Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users

[Russ Nelson]

Bill Ricker writes:
 > The PokeStop was at our exact target,  "1899 MIT Observatory site" which is
 > moderately well known (on the park map, in FourSquare). [1]

 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/944663159#map=19/42.44109/-71.08359=D

https://www.ingress.com/intel?pll=42.441303,-71.085092

 > This six year old OSM "man made/man mad/Survey point" is the only online
 > reference to this point i've found ... aside from the PokeGo Gym ... for
 > this disk.

 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/6007454#map=16/42.4433/-71.0844=D

https://www.ingress.com/intel?pll=42.441213,-71.084321

They're Ingress portals, well-known to be the source of Pokestops. You
won't be able to visit those links unless you sign up for Ingress,
just sayin'.

-- 
--my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | Sheepdog   

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users

[Toby Murray]

As an ingress player, I can confirm use of ingress data for pokestops and
gyms. Same location descriptions and images submitted by ingress players.
Ingress saw a huge influx of new users when Pokemon Go launched. People
created ingress accounts just so that they could use the ingress Intel map
to find pokestops since (in typical niantic fashion) they did not supply
this useful information to players directly.

The thing that is (MAYBE!) being pulled from OSM is Pokemon spawn locations
along pedestrian features and "biomes" which (I think) are land use area
that spawn specific types of Pokemon. So water ones around rivers, canals
and lakes.

Toby

On Jan 5, 2017 4:20 PM, "Rihards"  wrote:

On 2017.01.05. 22:34, Bill Ricker wrote:
> I have a possible confirmation that PokeGo is using OSM Points of
> Interest to populate features, but not of edit vandalism.
>
> We went onto local hiking trails to document some local science history,
> taking my daughter along for company and having someone under 50 to keep
> an eye on us oldsters. She brought her iPhone and PokeGo of course. (I'd
> expected her to be my photographic "2nd shooter", oh well.)  She
> reported that our destination included both a PokeGo Gym and a PokeStop.
>
> The PokeStop was at our exact target,  "1899 MIT Observatory site" which
> is moderately well known (on the park map, in FourSquare). [1]
>
> But the Gym was a horizontal control benchmark "BLOOM 1934" which is NOT
> in published catalogs (USGS, MASSDOT, Geocache.com) of benchmarks. It
> appears to be part of the MAGS 1934 survey, does not appear to have
> elevation stamped, consistent with other MAGS 1934 disks. Is it not
> cataloged because not required in final control mesh?  [2]
> (I have added the disk name "BLOOM 1934" to the OSM node today.)

reportedly gyms have been populated from their previous game, ingress.
in ingress they got in by people taking photos of objects and sending
those in.

> Both were added in a 6 year old trail-improvement changeset based on GPS
> hiking track. [3]
> (Which was more uptodate than the published park map and was very
> helpful for old guys taking the gradual slope trail! )
>
> This six year old OSM "man made/man mad/Survey point" is the only online
> reference to this point i've found ... aside from the PokeGo Gym ... for
> this disk.
>
> Alas I did not have her take screen-captures to determine if the
> spelling of feature names is exactly OSM's.
>
> (There's another point in that change set i need to discuss with
> OceanVortex ... will DM on OSM.org ...)
>
> [1]
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/944663159#map=19/42.
44109/-71.08359=D
>
> [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/944663076
> [3]
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/6007454#map=16/42.
4433/-71.0844=D
>
>
>
> --
> Bill Ricker
> bill.n1...@gmail.com 
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>


--
 Rihards

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Am I wrong to be bothered by this?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi Tod,

On 01/05/2017 09:26 PM, Tod Fitch wrote:
> I monitor a number of places I’ve done mapping in and suspect I’ll be back to 
> in the future. Today I noticed a change set that covers nearly all of 
> California and Nevada [1].  It looks like this same mapper has even done some 
> changes that span continents [2].
> 
> I guess I prefer geographically compact change sets: It makes me feel that 
> all the changes have actually been looked at. And, at least with how I use 
> the OSM tools I know about, I can quickly take a look and see if I agree or 
> not. In this case, I’ve found a few of the actual ways changed in my area of 
> interest [3] and wonder why the street name was dropped from the way. I guess 
> I need to dig through all the changed ways now and it would just be easier if 
> the change set did not cover so large an area most of which I have no way of 
> doing a site survey to verify.
> 
> Am I out of line to be annoyed when I see a change set like this one?

Well maybe annoyance is too intense as a first reaction. We have rules
about automatic/mechanical edits that say that any edit where the person
making the edit doesn't actually look at the concrete object they're
editing needs to be discussed and approved in advance.

So "I'll find all mini roundabouts in California, look them up on Bing
imagery, and remove them if what I see isn't a mini roundabout" is ok to
do just like that, but "I'll find all mini roundabouts in California and
remove them whoesale because there can't legally be any" is something
that would require prior discussion which obviously hasn't happened in
this case.

But it's quite possible that the user in question didn't know that so
the best thing is to make contact via a changeset discussion and find
out what happened and what the user was doing/thinking. If necessary,
the edit can then be reverted.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users

[Rihards]

On 2017.01.05. 22:34, Bill Ricker wrote:
> I have a possible confirmation that PokeGo is using OSM Points of
> Interest to populate features, but not of edit vandalism.
> 
> We went onto local hiking trails to document some local science history,
> taking my daughter along for company and having someone under 50 to keep
> an eye on us oldsters. She brought her iPhone and PokeGo of course. (I'd
> expected her to be my photographic "2nd shooter", oh well.)  She
> reported that our destination included both a PokeGo Gym and a PokeStop.
> 
> The PokeStop was at our exact target,  "1899 MIT Observatory site" which
> is moderately well known (on the park map, in FourSquare). [1]
> 
> But the Gym was a horizontal control benchmark "BLOOM 1934" which is NOT
> in published catalogs (USGS, MASSDOT, Geocache.com) of benchmarks. It
> appears to be part of the MAGS 1934 survey, does not appear to have
> elevation stamped, consistent with other MAGS 1934 disks. Is it not
> cataloged because not required in final control mesh?  [2]
> (I have added the disk name "BLOOM 1934" to the OSM node today.)

reportedly gyms have been populated from their previous game, ingress.
in ingress they got in by people taking photos of objects and sending
those in.

> Both were added in a 6 year old trail-improvement changeset based on GPS
> hiking track. [3]
> (Which was more uptodate than the published park map and was very
> helpful for old guys taking the gradual slope trail! )
> 
> This six year old OSM "man made/man mad/Survey point" is the only online
> reference to this point i've found ... aside from the PokeGo Gym ... for
> this disk.
> 
> Alas I did not have her take screen-captures to determine if the
> spelling of feature names is exactly OSM's.
> 
> (There's another point in that change set i need to discuss with
> OceanVortex ... will DM on OSM.org ...)
> 
> [1]
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/944663159#map=19/42.44109/-71.08359=D
> 
> [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/944663076
> [3]
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/6007454#map=16/42.4433/-71.0844=D
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Bill Ricker
> bill.n1...@gmail.com 
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> 


-- 
 Rihards

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users

[Bill Ricker]

I have a possible confirmation that PokeGo is using OSM Points of Interest
to populate features, but not of edit vandalism.

We went onto local hiking trails to document some local science history,
taking my daughter along for company and having someone under 50 to keep an
eye on us oldsters. She brought her iPhone and PokeGo of course. (I'd
expected her to be my photographic "2nd shooter", oh well.)  She reported
that our destination included both a PokeGo Gym and a PokeStop.

The PokeStop was at our exact target,  "1899 MIT Observatory site" which is
moderately well known (on the park map, in FourSquare). [1]

But the Gym was a horizontal control benchmark "BLOOM 1934" which is NOT in
published catalogs (USGS, MASSDOT, Geocache.com) of benchmarks. It appears
to be part of the MAGS 1934 survey, does not appear to have elevation
stamped, consistent with other MAGS 1934 disks. Is it not cataloged because
not required in final control mesh?  [2]
(I have added the disk name "BLOOM 1934" to the OSM node today.)

Both were added in a 6 year old trail-improvement changeset based on GPS
hiking track. [3]
(Which was more uptodate than the published park map and was very helpful
for old guys taking the gradual slope trail! )

This six year old OSM "man made/man mad/Survey point" is the only online
reference to this point i've found ... aside from the PokeGo Gym ... for
this disk.

Alas I did not have her take screen-captures to determine if the spelling
of feature names is exactly OSM's.

(There's another point in that change set i need to discuss with
OceanVortex ... will DM on OSM.org ...)

[1]
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/944663159#map=19/42.44109/-71.08359=D
[2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/944663076
[3]
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/6007454#map=16/42.4433/-71.0844=D



-- 
Bill Ricker
bill.n1...@gmail.com
https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Am I wrong to be bothered by this?

[Tod Fitch]

I monitor a number of places I’ve done mapping in and suspect I’ll be back to 
in the future. Today I noticed a change set that covers nearly all of 
California and Nevada [1].  It looks like this same mapper has even done some 
changes that span continents [2].

I guess I prefer geographically compact change sets: It makes me feel that all 
the changes have actually been looked at. And, at least with how I use the OSM 
tools I know about, I can quickly take a look and see if I agree or not. In 
this case, I’ve found a few of the actual ways changed in my area of interest 
[3] and wonder why the street name was dropped from the way. I guess I need to 
dig through all the changed ways now and it would just be easier if the change 
set did not cover so large an area most of which I have no way of doing a site 
survey to verify.

Am I out of line to be annoyed when I see a change set like this one?

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44914222
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Stephen214/history#map=2/44.7/-56.0
[3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/437522050/history


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] weeklyOSM #337 27/12/2016-02/01/2017

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 337,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things 
happening in the openstreetmap world:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/8535/

We apoligize to send a wrong URL in our last email. 

Enjoy!

weeklyOSM?
who?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] First new 2016 NAIP imagery is now online (Massachusetts & Tennessee)

[Mike N]

On 1/4/2017 10:46 PM, James Mast wrote:

I tested out the new 2016 TN link in JOSM before I sent the original
email and it worked perfectly fine for me.


  I looked again and all is working now!   It had been unusable for 
several weeks around the USGS transition, and I thought the whole NAIP 
program had also fallen victim.


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us