Author of machiavelli.net, proud father of three, interested in shaping network society. Welcome to my blog.the tattered ruins of the state
Google announced that they were adding “Map-Maker” to Google maps, allowing you to participate in creating/adapting/changing the maps of our worlds. For the analysis go to:
Mashable
John Battelle
Techdirt
Of course, Jorge Borges, On Exactitude in Science” comes to mind, where describes the tragic uselessness of the perfectly accurate, one-to-one map:
In time, those Unconscionable Maps no longer satisfied, and the Cartographers Guild drew a Map of the Empire whose size was that of the Empire, coinciding point for point with it. The following Generations, who were not so fond of the Study of Cartography saw the vast Map to be Useless and permitted it to decay and fray under the Sun and winters.
In the Deserts of the West, still today, there are Tattered Ruins of the Map, inhabited by Animals and Beggars; and in all the Land there is no other Relic of the Disciplines of Geography.
The idea of crowd-sourcing map-making chips away at another prerogative of the state, namely, the definition of territory and territorial sovereignty. So maybe we will be confronted with a future, where we can find the tattered ruins of the empire on the crowd-sourced and ad-sensed map of tomorrow 2.0.
Does wiki make sense for roads in the same way that it makes sense for encyclopedia entries?
The difference between Wikipedia entries like “Hillary Clinton” and a road off I-91 is that Clinton’s entry is surely opinionated, evolving and contestable while a roadmap only needs to be updated every once in a while.
So once Google recognizes the road, will it still have opinionated, passionate contributors?
Does wiki make sense for roads in the same way that it makes sense for encyclopedia entries?The difference between Wikipedia entries like “Hillary Clinton” and a road off I-91 is that Clinton’s entry is surely opinionated, evolving and contestable while a roadmap only needs to be updated every once in a while. So once Google recognizes the road, will it still have opinionated, passionate contributors?
I think you hit on an important point, but the answer might still be yes…
Wikis work best for problems that are “communicative” i.e. together we want to know the answer (B-Day of Abe Lincoln, the speed of sound) and that is why Wikipedia is so strong.
Wikipedia is weakest in contentious issues such as “Hilary” or “George W.” however you are right, it works in spite of the contentious nature of the subject.
I-95 exists change more often than the B-Day of Abe Lincoln and errors on maps are pesky and annoying (like the ferry in Potsdam that the navigation units of most cars describe as a bridge and that has led to several of them plunging into the Havel river at night), so relatively small edits can have big impacts.
However, you are right, will there be a committed community? Maybe no, but will it be needed? Maybe no, because if it is simple enough most of us, will be willing to make the changes. However, what about terrorists? Good question!
I think you hit on an important point, but the answer might still be yes… Wikis work best for problems that are “communicative” i.e. together we want to know the answer (B-Day of Abe Lincoln, the speed of sound) and that is why Wikipedia is so strong. Wikipedia is weakest in contentious issues such as “Hilary” or “George W.” however you are right, it works in spite of the contentious nature of the subject. I-95 exists change more often than the B-Day of Abe Lincoln and errors on maps are pesky and annoying (like the ferry in Potsdam that the navigation units of most cars describe as a bridge and that has led to several of them plunging into the Havel river at night), so relatively small edits can have big impacts. However, you are right, will there be a committed community? Maybe no, but will it be needed? Maybe no, because if it is simple enough most of us, will be willing to make the changes. However, what about terrorists? Good question!