4 ms·
You need to provide the data. You should also specify the terms of contributions and a license of the data. People will be more encourage to contribute if the
by chippy 10y ago
You need to provide the data.
You should also specify the terms of contributions and a license of the data.
People will be more encourage to contribute if they know that their free work is benefiting others, and not just the project owners. Looking at the code, there is an API route, it says that the data is not confidential, but that it's only for admin users because you don't want people hitting the service too much. In this case, I would suggest providing daily or weekly dumps of the data. (You could also benefit from seeing the growth over time).
So, provide the data, make the data open. Think about the license of the data. What's different from Google doing this? Why would anyone want to contribute to this project, and not say a project from Microsoft? Is having open source a differentiator? What benefit to the contributor does having the code as open source provide, if they cannot get the data. Differentiate your project and encourage actual crowdsourced contributions by specifying that it is open DATA and specify your terms for contributing.
- Ao7bei3s 10y agoI fully agree. And you should contribute the data back to the probably single most important open data project -- OpenStreetMap.
- pimlottc 10y agoIndeed. Why isn't a big dynamic map with all the camera locations plotted not the first thing I see when I click on the daylightingsociety.com link?
- lucb1e 10y agoI just sent an email (before seeing your comment) asking after the data license. If it's an open license, it could be integrated with existing services like OpenStreetMap which 1) allows many more people to benefit from the data; and 2) allows users of this project to benefit from existing OSM data. Let's see what they say. Edit: 39 minutes later (that was quite quick!): > Whoops, good catch! That is absolutely not our intention, give me a bit and I’ll extend the license to cover GPS data for camera positions. > We are considering closer integration with OpenStreetMap. We already use them for all of our map backend, but don’t currently store our camera data in OSM. There are some concerns about corrupting their data with non-existent cameras, particularly if someone scripts interacting with Where are the Eyes. While the data is under our control we can try to detect bots and roll back their changes, but we don’t want to be “rolling back” parts of OpenStreetMap. > I definitely agree about adding the cameras from OSM to Where are the Eyes, and periodically copying the Where are the Eyes data to OSM, but I am less comfortable with completely integrating the two. I won't go into detail about issues and solutions I see with either option, but they seem to be considering things carefully, and I guess that's not a bad thing.
- spacemanmatt 10y agoAnother vote for contributing the camera location data back to OSM. A surveillance layer sounds awesome.