>>1577119 (pb)
this is an excellent question. i've been frustrated by fake yous before, but i can easily move past them...but some posters seem to really hate them.
interesting.
>>1577119 (pb)
this is an excellent question. i've been frustrated by fake yous before, but i can easily move past them...but some posters seem to really hate them.
interesting.
no. that spot is on the southmost beach, and the dump was (i think) entirely taken from the north east.
i will dig around for other shots.
comparison between bing and google. different scales, but you can see the pattern is different, and the shape isn't quite right.
could be just a different satellite/angle/lens, but it's a starting point.
if you have any memory or list of sites i can look at with checkerboard patterns for both map platforms, that will be interesting too.
if similar resolutions look different from bing's LSJ shape - that will say a great deal. (meaning, google chooses a checkerboard, bing just greys it out - defo fishy)
here's why i ask. even though the resolution is poor - the checkerboard pattern in bing makes a distinct impression.
on LSJ, it's just grey.
makes me think further that both (all) sites were instructed to do this.