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

171–180 of 293 posts

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

#171

Post by easton »

richardw wrote: post #166
oceliker wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I’ve found Waze to do the opposite, which suits me. It’ll often show me new routes when the obvious ones are slow. It seemed to be more aggressive than Google Maps. I thought that was interesting since they’re both Google. Different engine? Different default options? User intuition wrong?

It’s definitely more aggressive, and I think it to give users a choice. Most people don’t want to be cutting through side streets and things just to save a few minutes if they don’t know the area well enough, so Google Maps picks the friendliest route, and only gets aggressive if the traffic is terrible, whereas Waze tries to shave every second it seems like.

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

#173

Post by shrikant »

klyrs wrote: post #103
blitz_skull wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“I have no interest in activist software” that’s my exact sentiment. Provide the option, sure. Plenty of people care enough to use it. But don’t force it on me. I’ll find software that actually wants to serve its purpose.

What if they released the exact same product as "minimize fuel cost if it doesn't take more time" and set that to default? You can still change to "fastest" if that's your preference. My personal annoyance: their walking directions assume you don't know parkour and there isn't even an option for that

I genuinely cannot tell if that last bit is sarcasm or not!

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

#174

Post by hedora »

drusepth wrote: post #92
oceliker wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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!

Yeah; in most cities, doing that doesn’t make sense, but in Silicon Valley, side streets can be 4x faster during rush hour. It’s not due to congestion; the light cycles are punitively long, to the point where intersections sit idle for 30-60 seconds at a time while there’s a multi-block (and multi-light) backup sitting behind red lights.

(Source: my pre-covid commute was always under 15 minutes on side streets, but regularly 45-60 minutes on main roads.)

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

#175

Post by eru »

drusepth wrote: post #92
oceliker wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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!

Especially when on a bicycle or walking.

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

#176

Post by eru »

spqr0a1 wrote: post #139
SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If it's optimizing for combustion cars it won't be a perfect match for electric. The ICE route will penalize intersections and hills due to engine idling and lack of regenerative braking.

Some fancy ICE cars automatically turn off the engine instead of idling.

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

#177

Post by eru »

baryphonic wrote: post #119
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…

If I say to hell with the CO2 emissions and pick the fastest route always, will YouTube and Search direct me toward more climate change-oriented content? :-D

Keep in mind that your car emits CO2 mainly from burning fuel.

Even if you don't care about CO2, you might want to care about burning less fuel. That stuff ain't free.

(And the beauty of CO2 taxes would be that they make worrying about fuel costs equivalent (or equivalent enough) to worrying about emissions.)

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

#178

Post by canada_dry »

throwawayboise wrote: post #131

FTA 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…

> easiest places to navigate indoors, because of the plentiful signage.

You should try getting around Toronto's main transit hub "Union Station". Legend has it the TV show Amazing Race lost contestants for several days after they were trapped in undecipherable signage hell! Good luck to Google.

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

#179

Post by eru »

5cents wrote: post #93
Alex3917 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

> [...] it's the government's responsibility to ensure that the roads are reasonable safe [...]

Even if you agree with that, it's still not the governments responsibility to make all possible routes exactly equally safe. (That's actually not possible, for any non-zero level of risk.)

So even if the overall risk was low and in some sense reasonable, you might still want to pick the less risky route.

Also keep in mind that different people have different risk appetites.

Post reply on HN