What is Digg?38 Comments
- mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8..there's no such thing as digg.uk
- mediaburn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Google maps buys he map data from another company.
The map data that is free in the states isnt very good.
I rather see good data from a well funded project, then have the poor data for free. - captaindan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Not all data from the US government is free. Try getting the FAA's National Airspace System database without paying for it.
- shakey77, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Bad digg: The article/link and summary both have incorrect information.
Take a look at a few of the digg's we've seen here.
Where those driving directions really come from: http://www.digg.com/technology/Where_those_driving_directions_really_come_from
The US free road data is crap. The few companies that have tried to release products based on TIGER data have been destroyed by the market place. Navteq and Tele Atlas did both use TIGER several decades ago as a start, but that was then. Tele Atlas has improved its maps by using aerial photos, while Navteq has a huge team of people that drive the roads and use remote sources to improve their data. It really takes sending people around to get a large portion of the needed information.
In the UK, OS has been able to create a map comparable to Navteq only because the UK government allows them to charge for the data. It costs hundreds of millions of dollars to create good information (whether maps or research). It is always a toss up between the government providing some of it for free as a basis for commercial companies to take over or whether the government should charge for it to continue its funding. - alphamatrix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3There have been moves to make US government weather data a pay service, mostly due to lobbying on the part of the commercial weather outfits. I believe Rick Santorum is involved in that move. As for the USGS map/aerial data, unfortunately I don't think all of it is free. Anyway, I hope our friends in the UK get their data for free.
- neave, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Sign the petitions here: http://petition.publicgeodata.org/ and here: http://www.okfn.org/geo/
Do it now! - yukevster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Digg is a multi-national site (like any site on the internet).
- geekchic, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Absolutly - I find it so annoying when I often end up using US government data about the UK for a UK centric report !
- Olle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There is nothing wrong with paying for somehting twice. Heck, I'm paying for my house 360 times.
Now, paying _double_ is a different thing.
However, even if it turns out that he pays double, the government still has only one big but single purse. Maybe that fee is used to sponsor social security and they charge for that service just because they can.
Take that fee away and the government will either have to a) lower the quality of the service b) raise the tax or c) pay less social security (or decrease the size of the army, you pick). - kakapu4u, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Note: These petitions are only available for European residents.
I live in Chicago, but I hope you guys can get your geodata pretty soon without paying twice for it. - nathanm, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Sorry, response to mediaburn - didn't post right!
You've got no idea what you are talking about. USGS map data is, hands down, the best available map data on the planet earth outside of military projects. If you are talking about road maps of cities and what not then you're right - the feds don't have good data... but they don't collect that data either. Utility and infrastructure data (roads, pipelines, addresses, etc) is usually generated by the local municipalities (cities and counties) - while this data is publicaly available it is not combined into large sources by any government funded agency. All the private companies do to get their maps is combine USGS data (freely available) with local data (also freely available) into larger maps than any municipalities cover. that is what you buy when you buys maps for the thirds parties - the service of combining the data, not the data itself.
The non-sharing and combining of data between municipalities is beginning to change by the way - for example you can get the GIS maps of municipailites for several counties around Sacramento, CA on the web for free. http://www.sacog.org/mapping/index.cfm As time goes by you will see more and more of this type of inter-municipalitiy cooperation in reagrds to GIS data. - atheken, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2information *wants* to be free.
Google Maps uses Navteq & Teleatlas data (which is very good data - commercial, costs alot to collect). Census produces TIGER data, which is "good" for small scale work, but poor for large-scale work. Although, higher density areas like New York City will tend to have less error compared to rural areas like the middle of Alaska, etc. Census is making efforts to update the TIGER data.
There are government bodies in the U.S. that charge for GIS data as well. I disagree with paying taxpayer money, and then paying a fee for the data when I want to acquire it in both cases/countries. - xilently, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If you had any idea as to the amount of vexatious claims and the sheer work load of the FOI depts in the UK (yes separate ones for Scotland, England - different act) then you will appreciate that what is charged at the time being is a minimal amount in order to make the information available. Making it all free would be counterproductive as it would equal more vexatious claims which would then equal higher work load and very quickly it would mean it is the genuine punter that would suffer. If you don't believe me then maybe you should find out how many claims are put in (in bulk as well) from lawyers and reporters alone.
From a man in the know :) - B0jangles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Stil sounds very procurious.
The amount of hard work that went into cataloging most of the world shouldn't be forgotten. OS have saved thousands of lives, for that we should be gratefull and buy their lovely maps.
Yet another one of Guardian-bitch and we might get some readers articles. - captaindan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2There's nothing "secure" about it. All of the data in the NAS database is on aeronautical charts that you can buy at your local airport for less than ten bucks. Without that information, it would be impossible to safely operate an aircraft.
- neave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1New website dedicated to freeing our data:
http://www.freeourdata.org.uk/ - hascat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2not quite!
The U.S. Census puts out it's TIGER files which contain mostly accurate street, city, etc. data for the entire nation. It's free for anyone to use, and can be matched against the actual census data.
Navteq and Teleatlas based their U.S. data on TIGER files many years ago, but have updated them on their own ever since.
So yes, the U.S. does put out free roadway data. Google maps isn't explicitly based on this data, but is based on a derivative work. - noseeme, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Seems very unfair.
- Olle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Atrerra,
Aaah, yes, guilty. No, I didn't.
OK, I accept that argument. If that's the case, then by all means, release the data.
I still don't accept the argument of "we shouldn't have to pay for it twice" though. - brownb2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Not only is Geo data held, but data such as nutritional information of all of the products available in the UK, data freely available on food packaging. This free data is then collected with our tax money. I sent an email to the Crown Press asking why the data is not freely available as a download online despite being collected using our taxes. She told me that it was freely available, in the library.
So I stated that I needed it in an electronic form and would scan the data - oh no she said, that wasn't allowed, its COPYRIGHT Crown Print. I told her politely she could stuff policy and I would be relying on the US' freely available nutritional data instead - the UK Government vis-a-vis Crown is a thief IMHO - where is the public interest in reselling us our data?
DIGG++++++ - brownb2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1BTW, they charge an a fixed fee and then an annual fee based on the amount of data any software we sell using "their" data.
- toddbu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Same holds true for zip code data. While the USPS is technically a quasi-government agency that is supposedly an independent entity, the creation of the zip code system was paid for by taxpayer dollars. The USPS is also granted monopoly status on mail delivery. In return, getting free access to the zip code database isn't too much to ask.
- rulethirty, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1FOIA has nothing to do with google maps... just, you know.. saying
- em00guy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Good to see the US being progressive
- Arramol, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2What's everybody complaining about? Charging for the same thing multiple times is a perfectly legitimate business model. Just ask the RIAA/MPAA!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2That would compromise MI6's mission though! You don't want 007 to die, do you?
- nathanm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0That's one way to look at it... but I would think to the British taxpayer it doesn't matter if Google has to pay for the data usage or not. The data is in fact gathered by the use of Tax funds. Funds paid by Joe Taxpayer, subject of the Crown. Currently if Joe needs a map of the countryside where his farm sits he has 2 options - pay surveyor to map the area (super expensive) or pay the govt for the same data that he already paid his taxes to have collected. Kinda silly to have to pay for the same thing twice isn't it?
- atrerra, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Olle did you read the article? It says a study concluded that the government would more than make up for the shortfall in the long term because of the increased economic activity (and therefore taxes) that releasing the data would generate.
""Governments realise two kinds of financial gain when they drop charges: higher indirect tax revenue from higher sales of the products that incorporate the ... information; and higher income tax revenue and lower social welfare payments from net gains in employment." - jeffness, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0so the data should be free, but what about the costs associated with dissemenating that data? It costs money to have servers, to program the applications to display it and enable it for online use.. do taxpayers also have to take that burden on as well?
taxpayers are ***** no matter which way you look at it. - Olle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Follow my logic here:
X - Y - Z = 0
The cost to produce the data - Tax Money - The money they charge = 0
It is a zero sum game.
If they stop charging for that service then there is less money for the government that needs to be made up somehow, or the level of service must be lowered.
If you get behind this campaign then you are effectively arguing that the British tax payer ponies up more money so that the U.S. based Google (for example) can use that data without contributing to the British Government. - TopBanana, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Hear, hear.
P.S. enough of the caps already - mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1public resources are free. the general public shouldn't have free acess to secure databases such as that.
- chrissyboy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0shouldn't you have your digg account taken off you for being such an idiot?
christ, what's wrong with some of the people who post comments here? - neave, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Here here, I wholeheartedly agree.
- mlayog, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0All information should be free! Isn't that the hacker ethic?
- witebred, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0damn brits, still taxing stuff. didn't they get the message during the tea party.
- chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Free the data- as in free as in beer.
- toddomatic, on 05/20/2008, -23/+2Shouldn't this be on Digg.uk?
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is