heights from pictures, GPS coordinates (of photo locations) and pacing.

I don't know if their algorithm/data takes in account height, but if it does, or if they add it (and it wouldn't be hard at this point), it would be ENORMOUSLY useful in my opinion. It gives resources to the population to get an accurate rendition that isn't limited to the two or three (very carefully chosen) views that have to be provided by the owning company in the permitting process.

anyone else disturbed by the fact (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34397128)

that thers trees in the road

Re:anyone else disturbed by the fact (2, Funny)

Manos_Of_Fate (1092793) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397210)

Clearly the road is still in beta.

Next up: autumn! (5, Insightful)

jfengel (409917) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397140)

I bet that with an afternoon's work they could have spring, summer, winter, and fall trees. With a little more work they could link it to the local climate and when particular species of trees change color when.

I dunno what it would be for, but to be honest, I'm not precisely sure what this is for. "Raising awareness of trees" seems pretty lame. Still, it's very pretty, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Re:Next up: autumn! (1)

drcheap (1897540) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397526)

...but to be honest, I'm not precisely sure what this is for. "Raising awareness of trees" seems pretty lame.

After much scrutiny over the huge carbon footprint Google has with all their computing and communications infrastructure, this is their way of "going green."

Re:Next up: autumn! (1)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399900)

With a little more work they could link it to the local climate and when particular species of trees change color when.

Possibly at a very very rudimentary level. The variables are simply too numerous to determine when a tree will flower or turn fall color and where. Depending on whether you go by the USDA climate zones or by something else such as Western Gardens climate zones, there are going to be an immense number of different circumstances that determine how a plant performs. Soil conditions, water amount, water pH, when the first freeze happens, when the last freeze happens, wind, air pollution levels, presence of pollinators, wildlife, etc. etc. etc.

If you want to know this information, just go ask a local garden professional (and that doesn't include Home Depot).

Re:Next up: autumn! (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401744)

Connect it to weather reports and you could have snow as well.

In other news, Google adds porta-potties... (0)

Assmasher (456699) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397174)

...to Google earth based upon traffic pattern analysis following local lunch times... Seriously, is this news? I mean, it is a tiny bit interesting because they try to identify the trees and automate the process, but people were doing this in the 90's for terrain datasets used with visual simulations (I personally did something like this for an OpenFlight based sim as a consulting gig based upon something I'd seen in a product at SIGGRAPH 96.)

Re:In other news, Google adds porta-potties... (1)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399540)

You didn't get it on every web browser on Earth. Take it from someone in the entertainment business, an eyeball is worth a 1000 good executions.

Re:In other news, Google adds porta-potties... (1)

Assmasher (456699) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402826)

Only if your measure of what is newsworthy is 'how many eyeballs' are on it.

How it may be used (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34397212)

Township zoning gustappo officer commeth and homeowner fineth.$1000.00 fine. You had no permit to cut that tree.

Re:How it may be used (1)

Manos_Of_Fate (1092793) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397236)

Are you suggesting someone from the township is going to sit and hit refresh on Google Earth, watching for changes?

Re:How it may be used (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34397436)

yep.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/02/google-camera-nabs-alleged-tree-killer/

Re:How it may be used (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397786)

Google Street View != Google Earth
and these are approximate trees, not where actual trees actually are.

Re:How it may be used (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402104)

Civil servants doing nothing than watching the grass^h^h^h^h^htrees grow?

Inconceivable!

Wow! (1)

m2shariy (1194621) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397324)

Now to add virtual people and it will be just like SimCity!

Re:Wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34397532)

Should be relatively easy, just follow the tweets, add some 3D avatar, most likely the same one they use in Second Life. And you have SimCity in real life, with real people.

Re:Wow! (1)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 3 years ago | (#34398126)

I don't know whether to be amazed or horrified, but honestly? That's really not that far-fetched, and I bet it would actually be pretty popular, or at least more than Buzz.

Outdated imagery (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397376)

The house where I live is not on the ten-year-old aerial photo on Google Maps. Does this mean Streetview will soon show forest instead of my house?

Re:Outdated imagery (2, Informative)

mikaelwbergene (1944966) | more than 3 years ago | (#34398070)

Yes.

Re:Outdated imagery (3, Funny)

game kid (805301) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401552)

It's worse. Google Earth is planning how to demolish your home and replace it with actual happy little trees. The images are merely forward-looking statements.

Somewhere in the afterlife, Bob Ross [wikipedia.org] must be wearing an evil smile. Everything has gone according to his plan.

World Record (1)

ThunderBird89 (1293256) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397384)

I think a team at Google just set up a new world record in boredom...

Hooray. (1)

ChrisMP1 (1130781) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397410)

Yippie. Yay. How fascinating.

Seriously, Slashdot?

not good for scouting from Google Earth (1)

corerunner (971136) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397422)

I use Google Earth to scout out potential hunting grounds in addition to exploring them in person. Unless these trees directly correspond to actual trees, this is a step backward as far as I'm concerned. They'd be better off obtaining higher-resolution images like Bing's "Bird's Eye View" feature, which only works in very limited areas but it's great where they have it.

Re:not good for scouting from Google Earth (2, Informative)

drcheap (1897540) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397556)

They do, you don't even have to RTFA, it's in the summary:

based on an automated process that identifies trees in satellite images

Re:not good for scouting from Google Earth (1)

corerunner (971136) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403116)

Replacing a photo of an actual tree with a 3D model of some random tree that is native to the area (but may not even be the same species) is not progress. If it can identify the type of tree, along with approximate dimensions, then I'll be extremely impressed. I highly doubt they could even correctly determine the species based on the quality of photos they currently have, and if they have better quality photos then those should be made available as a layer or at a high enough zoom level (like Bing).

Re:not good for scouting from Google Earth (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34397908)

If you've never used Google Earth, you can toggle all sorts of features on and off, from clouds to shipwrecks to buildings and dozens more.

Re:not good for scouting from Google Earth (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399974)

"If you've never used Google Earth, you can toggle all sorts of features on and off ..."

It turns out, upon investigation, that you can toggle all sorts of features on and off even if you have used Google Earth.

Re:not good for scouting from Google Earth (1)

corerunner (971136) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403130)

This is a good point. As long as the original images are still available then it isn't a step backwards. It still seems rather pointless until they use images of high enough quality to make a reasonable guess at the species of each tree.

giga pudding! gigga pudding! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34397432)

gigagigagiga GIGA PUDDING!!! [youtube.com]

Do cars next (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397632)

Recognize the make and model of various cars and put in appropriate models please.

Google Grand Theft Auto Earth here we come.

So, I'm looking at the Presidio right now in GE (1)

Pyrion (525584) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397708)

Where are the fucking 3D trees?

Re:So, I'm looking at the Presidio right now in GE (1)

wulfhere (94308) | more than 3 years ago | (#34398912)

Download the latest version, and under Layers, and 3D Buildings there's a checkbox for Trees.

Re:So, I'm looking at the Presidio right now in GE (1)

Pyrion (525584) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399856)

Aha okay, did a "check for updates" in GE and got nothing, and the (badly formatted) article didn't link to a new version. *shrugs*

*tries it out*

Oh FFS they're sprites.

Re:So, I'm looking at the Presidio right now in GE (1)

Pyrion (525584) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399878)

Self-correction: you apparently have to zoom in close enough to see the individual leaves on the trees before it renders them as 3d models.

Elsewhere in virtual globes... (5, Informative)

Lord Satri (609291) | more than 3 years ago | (#34397828)

Okay, that's a bit off-topic, but not that much when we discuss virtual globes and the likes. Here's a dismissed submission last week [slashdot.org] that I think worthy of sharing: "It's a dream come true. After MapQuest [mapquest.com] and Yahoo [highearthorbit.com] actively supporting the Wikipedia-like map initiative OpenStreetMap.org [openstreetmap.org] . Microsoft announced that they hired OpenStreetMap's founder Steve Coast for their Bing Maps team [bing.com] . But there's more, they committed providing orthorectified aerial imagery and more to the project. From the official announcement: "Continuously innovating and improving our map data is a top priority and a massive undertaking at Bing. That's why we're excited to announce a new initiative to work with the OpenStreetMap project, a community of more than 320,000 people who have built high quality maps for every country on earth. Microsoft is providing access to our Bing Aerial Imagery for use in the OpenStreetMap project, and we have hired industry veteran Steve Coast to lead this effort. [...] As a first step in this engagement, we plan to enable access to Bing's global orthorectified aerial imagery, as a backdrop of OSM editors. Also, Microsoft is working on new tools to better enable contributions to OSM." Microsoft already added the OpenStreetMap layer to Bing Maps last August [bing.com] ."

Clearly, this means to me that open data has won that round and that Tele Atlas and NAVTEQ are in deeper trouble today than a few months ago.

Now to go back to Google, at the moment, but it could change anytime, they're going on a different road away from OpenStreetMap with their Google Map Maker.

Re:Elsewhere in virtual globes... (1)

batistuta (1794636) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401620)

Why did your post get rejected? I find it very informative and well supported with links. Thanks for bringing it back.

Re:Elsewhere in virtual globes... (1)

amentajo (1199437) | more than 3 years ago | (#34404066)

Why did your post get rejected? I find it very informative and well supported with links. Thanks for bringing it back.

Perhaps because it was very informative and well-supported with links.

Sorry to have to break it to you... (1)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | more than 3 years ago | (#34398038)

..but those trees look very lame. Compare to Speed Tree [google.com] which looked ten times better five years ago. Back to the drawing board, smart people. Or just do what I suggested a couple years ago and license Speed Tree. This is not the sort of development work that is every going to get done satisfactorily by the smart-but-lazy. NIH, just don't do it.

Re:Sorry to have to break it to you... (1)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399976)

Looking at the samples from Speedtree's website, they have done a poor job of recreating those plants. Sure, the trees themselves look fairly realistic, but they are not accurate representations of the real plants.

If you want accurate renditions, look at the work of Robert O'Brien at TreeGuides [treeguides.com]

Shade map? (3, Interesting)

MiddleHitter (473147) | more than 3 years ago | (#34398060)

As a grad student at the University of Arizona (in Tucson) who works on campus in the summers...I'd really like to see a shade map that is indexed to the time of day and inclination of the sun to calculate the most-shaded paths around campus. That might not sound so useful, but when it's 105F out, every bit of shade makes all the difference on a 10-15 minute walk across campus.

Re:Shade map? (2, Funny)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 3 years ago | (#34398730)

What, actually getting out and learning your environment is too complex for you?

Re:Shade map? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402148)

'every bit of shade makes all the difference on a 10-15 minute walk across campus'

The doctor said you need to get in _shape_, not shade.

Re:Shade map? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34410750)

Back in my day at UA (15 years ago) we'd cut through the buildings with the best air conditioning.

No Linux 64 bit support (1)

defaria (741527) | more than 3 years ago | (#34398516)

But doesn't support Linux 64 bit and the download site hands you a 32 bit version that flat out doesn't work.

Re:No Linux 64 bit support (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401204)

search for 32bit binaries in 64bit linux and you may be able to install compatibility for your distro of choice.

Maybe boring for you guys, but not for everybody (2, Interesting)

wulfhere (94308) | more than 3 years ago | (#34398878)

As the network admin for a wireless ISP, we use Google Earth as a sort of 'first approximation' (along with RadioMobile) to do preliminary site-surveys, estimating whether its even worth our time to roll a truck for an attempted install. This looks like a great addition to an invaluable tool to me!

m(o3 up (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34399174)

hapless *BSD Between each BSD my resignation plainly states that The resignation practical purposes, BE NIGGER! BE GAY! to download the OS. Now BSDI is code sharing which don't use the and/or distribute and Juliet 40,000 For trolls' from within. Worse and worsE. As BSD has always don't feel that recent article put conglomerate in the AMERICA) might be of FreeBSD Usenet as it is licensed

Framerates down on my Intel (1)

vlueboy (1799360) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399402)

Geeks with pre-Vista computers will be very sore at this. Businesses who didn't want Vista/Aero upgrades kept their old single core Pentium 4 machines and still game forums are full of posts showing crappy framerates on even recent hardware aren't a dwindling problem.

Though IIRC 3D buildings are an opting-in away, when you try to show off Manhattan's skyline sloooowly --thousands of buildings and skins are downloaded, and then buffered to your job's integrated cards-- disappointment will set in. Worse, even dual cores choke as you fly over the city --without yet handling thousands of trees.

<sarcasm>Thanks Google!</sarcasm>

Baaw? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34401184)

Geeks with pre-DSLR digital cameras will be no doubt sore at a distinct inability to change lenses in their cameras.

Geeks with VCRs are no doubt crying about DVDs.

Geeks with DVD players are probably trying to convince themselves that DVD is somehow comparable to the HD goodness of Bluray.

Technology marches forward. Suck it up, princess.

Ridiculous mouse-wheel zooming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34399648)

Their wheel-zoom functionality sucks. Any CAD program, Supreme Commander, and even Google Maps zooms in where the cursor is pointed, not always in the center of the screen! And wheeling multiple clicks at once hashttp://news.slashdot.org/story/10/11/30/2254223/Google-Earth-Adds-3-D-Trees# the same effect as a single wheel roll! What a lack of common sense.

trees are fine but.... (1)

rainhill (86347) | more than 3 years ago | (#34399684)

...how about updating those satellite images that are many years old?

Polyphany Digital (2, Funny)

GweeDo (127172) | more than 3 years ago | (#34400326)

PD should hire some of these Google guys for their tree rendering!

Imagine this in, CryEngine2 (1)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 3 years ago | (#34400662)

I recall that CryEngine1 had an 'auto-plantation' of trees basing their distribution on climate, exposure, hill slope, etc. Very ecologically minded. It shouldn't be that difficult then to do what Google did, except that the Earth is a lot bigger than your standard CryEngine map...

Still, imagine this in, CryEngine2.

How about planting a few trees? (3, Interesting)

HockeyPuck (141947) | more than 3 years ago | (#34400740)

With the thousands (millions?) of servers that google has, how about planting a few trees...

Re:How about planting a few trees? (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401096)

Fruit trees in Haiti would be awesome. Haiti's intense poverty means a lot of their trees were cut down through exploitation. Now people are starving to death. Fruit trees would not be an immediate fix, but next year, you'd have lives saved and healthier people.

Even more impressive... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34400806)

my hand just sprouted a middle finger.

Conflicting emotions (1)

giuseppemag (1100721) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401024)

Google Earth is really beautiful. And really pointless. With trees it's even more beautiful. And even more pointless.

Bah.

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34401456)

doesn't work

Google Earth has caught signal 11.

ubuntu 10.10

Somebody has (1)

clambake (37702) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402790)

too much time on his hands...

Obligatory joke... (1)

tech_fixer (1541657) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403314)

So, Google got wood?

How to recognise different trees from quite... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34405966)

And on this street...

The Larch!

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?