14 ms·
Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI
- Forge36 6y agoWonder what it would take to get my company to go green in this way.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoHaving worked with a client on this to dabble in the sustainability space, quantifying to them the economic cost savings and potential PR boost. Worked with their facilities, marketing, purchasing, and HR teams. Identify and prioritize changes possible that provide the largest impact (can employees work from home avoiding a commute? can a renewable power purchase agreement be negotiated? what does the supply chain look like and is there any leverage to encourage suppliers to use renewables and sustainable practices?). I recommend "Small Actions, Big Difference: Leveraging Corporate Sustainability to Drive Business and Societal Value" [1] on the topic to get started. [1] https://smile.amazon.com/Small-Actions-Big-Difference-Bhattacharya/dp/0367337568/ https://smile.amazon.com/Small-Actions-Big-Difference-Bhatta...
- smabie 6y agoSo it'll only show walking directions?
- AussieWog93 6y agoI get that you're being flippant, but I did have a coworker who calculated the carbon footprint of his commute for various modes of transport, including walking. He came to the conclusion that, given the average amount of CO2 produced per calorie consumed, riding an e-bike was actually the lowest-impact way.
- minitoar 6y agoUntil you have an accident and require lots of carbon intensive medical treatment, and your ebike is trashed. Disclaimer: I ride and love ebikes.
- loloquwowndueo 6y agoYeah because walking is accident-free and cars are so much cheaper and carbon-friendlier to repair than bicycles.
- slingnow 6y agoEither you're being purposely obtuse or you honestly believe the accident rate between walking and riding an electric vehicle is the same.
- minitoar 6y agoElectric bicycles are notorious for high rate of injury accidents involving motor vehicles. Injuries tend to be similar to motorcycle/car collisions.
- datavirtue 6y agoI don't have accidents, accidents have me. I refuse to ride the road anymore. Wisdom.
- loloquwowndueo 6y agoWow he must be quite the farter.
- kojeovo 6y agowas the manufacturing of the e-bike considered?
- uoaei 6y agoDoes this factor in battery manufacturing / vehicle body manufacturing / varying gas efficiencies / etc.? The question is borne of the understanding that electric vehicles merely frontload your carbon footprint, rather than eliminating it.
- sudosysgen 6y agoI got around that by making my ebike out of recycled UPS batteries, and a bicycle I already owned. That way, the only source of carbon was making the additional drivetrain components.
- uoaei 6y agoExcellent, innovative, bravo! Unfortunately the vast majority of e-bikes are not DIY'd and so require new batteries for operation.
- sudosysgen 6y agoIndeed. Though, there are suppliers that will sell you thousands and thousands and batteries recycled from former low-stress applications at fair prices, so it would probably be feasible to set up commercially?
- uoaei 6y agoIf you ever set up a business around this, let me know! I am woefully ignorant of these suppliers you reference.
- nullserver 6y agoSo the wheel is efficient, and a low mess wheel more efficient. Unicycle?
- jld 6y agoI have read that cyclists who only eat beef generate more CO2 per mile than a hybrid car, though that presumably that ignores all the carbon cost of building cars and car infrastructure. Bikes are still better in pretty much every way. https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/are-meat-eating-cyclists-worse-for-the-planet-than-drivers https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/are-meat-eating-cyc...
- reidjs 6y agoDo cyclists have drastically different diets than car-drivers? In my experience there is more overlap between cyclists and vegetarians than carnivores.
- datavirtue 6y agoYes.
- SilverRed 6y agoIt ignores so many factors that the result doesn't matter in any way other than to create a clickbait article.
- benrbray 6y agoEven if this is true (I think it's absurd because drivers eat meat too), it doesn't account for the fact that bicycles are slower than cars, so people who commute by bike will travel (much) fewer miles per day than the average car commuter.
- Doji 6y agoThis analysis omits an important detail which I wrote about in a different thread a week or so ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26541860 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26541860
- nxc18 6y agoThat assumes you would be eating more to compensate for the activity. Many people, because they spend so much time in their car or just being sedentary otherwise, actually need to go out of their way to exercise (e.g. in a treadmill in a gym). And for people who don’t already exercise, the marginal increase in CO2 is probably worth it for society. Practical example: I primarily walk and cycle, used to have a car but no longer do. I need to get 1-1.5 hours of walking in a day for my health. I chose walking because it is specifically calorie inefficient and unlikely to make me hungry like running or cycling. If I can walk for all my business, I no longer need to take a separate walk in the evening to get my exercise. If I drive a car or ride the e-bike (the e part robs you off fitness benefit) I now need to take a separate dedicated walk. If you consider that the CDC wants every American exercising several hours a week, I think your friend’s analysis would come out differently. Also the analysis should factor in the reality that walking 6 miles will likely not trigger the same level of calorie intake increase as running or biking 6 miles; it is very easy to e.g. run and actually consume far more than you burned due to appetite response.
- globular-toast 6y ago> I chose walking because it is specifically calorie inefficient Surely you mean calorie efficient?
- nxc18 6y agoIf you’re trying to lose weight (I am), or not gain weight in a western culture that encourages a high level of consumption, you want something that is inefficient. I can get from point A to point B faster and with less energy expenditure (I think) on a bike. Theoretically running is even more inefficient (depending on speed apparently) but I hate doing it and it spikes my appetite in a way that makes dieting unsustainable. Maybe it’s genetic, I remember my dad going through a phase where he ran enough to the point where he could do a half marathon while obese; he easily consumed more than he burned despite a very heavy training schedule. I can walk for 30 minutes, an hour, two hours, or almost literally all day and still eat less than I use which is extremely efficient for my goals but extremely inefficient at making me fat.
- ladberg 6y agoThe important paragraph that most people probably care about: Soon, Google Maps will default to the route with the lowest carbon footprint when it has approximately the same ETA as the fastest route. In cases where the eco-friendly route could significantly increase your ETA, we’ll let you compare the relative CO2 impact between routes so you can choose. Always want the fastest route? That’s OK too — simply adjust your preferences in Settings.
- prewett 6y agoThis is a great example of why I figured Google Maps for navigation. I don't use Maps to express my environmental values, I use it to get from A to B the fastest way. If they default to something else, they are actively getting in the way of why I would use their product. I have no interest in activist software.
- prewett 6y agoWow, I'm impressed, I've never been downvoted to -4 before. I wouldn't have expected that this would be the post to get that, though.
- dataflow 6y agoDo you believe humans are causing climate change? If so, how do you envision it should be addressed that doesn't involve us changing our habits?
- datavirtue 6y agoQuit eating factory beef.
- doubleunplussed 6y agoA carbon tax. If addressing climate change relies on people changing habits against their selfish interests, then we are doomed. The externality should be internalised with a carbon tax. It's the simple, most obvious solution and it will cause selfish interest and ethical choices to align when it comes to carbon emission.
- tehjoker 6y agoGoogle greenwashing what is clearly a demonstration of its power to redirect flows of people at a whim. I wonder what other purposes such redirections could be used for?
- gtirloni 6y agoIt puzzles me how HN is so cynic about anything that comes from Google.
- commiebob 6y agoHonestly though, what about any of Google's behavior in the past several years should make us give them the benefit of the doubt?
- uoaei 6y agoThe fact that it is an immense and heterogeneous organization with many different decision-makers at all levels with varying priorities and intentions. Essentializing Google as a singular agent obscures this perspective and gives no credence to those who are trying to push it in better directions from the inside.
- tehjoker 6y agoAnything like a major PR campaign is approved at the highest levels. EDIT: I'd also note that in the book Surveillance Capitalism, Zuboff discusses how Pokemon Go was seen in investor circles as a successful demonstration of manipulating masses of people to go to commercial spaces by luring them with imaginary characters. This sent market caps soaring. When I saw this headline, I immediately thought that this is them doing that with maps, but in a PR friendly way.
- uoaei 6y agoAnd how is any of this a new concern? This issue existed long before these new features and will continue to be a threat long after. I really don't see how this is comparable considering they could just as easily have done the same without greenwashing.
- nerfhammer 6y agoThey could also just call it "uses less gas"
- profunctor 6y agoElectric vehicle and trains don't use gas
- ilammy 6y agoYeah, they just use coal somewhere you don't see it.
- SilverRed 6y agoThey just use whatever the source for your power is which is so varied you couldn't ever assume. And even the same fuel source going to a power station to generate electricity for your car is massively more efficient than an ICE engine that regularly starts/stops and idles.
- xyzelement 6y agoI and more recently my wife have been getting walking directions for short trips by default. It's a nice idea but 100% of the time this has been useless - eg I am running errands and I'm not going to leave the car at store #3 just because I could walk from it too store #4 I can see this be very useful in a foreign city where you're trying to get around and don't know the options.
- 1123581321 6y agoI love the image of someone in a parking lot with their car being surprised that the walking directions are asking them to leave their car. "Not again!" More seriously, though, when shopping in roughly the same area of town, the best way to walk is to pick a spot that's close to the last place you're going to shop. It'd be an interesting mapping feature to suggest a spot based on a list of locations.
- jld 6y agoSo they'll default to showing directions for biking, walking, and transit?
- tehjoker 6y agoAt least for cars, it makes little sense because the dominant factor is going to be the time on the road, which they in theory have been trying to minimize already. Any additional micro-optimizations are going to be fractional.
- datavirtue 6y agoUnless of course they optimize for me not driving under a train bridge with my camper. That would be a big help. I wish they took into account the vehicle you are driving.
- girzel 6y agoI've been looking at OSMAnd's nav settings while reading this thread, and they do indeed let you create a driving profile that includes vehicle dimensions and max speed!
- tehjoker 6y agoCan you elaborate? I'm not sure I understood. I've never driven a camper.
- mh- 6y agoI assume they mean the bridge clearance vs vehicle height. /r/11foot8 has some amusing examples.
- thescriptkiddie 6y agoA pet peeve of mine is that google maps doesn't show most transit routes on the map. There is a transit layer you can enable, but it only shows metro and light rail, not buses, brt, trams, ferries, etc.
- pezezin 6y agoWhat I want is an option to find the route with the least amount of turns. I live in a place with little to no urban planning and extremely confusing street layout, and Google will consistently choose very twisty routes, only to later zoom out the map and find that I could have followed an L or S shaped route with just one or two turns.
- atty 6y agoAs mentioned in another reply, Apple Maps many times suggests the “simplest” path (I believe it’s the minimum number of turns, but I’m not sure) as an option next to the fastest route. I think it’s my favorite feature of Apple Maps, and it’s the primary reason I use it over Google Maps.
- pezezin 6y agoThanks for the tip. Is Apple Maps available for Android? Anyway, my girlfriend has iPhone, I will ask her to look for a few routes so we can compare.
- Igelau 6y agoI got a route from them recently that wanted me to turn left on a six lane road, no traffic light, to make a quick right turn from the farthest lane, during rush hour.
- pezezin 6y agoThe widest road where I live is only two lanes (per side), but it still wanted me to make an U turn in the middle of the road, with several cars tailing behind me and trucks coming in the opposite direction!
- tomaskafka 6y agoThere are many reasonable requests like this - I would love an option to take a scenic route when I have time, to see a new countryside just behind a hill from a highway I usually travel through. Or city transport route with as few changes as possible, to enjoy the booknor to make travelling with toddler easier. Guess these won't get a middle manager a promotion for rising some key metric, though.
- murphyslab 6y agoIt's also the cheapest route to drive, as it's optimizing for lower fuel consumption: With insights from the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Lab, we’re building a new routing model that optimizes for lower fuel consumption based on factors like road incline and traffic congestion. Provided that the few extra minutes aren't critical to one's wallet, it's a cost savings. For me those extra minutes are rarely critical. If I could, I'd usually choose the lowest stress route! But I'm definitely going to enjoy using this additional information.
- oceliker 6y ago> If I could, I'd usually choose the lowest stress route! Apple Maps sometimes features alternate routes that are "simpler" or with "fewer turns", which I think is a very nice feature. I'd rather not cut through small side streets just to save 1-2 minutes.
- atty 6y agoI almost always take the simpler route, especially in areas I’m not familiar with. It’s a very nice quality of life feature that doesn’t get mentioned much.
- ape4 6y agoI'd love a simpler route choice in Google Maps. It very telling that they don't provide it - do they use their own product.
- davchana 6y agoMe too, I too would love an option saying Fewer Turns (same way as Fewer Transfers in public transport option). While we are there, it might be not possible, but would live an option with Route with Left Turns with Traffic Signals only. Many times a main road is through way, & a small crossing road has stop signs on both ends.
- throwawgler87 6y ago
- dirtyid 6y agoIf it's about using less fuel, why not just market it as economy mode.
- option 6y agosuch a silly branding. Brand it as “the cheapest route” and people will (maybe) use this option.
- flukus 6y agoWon't the fastest route generally have the lowest carbon footprint anyway? Traveling at high speed on a highway will use less gas/distance than traveling through stop start traffic.
- nyx_ 6y agoEco-friendly stuff aside, this post makes me feel kind of nauseous. Things like indoor AR directions or having the weather integrated into a maps app are obvious applications of existing technology, but hardly anyone but Google has the resources to make these things happen at scale with nice UX. So I see features like this and I feel bad that it's Google doing it: the ultimate goal of the technology is not to make the world any better, but to get more eyeballs and exfiltrate more personal data so their advertising monopoly can continue to snowball.
- omegaworks 6y agoI mean -- if it is in their ultimate advantage for the continuation of our economic system and way of life, it makes sense. They're treating climate change like it is an existential crisis for them as well. Let them.
- drusepth 6y ago>the ultimate goal of the technology is not to make the world any better, but to get more eyeballs and exfiltrate more personal data so their advertising monopoly can continue to snowball I don't think these two things are mutually exclusive, especially in the context of e.g. taking steps towards addressing climate change.
- mercurywells 6y agoDid April fools come early this year?
- senectus1 6y agoBe very interesting to see the unintended consequences of this. More traffic in areas not normally use to it, councils changing road design to deal with the new amount of traffic.. etc
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoProbably the opposite. Lowest carbon footprint will basically be fewest extraneous stops. Continuing at speed for 30sec takes basically no fuel than stopping and starting. So Google should mostly be routing people back onto the highways and boulevards that they generally eschew in favor of complex routes through side streets that save minimal time for the complexity added.
- lscotte 6y agoThis is just so stupid, there's no other way to describe it.
- mcphage 6y agoWhat is stupid about it?
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoSeems like a creative way of saying that after a decade+ they've finally decided to listen to everyone who's been saying they don't wanna take three left turns in rush hour traffic to save an average of 15sec on a 2hr trip.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- eximius 6y agoI find it more believable that Google attracts engineers who want to save the environment than Google is secretly manipulating the routes of the masses for profit.
- ehsankia 6y ago> than Google is secretly manipulating the routes of the masses for profit That's the first I hear of this conspiracy, are there really people that believe this? FUD has honestly gotten out of control into very strange territory.
- Igelau 6y agoWell... things did get kind of fishy with Waze after Google bought it. Waze made money by showing you ads for things along your route when you weren't moving. How do you maximize the dollar signs in that equation? Maybe they stopped doing that in favor of a model that has less "conflict of use cases", but I wouldn't know. What I want to know is how much increasing volume and congestion on the greenest route reduces its greenness.
- eximius 6y agoTake a peek at some of the other comments on this thread hinting or outright suggesting it.
- uoaei 6y agoBoth are possible. Google is a very big place.
- 1-6 6y agoWell, if I’m driving a van, I’d expect to avoid stop and go streets to minimize fuel use. When I’m in my hybrid, I can take those stop signs like a champ. Will Google Maps support that type of logic?
- quinncom 6y agoI'm happy about this, and I really hope they provide a transparent explanation why they suggest each route. I would welcome a list of the primary attributes of each suggested route like "this route has many stoplights", "this highway can be dangerous during twilight", "this route avoids quiet neighborhoods". One routing algorithm I'm really hoping for: Instead of navigating to a point, I wish Google Maps would let me draw a circle on the map and navigate to wherever within the circle I can drive to the quickest. Often, Google will send me on a circuitous route to the destination pin, which takes ten minutes longer than it would to go to the parking lot off the big avenue a couple blocks away.
- tsjq 6y agoYes. These are good ones. I'd be happy to pay for such "premium features" if they wanna make money
- variable11 6y agoHi, we're the social engineers, we tell you what to do, what to think, what to believe, and we'll be disgustingly overpaid and totally smug about it.
- mensetmanusman 6y agoThey default to showing the walking path?
- wbillingsley 6y agoWill it still go through 3 farms and hope you don't mind pushing your car up a hillside goat track?
- Igelau 6y agoCaulk the wagon and float it across.
- throwawayboise 6y agoFTA but not the main point of this thread: we’re now able to bring Live View to some of the trickiest-to-navigate places indoors: airports, transit stations and malls. Seems to me that these are the easiest places to navigate indoors, because of the plentiful signage. Malls probably the hardest of the three, but still pretty easy IMO. I've never had any issue finding a gate or baggage claim at an airport, since there are signs every 10 feet or so.
- tape_measure 6y agoThis will be awesome in countries where I can't read the signage.
- pimlottc 6y agoDepends on what you’re looking for. Finding the approved ride share pickup spot can be pretty tricky in some airports. It can also be hard to identify and communicate exactly where you are on the curb (where’s “gate 6”?).
- jhugo 6y ago> Finding the approved ride share pickup spot can be pretty tricky in some airports. This may be by design - the local taxi mafia usually gets the front door and then the rideshare pickup is somewhere out of the way with bad signage.
- TulliusCicero 6y agoUnderground transit stations can be a huge pain in the ass to find the right exit for, when you want to come out going a particular direction, because you have no sense of cardinal directions while underground.
- mym1990 6y agoFor this reason I've more or less given up on finding the right exit in big subway station, I just find the fastest way to ground level and go from there!
- nullc 6y agoAbout time! I've been complaining to google for years about it aggressively recommending and rerouting onto a 20+ mile long detour around the east bay to save a minute by its own estimation (but probably lose several minutes much of the time, in reality). I also filed complaints with CARB and the state legislature because google was unresponsive.
- tsjq 6y agoExtra 20 miles and shorter by a minute : I'd guess the other route is a hell to drive. Bad roads / congestion / stoplights / low speed limits/ etc
- nullc 6y agoWe've accidentally conducted the experiment multiple times-- heading from northern Marin into SF with visitors in another car and failed to tell them to ignore the google 'faster route' -- they arrive much later after detouring through the east bay and getting stuck in traffic coming down to the bay bridge or inside SF. I have no idea how Maps estimation works, but it's easy to imagine that it could make a decision based on a brief delay that will likely have cleared before you arrived, while the path it suggested congested ahead of you. Even if they even managed to accurately give a solution that was correct in the expectation, a much longer route is almost always going to have a much higher 95th percentile time (unless the shorter route has a train or drawbridge or similar). If given a choice between of an alternative that would be 1 minute faster on average but never more than 2 minutes faster and 5% of the time you're advised to use it it's actually >30 minutes slower-- which would you take? But I doubt they're particularly accurate in terms of the expectation in any case-- at least not relative to traffic driven 1 minute differences. Aside, I drive a stick, so I don't especially love stop and go-- but Maps has done far worse to me in an effort to avoid some stop and go on an arterial road, e.g. sending me off onto extremely hilly residential streets clogged with other drivers, leaving me chirping the tires to avoid rolling into the bumpers behind me in the Maps congo line. It's better to be in congestion on a road that was designed for it than to still be in congestion on some detour in an area where the roads weren't designed for heavy through traffic.
- Igelau 6y agoI just want "route with the lowest chances of catching a bullet, stray or otherwise"
- jsz0 6y agoSounds like a good idea in theory but in many places in the US when you get off the highway you get a major drop off in the quality of roads and availability of food/gas. If you really care about reducing your CO2 the best option is significantly reducing your travel not slightly optimizing you routes.
- fireeyed 6y agoWhat happens if these “lowest carbon footprint” routes overlaps with high crime “waze avoid areas” ? Which takes precedence, Virtue signaling or driver safety? https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10708-019-10117-y https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10708-019-10117-y
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- seoaeu 6y agoTaking an alternate route to avoid CO2 emissions is basically the opposite of virtue signaling: it actually has a real world impact, and doesn't "signal" to anybody because no one else on the road can even tell whether you're taking the low-carbon route or not.
- p1necone 6y ago"Virtue signalling" is just conservative-speak for "anything I don't like" used to avoid actually having to engage with peoples concerns. Don't bother talking to people like that under the assumption they're acting in good faith, just downvote and move along.
- aaron695 6y ago> Google Maps will soon default to the route with the lowest carbon footprint This is not the title of the blog. And that matters because this doesn't make sense. The fastest route should be the lowest carbon footprint, which it should currently default too. "road incline and traffic congestion" I find it unlikely road incline makes 'any' significant percentage difference. I'd want to see the mathematics on this. Adding this complexity seems like PR BS. 'Traffic congestion' might make a difference, sitting still in traffic might be better than going around. Not good for your mental health though. How about better directions so we make less wrong turns and also save on CO2 emissions. How about better predictions on congestion. A better product will do both.
- ehershey 6y agoThe whole thing reads like PR BS to me. Touting AI as a cure-all to make up for getting bashed about it lately.
- uoaei 6y agoWhat about this is AI? This is all perfectly doable with "classical" algorithms.
- aaron695 6y ago> What about this is AI? The PR Title - "Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI". And the PR last line - "All of these updates are possible thanks to AI advancements" And that might be it. > "classical" algorithms They probably just need to change a constant on the time to tell the user to change lanes and they'd make a difference on screw ups. The fact Apple now says "sorry" when it makes a mistake is quite clever, it's a quick word to stop confusion for repeated instructions. I do think the voice on maps needs work, and it matters. Text to Voice might be 'AI'
- uoaei 6y agoYou have found yourself on a comment thread only discussing the eco-friendly routing option, which requires nothing but a fancier version of Dijkstra's algorithm.
- mc32 6y agoCan Amazon match them and show you the carbon footprint comparison for competitive products?
- benplumley 6y agoJudging by the state of other metadata there, every single third-party product would have "carbon footprint <1g".
- xmichael0 6y ago.google eh
- mjgs 6y agoLiveView indoor navigation looks very cool. Though I can envisage some places where the dataset might be a little “out of date”, where you end up being directed to the car park or a completely empty floor in the mall.
- 48snickers 6y agoThis is the opposite of a map. A map helps you build a mental model for how you navigate space by showing you a broad view of the land, potentially enabling you to navigate to anywhere. This offloads the effort of learning, such that you don’t learn to navigate the space yourself, and only gets you from one point to another.
- sanxiyn 6y agoYou are right, but most people want navigational aid, not map. Maps were popular because they were good navigational aid, not because they help building mental model. If better navigational aid becomes available, most people will gladly abandon map's mental model building feature.
- holri 6y agoNot if you experience the self exploration of the world around you as a fun activity. This map disables mindfulness.
- megous 6y agoThis is not a new thing. Google maps were hard to use as a map (on mobile, but on desktop too due to horrible styling) for a looong time for the purpose you state. We just snap a photo of a tourist or transit paper map and use that on holidays. Way faster and easier to use for just walking around or planning a non-direct transit route. Even a basic information like, "will we be walking up a hill" is hard to see on gmaps. Even on terrain overlay, the shading is sloppy an imprecise, and contour lines are a mess (too sparse, and marked too sparsely), no hills are marked with height so it's hard to see what's up/down. Same location (lol): https://megous.com/dl/tmp/5e34dc4220021506.png https://megous.com/dl/tmp/5e34dc4220021506.png https://megous.com/dl/tmp/e13a2b0008ba6d0a.png https://megous.com/dl/tmp/e13a2b0008ba6d0a.png
- frosted-flakes 6y agoGoogle Maps is horrible for use as just a map. I like to use an external Garmin GPS device in my car (with my own custom high-contrast map theme[1]) because it works so well as a HUD map. I rarely set a route, but I frequently refer to it while driving, and as a result I get to know the roads I drive on quite quickly. One of my favourite features is the blue line it paints on the map behind you, which makes it easy to orient yourself when driving in a place you've already been. [1]: For some reason, both Google Maps and Apple Maps have terrible contrast, to the point where they're completely unusable for me in dark mode, especially while driving. Apple Carplay is useless to me for this reason. Garmin's default map theme is pretty decent, but they actually let you change map themes, and load custom ones if you're so inclined. So I made the street lines bright and bold, with high-contrast keylines. It's an absolute joy to use now.
- alert0 6y agoWhy aren't their map screenshots cluttered with business markers? Can I turn this off?
- telesilla 6y agoSometimes I feel like the advertising dollars I give Google get put into a nameless machine. Sometimes I feel like they come out, converted to magic that the world benefits from, such as Google maps. It's been one of the biggest use cases of tech for me in my life. In awe that never again I might stand frustrated in the middle of an airport looking for my gate when I've only a few minutes left to get there.
- godelski 6y agoThere's two options I would love in Maps. 1) "I already know this part" where the navigator is muted for part of the journey and you can just get directions for the parts you don't know. I feel like this is a very common occurrence for people but we just leave the navigation on and it consumes the battery (increasing carbon footprint) and distracts us (increasing danger) 2) Multi-method transit. It's a nice day out. I don't want to drive directly to my destination. Show me free parking and let me walk half a mile to finish. This would also encourage more people to walk and be a far greener option.
- tsjq 6y agoTotally agree with the [1]. I have experienced it many times.
- throwawayfire 6y ago> it consumes the battery (increasing carbon footprint) Using web-searched estimates, the carbon cost of leaving this on constantly for a full year is approximately equivalent to the carbon cost of one single liter of petrol.
- ashkankiani 6y agoI tried out the live view in Tokyo, but the constant warnings about "don't use it while walking" (which are often false positives anyway, and regardless of the concept that I'm pretty sure when it's safe to hold up a phone being a 28yo adult) make it basically unusable for me.
- jhoechtl 6y agoAll privacy concerns aside --- this seems like a very valuable addition to the map service. Concerning indoor navigation: My minor concern is that I will take minor deviations eg. in an Airport, to pass by a potent Google add customer instead taking the shortest path.
- Rygian 6y agoI am surprised that no one mentioned www.abetterrouteplanner.com yet, which is EV-oriented and takes into account not only charging stations (and their power output), but also elevation changes to account for regen filling up the battery and providing increased range. Also has an in-car mode that is somewhat usable for cars that have an integrated web browser with access to location data.
- matsemann 6y agoAs someone that's renting a EV for a few months, I quickly realized GMaps was kinda useless in actually planning longer trips. ABRP has worked very well for me, and given me peace of mind when planning long trips over the mountains in winter times.
- carstenhag 6y agoYeah, Google Maps is pretty useless for EV cars. I wonder why they care about indoor navigation and pickup stuff so much, when EV cars is the thing of this decade.
- karussell 6y agoDriving with low carbon emission can only mean driving with a speed that is (much) smaller then the allowed maximum speed outside of cities. E.g. 80km/h (or even 70) instead of the allowed 100km/h in Germany. This way I can reduce my fuel consumption by at least 30%. With Google Maps driving and reaching the ETA is very stressful (and burns a lot of gas) as you often have to "max out" the speed limits. I guess the AI that is used is based on the average person that drives like this and/or does not care about the speed limits (which is the case here in Germany). And so I doubt that anything ecologically can come out of an AI that is based on the current state. To change something you would have to assist people how to reduce fuel consumption. This would have many advantages: it would reduce stress and accidents (people would be less willing to overtake a 'slower' car) and the time of arrival would be only 2-4 minutes later on a 1 hour trip.
- cerved 6y agoWhen you calculate the shortest path in a road network, you usually take the distance and divide it by the speed limit to determine the weight of the edges. To be fancy you also do things like account for deceleration and acceleration at nodes (turns). Artificially capping the speed limit is easy. You often do this for things like tractors that don't drive at the speed limit. If people want to drive under a certain speed it's a trivial technical problems for the individual vehicle and path finding. I'm not sure the calculations are made individually however, so an individual speed limit may be a non trivial problem
- carstenhag 6y agoAs you mentioned tractors, it's pretty sad one can't define usual/max driving speeds on Google Maps. Applies to e-bikes, tractors, cars with trailers, etc
- benhurmarcel 6y agoThis is a good point, and navigation apps like Google Maps could perfectly tell you something like "On this section driving at x km/h would save y€ of gas for only z minutes added".
- matesz 6y agoDoes Google use Filament [1] for this AR stuff or do they have something completely different? I mean using something else would be a huge waste from my little point of view ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ [1] Filament is a real-time physically based rendering engine for Android, iOS, Windows, Linux, macOS, and WebGL2 - https://github.com/google/filament https://github.com/google/filament
- red0point 6y agoI find it hilarious that the GIF showing it in action at the airport is giving totally wrong directions. It sais "Go down one level to Floor 2", to apparently reach gate E27. However, if you go down this escalator, all you will find is 2 train tracks with trains taking you out of the airport. You indeed need to take a train to gates E, but those depart from a totally different location.