Slashdot Mirror
'Google, Apple, and Uber Should Be Forced To Share Their Mapping Data' (technologyreview.com)
The UK government should encourage companies like Apple, Google, and Uber to publish more map data to help the development of technologies like driverless cars and drones, according to a new report by the Open Data Institute. From a report: This sort of data, which includes addresses and city boundaries, fuels tons of everyday services, from parcel and food deliveries to apps like Google Maps and Uber. Internet giants are sitting on top of vast amounts of geospatial data, but it is largely inaccessible to others. The ODI argues it should be as open as possible as a part of "national infrastructure." Analyzing map data can help communities and organizations make decisions across a vast range of sectors -- for example, how to improve access to a school or hospital.
This is 17 levels of dumb. For goodness sakes, collecting this data is expensive. If the government forces the companies to just hand it all over, then they are going to stop collecting it. Then we will all have really good and quickly and permanently obsolete maps.
If the government wants the data they should create a whole department that is tasked with doing nothing but creating and improving maps. (Wait...)
Is money.
Google et al, scum buckets and hives of villany tho they all are, spent money to collect, organize, store, and maintain that data. If a government wants to license that data on behalf of it's citizens for whatever mutually agreed upon price, more power to them. If they want to dictate that the information be given up or seized just bc they say so, well, thats how revolutions get started as Britain learned a couple centuries ago.
telling the US brands what should be done with data the US brands collected.
Its "inaccessible to others" as the US brands had to spend a lot of time and their own money to collect all that data.
The UK gov can create its own data sets and give them away to any project they want for free as "national infrastructure".
What is it with gov and bureaucrats need to take from the private sector and give to competitors?
Should the UK gov want to provide data sets to innovate new start ups, create a UK gov backed open set and let anyone use the data for anything.
Start spending gov money in the UK on UK projects that provide data to UK brands.
Don't go full tyranny and demand US brands give their years of hard work over to the UK for "free".
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Since it's "national infrastructure", and the data is just sitting out there for anyone to collect for free, then let the government collect the data and give it away.
Good mapping data is expensive and labor intensive to collect, and is a huge competitive advantage to the company that invests the resources to do it well. It should remain with those that own it.
Forced? Let me guess.....for the common good?
Whatever happened to property rights?
These companies paid (made large investments) to collect this geospatial data.
If the government wants the data "nationalized", shouldn't the government make contracts to pay the companies to give away the data they collected?
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Why the hell isn't the second option not good? PLease explain and leave the 'govarnmant baaaad'-shit out of it.
LOL, that's like saying, "Please explain why forced labor is not good, and leave the "slavery bad" shit out of it. That's an unreasonable constraint, given that the government is the only entity capable of such coercion.
LOL, that's like saying, "Please explain why forced labor is not good, and leave the "slavery bad" shit out of it.
Not really. Slavery is inherently bad, so an explanation of "it is wrong because it is slavery and slavery is wrong" works. Government, on the other hand, is not inherently bad, so saying "it is wrong because the government is doing it" makes as much sense as Trump's "it is wrong because Obama did it" stance.
:)
And if you think government is inherently bad, I will gladly help fund you a one-way trip to Somalia.
Why the hell isn't the second option not good? PLease explain and leave the 'govarnmant baaaad'-shit out of it.
LOL, that's like saying, "Please explain why forced labor is not good, and leave the "slavery bad" shit out of it. That's an unreasonable constraint, given that the government is the only entity capable of such coercion.
Great example - it took a strong federal government to end slavery in the US, because the invisible hand of a free market sure as hell wasnt getting it done, or fixing company towns, or the railroads, or the banks. But this is different because on a computer.