Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI • Hacker News Board

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#51

Post by SXX » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 12:07 AM UTC

scarmig wrote: post #27

Lucasoato wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can say that Google did a thing or two to break people's trust.

Cancelling Google Reader is a sure sign that Google is out to exploit people by encouraging them to take lower-carbon routes.

Imagine Google cancelling you. Like by permanently banning your every account for no reason without chance to appeal. Or better cancelling your whole company by banning Ads, Google Play or GCP account. Everything is gone in one second, poof and no one can help you unless you somehow get to HN or reddit frontpage.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#52

Post by prewett » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 12:08 AM UTC

ladberg wrote: post #4

The 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 yo…

This 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.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#53

Post by lscotte » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 12:08 AM UTC

This is just so stupid, there's no other way to describe it.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#54

Post by vernie » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 12:09 AM UTC

tehjoker wrote: post #5

Google 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?

Pretty soon they'll be routing cars through their political foes' homes.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#55

Post by lscotte » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 12:09 AM UTC

mercurywells wrote: post #43

Did April fools come early this year?

I sure hope so, this has to be a joke!

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#56

Post by tehjoker » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 12:10 AM UTC

logshipper wrote: post #47

SXX wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other purposes? It's easy! You can make people avoid businesses that didn't paid to you and make them drive close to fastfood that wanted advertising. Or you can drive people around some political protests...

I'm sorry, this is is dangerously close to conspiracy theory territory. I am by no means, an apologist for Google, but I seriously doubt they have the ability/resources, or even motivation to manage route planning at such a microscopic level. I recognize that they have been caught with their pants down with things like altering search results [1], but making broad speculative claims like this about the real world wit…

Is it really a conspiracy theory that all they'd have to do is tweak the weights in dijkstra's algorithm based on who pays them?

Alleging that they're actually doing that is one thing, but simply recognizing that they can do it and have a potential incentive is another and I think that is clear.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#57

Post by throwaway0a5e » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 12:10 AM UTC

Seems 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.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#58

Post by dataflow » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 12:11 AM UTC

prewett wrote: post #52

ladberg wrote: post #4

The 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 yo…

This 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.

Do 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?

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#59

Post by oh_sigh » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 12:11 AM UTC

prewett wrote: post #52

ladberg wrote: post #4

The 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 yo…

This 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.

The quoted paragraph clearly states that the lower-emissions route will only be given by default when there are multiple routes with a similar ETA. So it will never tell you to take a route that takes longer just to reduce your emissions, without also telling you about the shorter route with higher emissions.

Since you have seemingly already abandoned google maps due to their activism before reading this story, what were the other reasons that made you quit?

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#60

Post by reidjs » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 12:12 AM UTC

prewett wrote: post #52

ladberg wrote: post #4

The 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 yo…

This 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.

If you need the extra 5 minutes, it seems possible to turn the feature off or ignore it. It seems pretty dumb to me too, but at least it will bring some awareness to climate change, right?