3 ms·
I guess the key here is, that Tesla knows that that OSM isn't "trustworthy"[1] and consequently treats the map information as it should be: just as the source f
by _ph_ 7y ago
I guess the key here is, that Tesla knows that that OSM isn't "trustworthy"[1] and consequently treats the map information as it should be: just as the source for the routing algorithm. So it uses the maps as the basis on how to get from A to B, but the actual driving is based on the sensors, not trusting the maps. So the worst case of false mapping information would be of trapping the car in a place where it doesn't know how to get to its destination.
[1] Due to its open collaborative nature, there is an obvious risk for bad or even malicious edits submitted to OSM. On the other side, "professional" and closed mapping services can have errors too, especially they run the risk of being outdated, so shouldn't completely be trusted either. Due to the community efforts, overally the OSM data should be better maintained and errors can be fixed resulting in better map quality. But the big thing is, that you cannot trust any map data 100% - and if only it has been invalidated by a tree falling onto the road.
- sabas_ge 7y agoTesla can collaborate with the community and other business users to take the feedback from their fleet and fix the issues upstream in the data. Facebook, Apple, Amazon and others are already doing so. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Organised_Editing_Teams https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Organised_Editi...
- rmc 7y agoDescribing what those companies do as “collaborating with the [OSM] community” might be a bit of a stetch. At best some companies have been dragged kicking and screaming to actually talking to the OSM community.
- sabas_ge 7y agoHi Rory, better than nothing it seems, they were all in Heidelberg for starters :)