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

Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

petewarden.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 117 posts

Re: Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

#81

Post by Doctor_Fegg »

potatolicious wrote: post #46
graue wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do the directions compare to YourNavigation? http://www.yournavigation.org/ Despite the clunky interface, I was pleasantly surprised by its biking directions: not as good as Google, but not terrible either. (I was in NYC when I tried using it for awhile.) It's fully open-source.

Just plugged in some of the test endpoints I used with MapQuest. YourNavigation seems to have two bicycling modes, "bicycle" and "bicycle (routes"). The former seems to disregard bike lanes entirely and generates some pretty hazardous recommendations (including cycling down 5th Ave, or busy sections of Park Ave in Midtown). The "bicycle (routes)" mode does better and seems to respect bike lanes, but not consistently.…

CycleStreets (UK cycle-based journey planner) are on the verge of open-sourcing their code - as in, in the next day or two. It's a highly fine-tuned cycle planner based on OSM data; here in the UK, at least, the results are streets ahead of Google, which will merrily send you down busy, fast trunk roads with no cycle lane.

You could either take their code and run an instance for NYC, or smile sweetly at them and ask if they might host one themselves. Github link: https://github.com/cyclestreets

Re: Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

#82

Post by jetd »

I have one comment and one question.

Q: Are OSM/Nominatim good for most countries now? When I tried it was very good to good enough for developed countries like US or UK but for others clearly not.

C: I really dont get Google mindset. They sell geoservices. OK. How much money that would bring 1mil, 10mil or 100mil in over 20bil company. What is the logic? Creating barriers? I dont know.

Re: Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

#83

Post by levosmetalo »

reginaldjcooper wrote: post #76
mikeash wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I think it's silly to think that you may be bound to the terms of an agreement just because you clicked a button that says "Agree", without any of the fundamental attributes of a contract being present, and without even interacting with a representative of the other party in any way.

I've noticed typically I agree with your views, but on this case we diverge. I think it's reasonable to assume that when the service cannot be accessed before the accessor clicks "agree", and the accessor clicks "agree", that constitutes a valid contractual agreement. It's no more silly than mailing in a credit card application and being bound by those terms. The fundamental attributes are present. There is a contrac…

Do you also agree that a person infected with malware also accepted it just because he clicked "Ok" or "Yes" on some of the dialogs?

There is no signature, there is no proof of identity of the signing party (copy of personal ID, witness, ...). Usually no confirmation that other side also accepted it. No copy of ToS received after "accepting". We all know that it could be that, for example, my 4yo child clicked on it when I went to the toilet after reading first few paragraphs of ToS, and now I'm somehow bound to it? Also, it happens very frequently that you "accept" some ToS, and after two years you find on some forum that Google, or PayPal just changed their ToS without sending you the updated copy for acceptance.

Sorry, but too many things that are really different between ToS and a real acceptance of a Contract.

Re: Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

#84

Post by Mithaldu »

DannyBee wrote: post #75
Mithaldu wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have some sympathy with this if you made it easy for single people to pay you to be able to use your data in a manner outside of the ToS of the free APIs. However, for the Elevation API there are two choices: * free and heavily restricted * business api, which looks extremely sketchy † and is blocked to most people The gaming world has learned this with Steam and friends already. People will pirate the hell o…

"I would have some sympathy with this if you made it easy for single people to pay you to be able to use your data in a manner outside of the ToS of the free APIs. " I'm not sure why you assume, among other things, that upstream contracts always make this possible.

Occam's Razor makes me think that Google simply does not want to "bother" with many low-value customers, associated support infrastructure, etc.

Honest curiosity though: What kind of contract would make it impossible and would one make such a contract?

Re: Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

#85

Post by reginaldjcooper »

levosmetalo wrote: post #83
reginaldjcooper wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've noticed typically I agree with your views, but on this case we diverge. I think it's reasonable to assume that when the service cannot be accessed before the accessor clicks "agree", and the accessor clicks "agree", that constitutes a valid contractual agreement. It's no more silly than mailing in a credit card application and being bound by those terms. The fundamental attributes are present. There is a contrac…

Do you also agree that a person infected with malware also accepted it just because he clicked "Ok" or "Yes" on some of the dialogs? There is no signature, there is no proof of identity of the signing party (copy of personal ID, witness, ...). Usually no confirmation that other side also accepted it. No copy of ToS received after "accepting". We all know that it could be that, for example, my 4yo child clicked on it…

If you agreed to a ToS by clicking yes, and the ToS allows them to install malware that's a failure on your part to read it. If your child clicks it, you probably have recourse in civil court because a 4-year-old is not able to execute contracts. Most ToS's include a clause that they can change it at any time; you might not be legally bound by the new one, check that with a lawyer.

It seems like you are angered that you have to enter into a contract before using software, and you would prefer to just click "accept" and have that magically not be interpreted as you agreeing to the terms. "I'll use it but I don't accept the terms". I'd like that too, but I'm afraid that's not how it works.

Re: Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

#86

Post by levosmetalo »

reginaldjcooper wrote: post #85
levosmetalo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you also agree that a person infected with malware also accepted it just because he clicked "Ok" or "Yes" on some of the dialogs? There is no signature, there is no proof of identity of the signing party (copy of personal ID, witness, ...). Usually no confirmation that other side also accepted it. No copy of ToS received after "accepting". We all know that it could be that, for example, my 4yo child clicked on it…

If you agreed to a ToS by clicking yes, and the ToS allows them to install malware that's a failure on your part to read it. If your child clicks it, you probably have recourse in civil court because a 4-year-old is not able to execute contracts. Most ToS's include a clause that they can change it at any time; you might not be legally bound by the new one, check that with a lawyer. It seems like you are angered that…

No, I just say that the fact that someone clicked accept button on some website is not a proof that I accepted anything. If things worked like that you would not be required to go to the bank to sign a contract and take a loan, one mouse click on bank website would be enough.

I could as well write whatever ToS on my homepage with "accept" and "not accept" link with whatever terms, and then wait for Google bot to "accept" my terms. Do you think Google would be bound by their "acceptance" in the same way.

It's not like I was using my digital signature or whatever, it's just that someone clicked somewhere.

The burden of proof here is on the "vendor" or software provider. They need to prove that I accepted their terms, not the other way round. That's why many free services require credit card, copy of the ID and physical signature as a proof of identity. The fact that Google decided that this might be too expensive for them to enforce, and that is cheaper to just not do it is their choice.

Re: Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

#87

Post by fpgeek »

Mithaldu wrote: post #84
DannyBee wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I would have some sympathy with this if you made it easy for single people to pay you to be able to use your data in a manner outside of the ToS of the free APIs. " I'm not sure why you assume, among other things, that upstream contracts always make this possible.

Occam's Razor makes me think that Google simply does not want to "bother" with many low-value customers, associated support infrastructure, etc. Honest curiosity though: What kind of contract would make it impossible and would one make such a contract?

An upstream contract that required detailed information about paid users, for instance? I could imagine wanting information like that for auditing if there were complex restrictions on permissible resale of the upstream data.

Re: Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

#88

Post by HNLogInShit »

TallGuyShort wrote: post #5
Killswitch wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just wish people would stop being so self-entitled period.

Agreed. The tone of the article is correct, in my opinion, because this really does hurt the community. I think we'd have an easier time fighting things like SOPA, DRM, etc. if actual piracy wasn't such a big problem.

This isn't "piracy." It's easily shut down if the provider wants to.

Re: Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

#89

Post by easy_rider »

wpietri wrote: post #62
joshma wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this feeling of self-entitlement - who are we to judge whether or not an API has been offered "in a reasonable manner?" I'm guessing it's very resource-consuming to collect, process, and maintain the data necessary for geolocation APIs (especially given the upstream providers). It'd be one thing for Google to be deceptive about it, offer a free service, and try to upsell you every point along the w…

I agree in part with your point, but I think Google has pulled a bit of a bait and switch here. For many years, they were conspicuously open and friendly, as you would expect from a company run by engineers. That got them a lot of geek love, and a big boost to their early adoption efforts. I also think it had the effect of stunting the growth of alternatives. (E.g., Google Reader.) Now they are running things more in…

You've missed the point that Google has always been an advertisement company.

Re: Why you should not pirate Google’s geo APIs

#90

Post by chii »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #80
joshma wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this feeling of self-entitlement - who are we to judge whether or not an API has been offered "in a reasonable manner?" I'm guessing it's very resource-consuming to collect, process, and maintain the data necessary for geolocation APIs (especially given the upstream providers). It'd be one thing for Google to be deceptive about it, offer a free service, and try to upsell you every point along the w…

Building your own elevation API is absolutely trivial; I don't know why anyone would even want to pirate Google's API for large-scale usage. Firstly, the data is freely available. It's NASA's SRTM [1], downloadable from a zillion mirror sites. Then just take some code to calculate a lat/long offset and find the right position in the right tile. Bob Osola has some easily portable PHP for this if you need it [2]. Free…

interesting. I think of these data are freely available, then there ought to be more people using it and making competing versions so that google will not have a monopoly on provision of such data apis.
Post reply on HN