Online Maps Are Good!

Felipe Martino Gagno Ceotto — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 10:49:31 GMT

I was reading this article on BBC today, online maps 'wiping out history', and I couldn't believe what I was reading. For me, this is just another example of someone who cannot cope with the fact that the Internet is changing their jobs, just like the librarian I wrote about in this other article.

This article now is about the president of the British Cartographic Society, Ms Mary Spencer, saying that the Internet maps are leaving important landmarks that are part of History out, and that people will miss that, but that is so not true! Online maps probably have a lot more landmarks than regular paper maps, and they do have the historic landmarks such as churches, museums and others, and also the restaurants, pubs, and much more. They're just not displayed all at the same time due to a nice resource that is the dynamic way they are presented (and because that would be impossible to read), contrary to the static way a paper has to be. This has a disadvantage, I guess most people would say: the person using the map has to ask for it, but at least Google Maps and Google Earth have presented the users with several options to even show whatever has been marked in a certain area, even if you haven't asked for something in specific.

I'm going to talk more about Google Maps than Live Maps and the others because it's what I'm used to use more. So, if you search for the Royal Albert Hall in Google Maps, it will tell you where it is (check it here), and or course, it will show you a photo of the place, its address, telephone number, web site, and a lot of information a regular map wouldn't. But I get the point, if I wasn't looking for the Royal Albert Hall specifically I wouldn't see it in the map straight away as a point of interest... that is, if I'm not looking at the satellite view, since this case in particular would show me a big and interesting ceiling in that area which would make me wonder what it was, and Google Maps would have told me. But that's easily solved, let me explain how.

If you're in Google Maps and you don't know what you're looking for in a certain area, you can do the widest and wildest searches possible, for example, you could search for places of interest, South Kensington, London. That search would come up with the Royal Albert Hall, the Science Museum and the Natural History Museum that Ms Spencer said that were missing, plus Harrods, and a lot of other points in the surrounding areas which a regular map wouldn't even think about showing. Another missing landmarks pointed by Ms Spence were some churches, like the Worcester Cathedral. Well... I searched for churches, Worcestershire and there you go... Google Maps came with a list of 1580 churches near Worcestershire, UK, including the first in the list, the Worcester Cathedral.

My point is: don't tell me the information is missing from those maps, because it isn't. It takes some getting used to, such as everything else. Just like looking at a paper map, you need to learn some conventions, such as that a cross symbol represents a church, and several others, and I would say that our modern online maps are easier to learn. Ms Spencer said that "[online maps are] diluting the quality of the graphic image that we call a map", but I say it is actually increasing a lot the quality, presenting us with simultaneous street maps, satellite image, and even geographical and geological information. She also mentions that "the consequence will be long-term damage to future generations of map readers, because this skill is not being taught in schools" but I believe that the only thing happening is that the skills are changing and perhaps that is not being grasped by the cartographic society, because online mapping and specially the easy access to satellite images are definitely a threat to their profession as it is, in a certain way, and it is causing changes to it, and almost everybody is resistant to changes.

I always liked maps as a child and I played a lot with my Atlas, "travelling" around the world, and I remember downloading the first version of Google Earth, and how many hours I spent "travelling" to different places and finding interesting information, and a lot more information than I could find in my Atlas. I still do that today, and although I had fun and learned with "regular" maps, I think I learned a lot more with the modern online maps. Although the mentioned Open Street Map is a very interesting initiative, I don't see it as something different from Google Maps, since Google Maps (and a lot of the others) let you share your information as well, adding places and all, and having corporations behind these maps is not necessarily something bad.

Once Upon a Time There Was Privacy

Felipe Martino Gagno Ceotto — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:23:04 GMT

Once upon a time there was a little girl called Privacy. Privacy had a rough childhood, having suffered a lot while trying to grow up, and being invaded and broken several times. Her mother, Civil Liberty, tried to create a better environment for her whenever it was possible, but Government, a man hungry for power, was always trying tear little Privacy into pieces. The thing was that Privacy had the keys to several places that Government wanted to go to but Privacy wouldn't open the doors all the time. Whenever Government got too close to forcing Privacy to open doors she didn't want to, Civil Liberty would be called and came to protect Privacy, although it wasn't always possible for Civil Liberty to be there and Privacy ended up giving away some keys, sometimes, but that's life. Then the Internet was bourn, and the Internet gave a big boost to Liberty's cousin, Anonymity, which was then able to provide easier ways for Privacy to live and keep her keys, and everything was beautiful for a while. But nothing goes unchanged in life.

Nice little tail, isn't it? I wish I could say that Privacy lived happily ever after, but we're not there yet so I can't say it, and from the way things look right now, that is definitely not the end of it. Unless we do something to stop all this nonsense. I'm talking about the brilliant idea (insert sarcastic laugh here) detailed in this BBC article of some ministers of the UK to hold information of every phone call made and e-mail sent in the UK. I've been meaning to write about this for a while now but it is such an important issue that I've been postponing it to try to write well about it.

As mentioned by a Home Office spokesman, data is really a crucial tool for protecting national security and preventing crime. What he fails to mention is that its privacy is also crucial for the people's freedom, and although the Government can make promises about how this data will be used, once it is in their hands they can change their promises and History tells us that they will always change their promises over time. Another concern is how this can fall into the wrong hands, even while the Government is still just trying to do good with it (in theory), and the recent leaks of data that happened from within the Government don't help.

There has been some criticism already about how secure this data will be when held, and that it "should only be held if - and only if - it can be demonstrated that an appropriate system of checks and balances is in place and the security of the information being stored is of paramount concern", but I say it should not be held at all! One thing that is a common place for whoever works with data security is that nothing is ever 100% secure. An unplugged computer, turned off and held inside a safe is still subject to a security break. The possibilities might be slim, but they are never zero. The data about phone calls and emails today are virtually secure because it is scattered between companies that unless presented with a court order, can't provide them to anyone.

If we continue down this path, we will soon be in a society that is much like the one in George Orwell's 1984, or, to quote something more recent, Alan Moore's V for Vendetta. Put together this hit against privacy with the path they are taking towards censorship with movies and games, and what you have is a nice recipe for a huge Big Brother Awards. It is incredible that this is happening in a country like the UK, where because of its culture, size, geographic location and history, people are used to freedom, and this is very noticeable: it was one of the first things I came to appreciate when I first moved to London, and I don't even come from a place with freedom problems!

Because the people from here are used to freedom I trust that they will not let this happen. The ministers and MPs must remember that they are there to represent the people and that the people can take them out of their positions if not happy with their actions. And I hope that people also remember that.

Politics

Online Maps Are Good!

Once Upon a Time There Was Privacy