Live data from Hacker News

Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

gizmodo.com

31–40 of 184 posts

Re: Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

#31
post #20

The attempt to turn public property into the property of the locals reminds me of a similar, non-tech-related case, also in LA - Malibu beaches. According to the law of the state of California, all beaches are public property. Of course, this gets a bit complicated when an individual owns the land in front of the beach. The people who buy houses in Malibu would, of course, prefer to have a private beach section. So t…

I found an interesting here in Scotland not far from Edinburgh - there are some really nice beaches and a large estate with golf courses and high end housing immediately inland from the beaches. Between the beaches and the houses there is a very large green metal fence which stops all access from the properties to the beaches. My initial reaction was how unreasonable it was for the developers to build such a fence to…

But what would be the reasoning for not having gates in this fence?

Re: Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

#32
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello, anyone caring to explain why this post is being downvoted?

The downvoting here has been ridiculous for a while now... I think posts with lots of upvotes and downvotes should be marked as interesting rather than bad. Or are we aiming for blandness here?

Yeah right, people will downvote without comment for having a different opinion. I've been told this was intended behaviour, but not exactly why. Happens to everyone, I suppose.

I've recently been voted into the lighter shades for calling out questionable ideology in an article. Even though it was not even a popular news item, I got at least eight or nine downvotes, and still ended up at +2 after waiting a day. That's because other people who read my comment decided to upvote (or at least anti-downvote), as I am wont to do when I see this kind of thing going on.

I also think, you as viewer should at least be able to choose if you want to order by "goodness" (upvotes-downvotes) or by "controversiality"/"interest" (upvotes+downvotes).

Re: Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

#33
post #24
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm behind a very stupid and extremely annoying corporate wall (McAfee Web Gateway) that blocks OpenStreetMap, but not Google Maps...

That sounds like a bug. Is there any way for people to report that bug?

Well, it's at a client's office, and I have another PC connected to the Internet via GSM so I don't care much...

Here's what McAfee says about OSM:

URL : https://www.openstreetmap.org/

URL Category : Public Information

Reputation : Minimal Risk

Application : OpenStreetMap

Rulename : Block Unwanted Categories of Applications

Re: Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

#34
post #3

I may be missing something, but why don't they build a car park and widen the road? Surely it's a lot easier than trying to stop people going to one of the most recognisable landmarks in the world. It's definitely worrying that major tech companies are willing to alter their maps at the request of a few wealthy individuals.

You do know that anyone can edit google maps, right? They don't block editing in a region until after something like this happens.

https://www.google.com/mapmaker

Re: Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

#35
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm behind a very stupid and extremely annoying corporate wall (McAfee Web Gateway) that blocks OpenStreetMap, but not Google Maps...

Im also behind McAfee Web Gateway and have access to OpenStreetMap, its up to whoever maintains it in your corp to unblock

Yeah I'm sure someone could unblock it, but I doubt they blocked it in the first place on purpose: OSM must be in some default list when McAfee Web Gateway is first installed, and that's probably the root of the problem...

Re: Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

#36
post #29

A large corporation accedes to the wishes of a rich elite, and helps them deny access to a public park? Say it ain't so... I wish there was some company around which had a motto of "Don't be evil". I'm sure that company would have done the right thing.

There was one once, a long time ago. Alas, they don't seem to have made it to the table in this current generation of large internet players.

Re: Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

#37
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least until Google vandalizes it. http://www.wired.com/2012/01/osm-google-accusation/

Please don't spread this kind of FUD – even the article you linked to is much more measured. It's pretty silly to imply that there was any corporate action on behalf of Google aimed at vandalising OSM at the same time as the were sponsoring their annual conference .

FWIW, I believe SOTM sponsorship came from Google's Open Source office rather than from Maps.

Re: Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

#38
On the one hand I can kinda feel the pain of the homeowners. When my neighbor recently had a yard sale, I basically had to sit in my driveway telling people to not block it in case I had to get out. Some would actually try and argue with me. So, I know how selfish and stupid people can be sometimes.

But, selfish and stupid works both ways. The homeowners near there can't deny people right of way on public streets. They can't put up fake signs/paint. This isn't right either. The best you can do is just try and keep the idiots off your own property.

Re: Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

#39
post #18
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NIMBY psychology strikes again?

"NIMBY (an acronym for the phrase "Not In My Back Yard"), or Nimby, is a pejorative characterization of opposition by residents to a proposal for a new development because it is close to them, often with the connotation that such residents believe that the developments are needed in society but should be further away."

Pejorative it may be, but it's accurate in this case. It was also used by the article's author.

I'm normally one to champion a homeowner's rights to reduce trespassing, loitering, and destruction of property, and I do understand where the homeowners in this case are coming from. I have a little turd of a neighbor who revels in illegally driving his four wheeler across my yard but the police say I'm in a catch-22; unless they are camping out in my driveway waiting to catch him, they can't arrest him for it, and of course they don't have the resources to dedicate to that. He knows this of course, and rides by at random times, flipping me off if I'm outside at the time and tearing mud holes across the lawn.

My point being, the folks in Hollywoodland who are threatening the author and coercing Google and Garmin are barking up the wrong tree. They should be seeking a solution that reduces traffic in their neighborhood without limiting the public's right to visit the park, and without threatening some guy who is already trying to do the right thing by steering tourists away from the neighborhood and towards the approved viewing areas. Just as I can't erect tire-gouging spikes in my yard or hire a thug to intimidate my neighbor into submission, these folks shouldn't be threatening people and illegally marking their curbs and signs to discourage tourists.

Re: Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

#40
post #2

"Because our mapping services are now subject to the whims of angry, powerful residents, we have to rely on other sources to give us accurate directions. In a way, the post on my blog is almost like passing out hand-drawn paper cartography from person to person, a map to buried treasure that hangs in plain sight." Samizdat internet ... even literally, according to Britannica: '(from Russian sam, “self,” and izdatelst…

Hmm, I always just thought it was a corruption of "same as that". I guess your way makes more sense. And yeah, I could have looked at wikipedia a long time ago.
Post reply on HN