Overturemaps.org - big-businesses OSMF alternative

So, this is the first public repository on the OvertureMaps organization.

here the direct link.


Edit: the repo was created 2 weeks ago.

The link to the GitHub repo is dead and I can’t find it through Google search. So maybe they took it down or something?



Ok, I think the initial repository was just a test, the real one is live now (likely not just formaly announced).

Live page:

5 Likes

From the blog: “Overture Maps Previews Data Schema and Reference System”

3 Likes

https://docs.overturemaps.org/gers/scenarios:

What if the company has proprietary (better) road segment data extracted from their sensor network that they do not / cannot share?

“However, by sharing just the new road segment geometries with Overture (not the entire proprietary traffic feed), Overture will add it to the Overture corpus and generate GERS IDs accordingly. The Overture road network will be improved and 100% of the company’s data feed can become GERS-enabled.”

Would those “improvements” then be fed back into e.g. OSM?

The OSM community has a basic quality expectation, but if I understand correctly, there are legal possibilities for this, in my opinion.

see:

  • [overture faq] “Overture data will be available for use by the OpenStreetMap community under compatible open data licenses. Overture members are encouraged to contribute to OSM directly.”

I assume that would require citing them as the source for the contribution, which seems like a good avenue to potentially provide them with cheap advertising and a way to easily siphon off users. If that’s the case it probably won’t be as beneficial to OpenStreetMap as it might seem at first glance. Especially in the long arch of time where 5 or 10 years from now there will likely be hundred of thousands, if not millions, of references to Overture Maps associated with objects. Rather parasitic if you ask me. Although again that’s contingent on users citing them as the source for the contribution, but I don’t see why they wouldn’t.

1 Like

I thing this question should be more framed as “Could” not “Would”. I know of no indication that the OMF intends to actively contribute to OSM.

In practical terms as an OSM contributor you would probably want to use any such (currently purely hypothetical) data more for QA in any case.

3 Likes

No need to worry about that as they don’t need it - just look at the names associated with Overture!

5 Likes

46 posts were merged into an existing topic: Overture Maps first dataset release

Everybody realizes, of course, that Overturemaps.org is watching every word of this discussion. “They” and “their AI” are parsing every word as hard as it/they can.

I suppose at some point we have to be real and say “and after that, lawyers sort it out.” Maybe not.

This is a “grand conflict” being deliberately constructed, if nothing else. OSM, we do well to deflect against too much time-wasting by deliberate time-wasters (like Overture?). A long-term strategy might be to think (hard) about how much “Overture is deliberately trying to spoof us” might be true. A mild effort on offense can become (has become?) a serious effort on defense (by OSM).

The trick for OSM/us is to “hose off into a bucket of noise” what is exactly that, versus how much is an actual threat. Tricky balancing point, that.

Overture is “put in a box.” OSM/we continue to draw boundaries around it (versus vice versa). Eyes open. Yet, “you are only this small” (and our fingers are seen to be squeezing a very small distance).

I don’t want to dismiss a real threat, if it is one. But, hey. If noise isn’t noise, and we call it out as noise


3 Likes

To ask a delicate question: is there anything in the OSM ecosystem or community that the promoters of Overture find offputting? Is any of that issues that we could do better on for our own sake?

I’m purely speculating here: I believe Overture finds OSM “off-putting” because Overture cannot own / control OSM as it wishes. It seems to bother Overture greatly that a successful crowdsourced project full of altruism, damn good data, a real (kind, helpful-to-others
) community-ecosystem which continues to grow over years (decades, really) into not only some of the best mapping on Earth, but a SYSTEM of mapping, all based on volunteers giving of ourselves and our local (and wider) geographical knowledge. That rocks.

I’m not saying that with aggressive lawyers and/or billions of dollars, “something else” can’t “compete” with OSM — it probably could or can — but Alphabet’s Google Maps, while it might be considered “a competitor” to OSM, still has many shortcomings compared to much of OSM. Same for TomTom and Apple and Bing and others that are out there. I don’t want to “rest on our laurels” and smugly insist “we’re the best damn map on the planet and nobody can touch us
” because with that sort of hubris, we are easily dislodged from our august and likely premier position. OSM must always be looking in our rear-view mirror at “the approaching competition.”

Perhaps one of the things that OSM might “do better for our own sake” is to better articulate “what our place is in the world of mapping platforms.” I’d like to say we are one of the premier mapping platforms, with some of the best data, constantly improving (as are our tools, community, documentation, education, outreach, ability to help newer users with guidance and improvement
). But if that’s not true, and “somebody is eating our lunch,” well, let’s roll up our sleeves and get busy being better.

It can be difficult to talk about such things, as such “quantification” (such as saying “we’re the best map”) isn’t easy to do and especially because doing so can be highly subjective. But in the cold light of day, OSM is able to look at something like Overture’s recent .alpha-0 release and say “kinda junky, with old, noisy data from the trash heaps of commercial social media, redolent with the low quality one might predict comes from such an endeavor.” I don’t think that’s too far off the mark, but of course, it behooves us to keep our eyes wide open (towards additional, future releases).

The first pickle out of the barrel often is funky. What matters (SHOULD matter to OSM) is how much better Overture gets in the future.

5 Likes

The fallacy here is assuming that quality has anything to do with success, it is really just marketing driven. Facebook/OMF has already, essentially overnight, occupied the “open map data” mindshare, it doesn’t really matter if the data is usable or not.

11 Likes

It could be helpful not boasting that our data is difficult to use.

2 Likes

I’ve been around on and off since 2009. Obviously I cannot speak for Overture, just share my thoughts.

  • Customer orientation
    OSMs stance has largely been “we collect the data, let the data consumers sort it out”. As a consequence, OSM doesn’t have customers, just people using our data. No brand recognition or loyalty either.

    Critically, the emphasis has shifted - from building the map to maintaining and providing it.

    We could look into a) what data our users actually value and need more of / better quality, and b) offer a (paid?) option where data excerpts with defined meaning and structure are provided and maintained with the junk weeded out. Oh, wait


  • Innovation
    Essentially, we are still in 2009-2015. But those goals have been (over)achieved, and the world has moved on. Remote sensing, satellite navigation, OGD, live data feeds and AI are commonplace. I don’t see any of this reflected in OSM. Advances are happening with tags, tools and applications, but not at the core.

    Nowadays, OSMs sheer size and complexity make any substantial change a huge undertaking beyond the capabilities and funds of any of the participants (not to mention the decade of debate that would ensue).

  • Reliability
    As it stands, OSM is a bunch of volunteers who could turn to mapping Mars if the opportunity arose. The community is still struggling with an image of amateurs and socially challenged nerds. That’s not the kind of partner a professional data consumer would want.

  • Unresolved internal conflicts and contradictions
    Going way back to the not to be questioned ideals of the founding fathers (were there any mothers?), just to name a few:

    • Collect data vs provide something useful
    • Community orientation vs product orientation
    • Free data, but with a not-so-free license
    • Monetization, but only for some
    • A steering body where nobody should have a decisive influence
    • Brand recognition, but only through intermediaries
    • No rules, unless the Wiki (subject to change without notice), the Community (the handful of guys who happen to be online), the DWG or your favourite deity say otherwise
      • Then again, its a do-ocracy, make your own rules
      • Then again, none of the above may be applicable
    • No mass edits or imports, except manually, or under the radar, or if nobody notices or cares, or if you ask nicely
    • Use QA tools, but don’t rely on them; after all, there are no rules and everything is subject to debate
    • Play in major league, but depend on donations, but not in a way that someone might want to influence us for their own benefit
  • Efficiency
    Human mapping on the ground has its advantages (apart from being fun). That said, there simply aren’t enough experienced mappers around to even maintain the ever-growing amount of data, let alone extend it. It’s a battle we can’t win. The structures and tools for data management simply aren’t there.

    Our strength used to be in numbers, but how long that will hold is anybody’s guess.

    Overtures alpha release may be junk, but with their infrastructure and reliability percentage they have the means in place for continuous, manual and automated refinement. Just a matter of time, money and patience. The big question ist, how much will it take to catch up with millions of unpaid mapping hours world-wide? (nothing, if they can re-publish our data)

  • Leadership
    OSM of 2009 is over in most respects. What’s needed is a new vision from now onwards. Who will participate and why? What will they strive for, and for whom? Which rules and tools will they need? How will they be motivated? Where will they get resources? What makes OSM different and better? How will it be recognized (Intel Inside¼, anyone?) And what’s the policy with respect to other players - compete, co-exist or cooperate?

    The OSMF is doing what it can, but it is no match for professional, commercial, focused leadership - unless Overture trips over its own feet, or runs out of steam.

17 Likes

Thinking about it, a strategic partnership with a big data consumer might help to set priorities and get brand recognition (and resources) as well.

1 Like

Yes, I think you touched on right points. OSM as of now is an “anarchy” with nobody to refer to in case of stalemates. Too little cooperation between different local communities, core OSM software devs (openstreetmap-website, openstreetmap-carto, iD, Nominatim) and data consumers.

That said, I would be far from writing off OSM. If anything, I hope it’s gona be an impulse to re-invent ourselves. And nobody said we couldn’t do what Overture members do, but more efficiently. For example, while AI has been used to trace buildings with varied results, NorthCrab just pioneered using AI to cross-check Polish government dataset (BDOT10k) with orthoimagery before importing buildings. Now he moved on to adding pedestrian crossings.
What we also have is an army of people with local knowledge, willing to check stuff on the ground. I highly doubt Overture will deploy yet another fleet of “streetview” vehicles.

7 Likes

Was remarked earlier in this thread along the lines of us volunteer OSM mappers made mules put before the OMF cart.

Simon, it might be the first time we seem to disagree! Quality has EVERYTHING to do with success. In the short term, yes, it is possible for “mammoth marketing” to “overwhelm” the truth of truly shitty quality.

But in the long run, shitty quality is flushed into the sewer and the quality stuff keeps getting reached for more and more often.

Map data are ALL ABOUT “usability.” Sure, money and techy flimflam dissolved around the lies and commercial nature of “those sorts” of social media (btw, I’ll call this Discourse right here OSM’s version of social media, although there are Slack communities and more
) can dupe people for a while. The USA had an ex-president (not 45!) once say “you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.”

Shitty quality (yeah, I’m calling it what it is, when it is shitty) is foolish. People might put up with it for a while, or find themselves (temporarily, one hopes) locked into or forced into it for a while, but they’ll reach for the quality good stuff as soon as possible. OSM intends to be there.

3 Likes