4 ms·
As a long-time OSM contributor (former editing software maintainer, former OSM Foundation board member yadda yadda) I like this piece, because it actually gets
by Doctor_Fegg 6y ago
As a long-time OSM contributor (former editing software maintainer, former OSM Foundation board member yadda yadda) I like this piece, because it actually gets the "mutual aid" dynamic between corporate OSM and enthusiast OSM.
The two should not be opposed. Rather, the more people are exposed to OSM via Facebook, Apple and so on, the more enthusiast contributors OSM gets. The more rendering tech that Mapbox releases as open source, the more opportunities OSM enthusiasts have to build cool stuff. And so on.
We get a fair amount of sniffiness from some of the more corporate types, denigrating enthusiast contributions as just early-stages stuff that should now inevitably give way to AI-assisted machine mapping. So to read a more balanced view like this is genuinely refreshing.
_But_ it does require both sides to understand the bargain and play fair, and that doesn't happen as universally as I'd like. There are some among the enthusiast community who are unremittingly hostile to corporate actors beyond what anyone should have to put up with, salaried or not. To some degree that's inevitable when you have a project that attracts single-minded 15-year old Linux geeks, maybe, but that explains rather than excuses.
Conversely, corporate OSM too often acts in its short-term interests without a view to the wider good. Attribution is the most notorious example, where Facebook, among others, is basically flouting OSM's attribution requirements. This breaks the "more eyeballs, more contributors" compact. We also see it where corporate editors steamroller some of the nuance from individual contributors' edits (particularly logistics-driven), and I'll confess I'm not a great fan of Mapbox's recent decision to close the source of the dominant in-app renderer, though that's clearly their right to choose.
If this thoughtful article helps both "sides" realise that they're better working together than against each other, that would be a win.
- tweetle_beetle 6y agoOut of curiosity, is the Facebook infringement well known in the community, but considered too big an issue to broach, not worth putting time into, etc.?
- throwaway11182 6y agoIt's not a thing. A few zealots in the OpenStreetMap community want the literal words "OSM Contributors" to appear on any map that uses OpenStreetMap and they complain loudly anytime someone publishes a map that doesn't meet their made-up standard. Facebook maps attribute OpenStreetMap legally.
- matkoniecz 6y agoODBL license has a clear requirement > notice associated with the Produced Work reasonably calculated to make any Person that uses, views, accesses, interacts with, or is otherwise exposed to the Produced Work aware that Content was obtained from the Database Hiding "attribution" in places where typical user will never visit (for example in menus hidden inside barely visible "i" symbol) clearly violates it.
- stereo 6y agoIt is relatively well known. The attribution is imperfect in some places, lacking in other places. If you'd like an example, examine the map on https://m.facebook.com/Stekerlapatte https://m.facebook.com/Stekerlapatte Facebook is, in all fairness, contributing to the OSMF's efforts to come up with new, better, clear attribution guidelines, and they are understandably waiting for them to be approved before overhauling things. The current draft would require the actual text to be shown in the example I've shared above.
- matkoniecz 6y ago> Facebook is, in all fairness, contributing to the OSMF's efforts to come up with new, better, clear attribution guidelines As in, trying to redefine their attribution violation as something acceptable. Attribution guidelines draft was rejected because it tried to describe hiding attribution in places that normal user will never see as acceptable. Facebook is doing some positive things in OSM ecosystem, but it is not a case here.
- rmc 6y agoThe OSMF is currently working on updated Attribution Guidelines, which should go some way to address some of this, and will probably adopt something within the next month or two. So the situation is currently fluid.
- SteveCoast 6y agoAs a long-time OSM contributor (former software creator, creator of OSM Foundation board yadda yadda) I like this piece also. Hi Richard :-)
- Doctor_Fegg 6y agoHey Steve! Yeah, you outrank me on the yadda yadda front :)
- muyuu 6y agothanks for the contributions to OSM I'd like to know if there are practical points of conflict between corporations and the community, including but not limited to map consensus discrepancies. Also, is the openness of OSM in danger in the long term? Could a dependency appear that would close down the body of data generated in the past? Regards
- gwern 6y ago> As a long-time OSM contributor (former editing software maintainer, former OSM Foundation board member yadda yadda) I like this piece, because it actually gets the "mutual aid" dynamic between corporate OSM and enthusiast OSM. The phrase 'commoditize your complement' ( https://www.gwern.net/Complement https://www.gwern.net/Complement ) is probably better known than 'mutual aid' as a description of why OSM gets all this corporate buyin from Facebook, Apple, etc.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]