But, but . . . the black duck eggs are real, aren't they?
They couldn't possibly be cheap knockoffs laid by underage mock black ducks in prison sweatshops, could they?
I demand REAL black duck eggs, dammit!
Why look at facts when you can just say "I'll never trust again".
Why not both?
Historical facts tend to be more accurate than "gee I hope so" facts.
The past can be a useful tool, because that's where all of the experience is.
How up to date do you want? If you're looking to see your property change on a week-to-week basis then you're going to be disappointed. Planners in rapidly-changing urban areas are likely to be disappointed too. I generally assume that I'm working with 3-5 year old imagery in Google Earth, but I'm beginning to think it's more like 3-10 years in more rural areas. Either way it beats the hell out of USGS quad maps that are older than I am and may not be updated in my lifetime.
That said, macro-scale elevation data from either source will almost certainly remain accurate throughout our lifetimes.
I use it to plan mapping projects. My company gladly pays $400/year so I can export imagery from Google Earth into a CAD program so I can plan aerial photography and select ground control points for surveyors. I then import that CAD data into Google Earth and send KMZ files to the pilots and surveyors. This is a vast improvement over USGS 1"=2000' quad maps that are ten to forty years old. I still use the quad maps as a sanity check of my final output coordinates as I don't trust the georeferencing of Google Earth's imagery -- I've seen several seam lines that were mismatched by hundreds of feet.
Google tells citizens when their search results are censored, which no other search engine does. This is the only situation I know of in which the sentence, "The Chinese government is forcing us to censor this" appears written in Chinese on the internet, without euphemisms. And you think that should go away?
Should? No.
Eventually will? Yes.
Much sooner than later? Hell yes!
If you're suggesting that Google should stay in China and fight the government for you -- and risk having their in-China management end up in labor camps -- then I'm not the only one asking others to sacrifice for my conscience, or whatever it is of which you're accusing me.
If you're asking Google to stay and acquiesce to the Chinese government's demands just so you can have a nicer search engine for a few weeks or months until it becomes worse than useless -- and risk sanctions and perhaps even prosecution from the US government -- then what's Google's incentive, ethically or financially? So that they can do you a very brief favor?
Google is a "very valuable tool" for citizens' discontent with the government.
Not after Google complies with the demands of the Chinese government.
That seems to be the part that you're not getting.
Google cannot win (i.e. help people more than Google has in the past).
Google cannot stay even (i.e. help people the same amount as Google has in the past).
Google can only capitulate to evil (i.e. help no one but the Chinese government) or leave (i.e. help the Chinese government).
Google is boxed into helping the Chinese government either way, but one way requires compliance with evil and the other does not.
Must be nice to be able to blame your vendors. The problem where I work isn't vendors -- they already have new versions that support all the latest goodies. The problem is that my company won't pay for those new versions no matter how many free pens the salesdroids give us.
Indeed. Too bad no one has invented any sort of device for keeping track of such complex interlocking sets information . . . an "Information Technology," if you will . . .
I did read the discussion. I also comprehended it. I'm just not quite so willing as you to give up on the technical issues as impossible to solve.
Notice your qualifier "for many places" -- there are such things as interim solutions until some acceptable approximation of perfection can be attained. One possible eventual outcome is that U.S. customers may ultimately be required by law to provide zip-4 for online purchases; another is that some jurisdictions will not be allowed standing for recovery unless they have made their demographic datasets available up front.
To paraphrase Jurassic Park, money will find a way.
"Now multiply that ridiculous level of legal complexity for every possible combination of city, county and state that are applicable . .."
It's called a tree-shaped data structure and I'll bet somebody could start a subscription-based website that maintains a current database of such info for its customers, if it hasn't already been done.
If the method is understood then we can train people as needed to consistently get real results with measurable margins of error, rather than trusting the word of self-selected "magical" people who fortunately just happen to be available.
Slashdot Mirror
But, but . . . the black duck eggs are real, aren't they?
They couldn't possibly be cheap knockoffs laid by underage mock black ducks in prison sweatshops, could they?
I demand REAL black duck eggs, dammit!
No, Microsoft is still evil. But they've been evil so long that it got boring. Now they have company.
Why not both?
Historical facts tend to be more accurate than "gee I hope so" facts.
The past can be a useful tool, because that's where all of the experience is.
Sounds like he's interrupted too often to ever get into the "zone".
How up to date do you want? If you're looking to see your property change on a week-to-week basis then you're going to be disappointed. Planners in rapidly-changing urban areas are likely to be disappointed too. I generally assume that I'm working with 3-5 year old imagery in Google Earth, but I'm beginning to think it's more like 3-10 years in more rural areas. Either way it beats the hell out of USGS quad maps that are older than I am and may not be updated in my lifetime.
That said, macro-scale elevation data from either source will almost certainly remain accurate throughout our lifetimes.
I use it to plan mapping projects. My company gladly pays $400/year so I can export imagery from Google Earth into a CAD program so I can plan aerial photography and select ground control points for surveyors. I then import that CAD data into Google Earth and send KMZ files to the pilots and surveyors. This is a vast improvement over USGS 1"=2000' quad maps that are ten to forty years old. I still use the quad maps as a sanity check of my final output coordinates as I don't trust the georeferencing of Google Earth's imagery -- I've seen several seam lines that were mismatched by hundreds of feet.
Oh, you're astroturfing for the Chinese government, never mind.
Should? No.
Eventually will? Yes.
Much sooner than later? Hell yes!
If you're suggesting that Google should stay in China and fight the government for you -- and risk having their in-China management end up in labor camps -- then I'm not the only one asking others to sacrifice for my conscience, or whatever it is of which you're accusing me.
If you're asking Google to stay and acquiesce to the Chinese government's demands just so you can have a nicer search engine for a few weeks or months until it becomes worse than useless -- and risk sanctions and perhaps even prosecution from the US government -- then what's Google's incentive, ethically or financially? So that they can do you a very brief favor?
Damn, hit "Submit" instead of re-hitting "Preview". Oh well, close enough.....
Not anymore, no matter how this ends up.
Not after Google complies with the demands of the Chinese government.
That seems to be the part that you're not getting.
Google cannot win (i.e. help people more than Google has in the past).
Google cannot stay even (i.e. help people the same amount as Google has in the past).
Google can only capitulate to evil (i.e. help no one but the Chinese government) or leave (i.e. help the Chinese government).
Google is boxed into helping the Chinese government either way, but one way requires compliance with evil and the other does not.
Because it's the only realistic alternative to being complicit in human rights abuse. Or were you looking for a non-obvious reason?
Must be nice to be able to blame your vendors. The problem where I work isn't vendors -- they already have new versions that support all the latest goodies. The problem is that my company won't pay for those new versions no matter how many free pens the salesdroids give us.
If you don't know, then you've just ruined all your potential jokes about having had sex with her.
Indeed. Too bad no one has invented any sort of device for keeping track of such complex interlocking sets information . . . an "Information Technology," if you will . . .
I did read the discussion.
I also comprehended it.
I'm just not quite so willing as you to give up on the technical issues as impossible to solve.
Notice your qualifier "for many places" -- there are such things as interim solutions until some acceptable approximation of perfection can be attained. One possible eventual outcome is that U.S. customers may ultimately be required by law to provide zip-4 for online purchases; another is that some jurisdictions will not be allowed standing for recovery unless they have made their demographic datasets available up front.
To paraphrase Jurassic Park, money will find a way.
http://www.zip2tax.com/z2t_services.asp
Looks like someone already does this for about $1100/year -- and that was just the first Google hit.
"Are counties/cities going to provide that insane GIS data set?"
Only if they actually want the money.
"Now multiply that ridiculous level of legal complexity for every possible combination of city, county and state that are applicable . . ."
It's called a tree-shaped data structure and I'll bet somebody could start a subscription-based website that maintains a current database of such info for its customers, if it hasn't already been done.
But if we outlaw books for the blind, then only the blind will have books! Oh, wait.....
The 400x metric on iPhone apps happens if and only if those apps are actually approved. Unless and until then they make 0x.
Nyet! Is Soviet Russia.....so Santa Claus is YOU!
If the method is understood then we can train people as needed to consistently get real results with measurable margins of error, rather than trusting the word of self-selected "magical" people who fortunately just happen to be available.
Format 118 cells?! Oooh-the agony! And it would have to be done for each and every copy of each and every textbook! Please make it stop!
". . . there could be a lot of honest intent in the MS Open Source group."
Yet, in the end, they still work for Steve Ballmer. They will ultimately follow Ballmer's "intent", not their own.