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

Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 293 posts

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

#91

Post by bseidensticker »

datavirtue wrote: post #72
oh_sigh wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

How is the fastest route not the least carbon footprint?

Because the fastest route doesn't have to be the shortest route. Where I live, it's often faster to drive in the opposite direction of my destination to get on a highway. It's generally slower (by a tiny amount) to take surface streets.

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

#92

Post by drusepth »

oceliker wrote: post #46
murphyslab wrote: post #30

It'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…

> 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.

Ironically, if there were a feature that only cut through small side streets and avoided larger streets, I'd use that all the time!

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

#93

Post by 5cents »

Alex3917 wrote: post #63
prewett wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I have no issue with this. The bigger issue I have with Google Maps is that it makes zero effort to avoid dangerous routes. If two routes for a ~45 min drive are within 30 seconds of another, why would I want to risk death by taking the one with an extremely dangerous left turn through oncoming traffic? It makes zero sense.

This looks like a governmental issue in my eyes: it's the government's responsibility to ensure that the roads are reasonable safe and the traffic reasonable regulated, not Google's. If a route is dangerous, something should be done with the route itself (not the suggestion). But if Maps' suggestions breaks regulations and propose an illegal route, I agree!

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

#94

Post by SomeCallMeTim »

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…

I'd be curious to know if that maps onto the lowest energy use in an electric car.

Because I've been wanting that feature for long-distance EV trips for a while now.

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

#95

Post by sudosysgen »

uoaei wrote: post #44
sudosysgen wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I 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.

Excellent, innovative, bravo! Unfortunately the vast majority of e-bikes are not DIY'd and so require new batteries for operation.

Indeed. 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?

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

#96

Post by quinncom »

I'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.

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

#97

Post by ehsankia »

eximius wrote: post #76

I 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.

> 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.

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

#98

Post by SXX »

tehjoker wrote: post #56
logshipper wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I would still find it very ironic if Google would actually try to affect real world businesses that way. After all racketeering of online companies is why US ISPs wanted to repeal net neutrality so much.

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

#99

Post by drusepth »

nyx_ wrote: post #42

Eco-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 th…

>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.

Post reply on HN