That was an interesting article Sean. I see a twist when it comes to GIS/Geography:
There is a reason we use maps to model the world. Every map is an abstraction that simplifies the actual reality that it models. This simplification serves two (2) purposes: [1] It makes some aspect or group of related aspects easier to understand. [2] It is less expensive that building an accurate full-scale model of the real thing. I think Google and others will find that it is much more difficult to move from traditional maps to a massive database of spatial information like the world has moved from print publications to the digital information available on the web. It's not necessarily that the technology isn't there, but that the cost of acquiring the spatial data is just too high. If you don't believe find out how much a good topographic survey costs. I believe we will need additional breaktroughs in technology that allows for fast an inexpensive acquisition of spatial data to really see great improvements in the amount of spatial data that is available to society. GPS was the first type of technology to make this possible. For the first time you could easily and quickly acquire spatial information without the need for specialized training and specialized equipment. We need more technologies like GPS. As an example, laser scanners now allow a surveyor to collect millions of accurate (+/- 0.02 US Survey Feet) data points of a survey site, whereas previously we would have collected only a few dozen or a couple of hundred. Technology that is easily used by the common man and that overcomes the limitations of GPS (like urban canyons, heavy tree cover, fuzzy vertical component) will be the next huge leap for the GeoWeb. Landon -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 8:02 AM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Critical Theory In light of the conversation on critical theory vs. positivism I thought folks might find the new Wired cover article interesting: The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-07/pb_theory It is a biased link to post on my part, but interesting reading all the same. The debate in the comments is probably better than the article. In the print edition there are some cool geo visualizations of massive datasets (crop production in Iowa and FAA flight tracking over a day). best, sean FortiusOne Inc, 2200 Wilson Blvd. suite 307 Arlington, VA 22201 cell - 202-321-3914 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Keown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2008 11:19:37 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Critical Theory >From what I can tell what Google had was a truckload of "spare" cpu capacity and the insight to apply their <http://labs.google.com/papers/mapreduce.html> "MapReduce" technology to the slicing and dicing required to make the imagery usable - that was the breakthrough. _____ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of M J Sent: Wednesday, 2 July 2008 12:54 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Critical Theory Just a thought... On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Eric Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Google "solved" similar problems in Google Earth by taking a commonly known concept in cartography (globes are better than maps at representing the world) and throwing just the right amount of technology at it to create a platform that furthers their goals (world domination?!?). Google didn't actually solve that problem. It was Keyhole, a completely separate company who was at the right place at the right time when obtained by Google <http://www.google.com/press/pressrel/keyhole.html> . Keyhole had been peddling their wares since at least 2001 and imo lucky to survive. The company I worked for at the time (long dead) was interested in subscribing to their service (we were building 3D model of cities using photogrammetry, CAD, & GIS), but not enough to actually do it as it cost a fair amount of money to do at the time (for a start-up) and was a pretty intense program for the computers of the time too. I believe that Google by that point was powerful enough to carry it to the next level and continue development. Nif _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
