Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Maps Hacks

simonweckert.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 397 posts

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#311

Post by nitrogen »

s0rce wrote: post #287
netsharc wrote: post #23

An interesting "red but no traffic" phenomenon is in Iceland, with roads which are next to scenery viewing points. The roads are mostly empty in this country, but everyone must've slowed down when they saw the breathtaking scenery, and would pull into the viewing point's parking spot to stop and take pictures. On Google Maps these areas were marked red. On another navigation related topic; I was using Waze in a high-…

There is a popular road in a relatively rural part of the SF Bay area for bicycling and on the weekends it appears to have traffic due to the slower speed of the numerous cyclists. There isn't actually more traffic. Google then sends cars on a winding narrow hilly alternate route.

Maps starts reading pedestrians in downtown SF as traffic during road closures for e.g. stadium events, and tries to direct cars along jammed and even closed roads. Too many times have I been stuck less than a mile from a destination for more than an hour, sometimes even two.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#312

Post by nitrogen »

labcomputer wrote: post #274
onionisafruit wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you fix that? I’ve been wondering how google and the others differentiate between cars on the free vs express lanes.

You can measure peak acceleration--cars accelerate much faster than buses or trains--or whether you're connected to headphones (not a head-unit). Use of headphones by drivers is illegal in most places. As for express vs. regular lanes, express-lane cars will have much different distributions than regular-lane cars. Use something like KNN where the distance metric is a weighted sum of Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance betwe…

Or just split speeds into a histogram and take the 20th percentile or something.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#313

Post by craftinator »

eigenvector wrote: post #277
8ytecoder wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an understated problem. Google used to regularly take me through a route that involves a left turn in a major road and multiple crossings where cross traffic won’t stop. Literally two blocks from the suggested left turn is a left turn arrow signal which also avoids the dangerous crossings. It’s both dangerous and anxiety inducing and doesn’t save time either.

This problem baffles me because all that has to be done to correct it is increase the estimated time of arrival penalty for making an unprotected left turn so that the routing algorithm doesn't mistakenly think it's faster. Ditto for U-turns, which Google constantly suggests (rather than turning onto a side street and U-turning there or going around the block) even when they are impossible (median in the way), danger…

Just another area where rules based heuristic systems can outperform machine learning systems by not removing edge cases through over generalization.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#314

Post by brewdad »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #297
netsharc wrote: post #23

An interesting "red but no traffic" phenomenon is in Iceland, with roads which are next to scenery viewing points. The roads are mostly empty in this country, but everyone must've slowed down when they saw the breathtaking scenery, and would pull into the viewing point's parking spot to stop and take pictures. On Google Maps these areas were marked red. On another navigation related topic; I was using Waze in a high-…

So I'm stuck in a traffic jam, and google maps is telling me I can take an alternate route to avoid it and save 25 minutes vs waiting in the traffic jam. Something that occurs to me as I sit in this traffic... what portion of all the other driver's around me also looking at google maps? Is Google Maps telling them to take the same alternate route as me? Are they all going to do it? If they all do it, does the alterna…

Presumably, this alternate route won't save you 25 minutes by the time you and others reroute. However if it saves you 10 minutes and reduces the delay on the original route by 10 minutes since there are now fewer cars idling, then everyone is better off.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#315

Post by newtonapple »

I drove through North Lake Tahoe one time on a weekday around midnight, and Google Maps was showing all red as I was driving up the mountain... I was super confused as there were no cars around me and it was not snowing either. What I later realized was that all the trucks were parked alongside the freeway taking breaks... I never realized that you could basically trick Google Maps by using a bunch of cellphones. Very neat!

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#316

Post by darkerside »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #240
herenorthere wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont think it's necessarily a bad thing

Yeah, "don't inconvenience anyone else" is a pretty good as far as simple driving strategies go.

Everyone on the road is inconveniencing everyone else all the time. I prefer the strategy of accepting it, rather than letting it bother me. I also don't judge others for inconveniencing me. We're all just trying to get to point B at the end of the day.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#317

Post by ufmace »

OnlineGladiator wrote: post #193
deathhand wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fed ex avoids left turns - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2014/04/0...

It's also a serious consideration for companies working on self-driving cars, as unprotected left turns are extremely difficult for the robots.

Not too surprising if we think about it. At a significant number of unprotected lefts at busy intersections, you basically have to semi-aggressively pull out in front of oncoming traffic and rely on them to slow down for you in order to get through in a reasonable time. It's tough to automate that in a safe way. Especially if it involves fuzzy value judgements about whether those cars seem like they'll probably slow down for you.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#318

Post by big_chungus »

sosborn wrote: post #134
big_chungus wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On our way back from the restaurant, we used Apple Maps. It took us on what looked like a longer route but lo and behold, it took a wiiiide berth around the Tenderloin. We saw not a single sketchy thing on our entire night time walk. Microsoft patented such an "avoid ghetto" idea year ago, but people got mad and called it racist: https://www.npr.org/2012/01/25/145337346/this-app-was-made-f... https://www.cnet.com/n…

My opinion: If the model is based on crime stats, it’s ok. If it’s based on demographics, it’s a problem.

I'm right there with you. A model based on race would be racist. The issue is that in urban areas, crime rate is often a good proxy for race (particularly when looking at, say, muggings or carjackings rather than white-collar crime). I consider that irrelevant, but as the two articles I linked show, the "disparate impact" type folks don't care about which stat is being used.

Re: Google Maps Hacks

#319

Post by brewdad »

andrewzah wrote: post #307
labcomputer wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can measure peak acceleration--cars accelerate much faster than buses or trains--or whether you're connected to headphones (not a head-unit). Use of headphones by drivers is illegal in most places. As for express vs. regular lanes, express-lane cars will have much different distributions than regular-lane cars. Use something like KNN where the distance metric is a weighted sum of Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance betwe…

> or whether you're connected to headphones I’m pretty sure this is rarely enforced in most states in the US. My father frequently drives across the US and always takes his calls with earbuds because the speakers aren’t very good. I do it with one earbud in because I find the quality of speaker audio terrible, forcing me to concentrate harder on it to discern what’s being said.

Single ear devices are usually legal where earbuds in both ears is not. Maintaining situational awareness seems to be the rule. If course, I'm essentially deaf in on ear, so being legal isn't any safer.

I tend to use the car speakers or simply refuse all incoming calls while driving.

Post reply on HN