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] [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

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

[Russ Nelson]

moltonel 3x Combo writes:
 > While this is only an anecdotal result, there are clearly a lot more
 > spawns on this walk than in the surrounding area (I regularly get
 > 10-15 spawns on this 700m footway, but only 1-2 covering the same
 > distance along the primary to get there).
 > 
 > IMHO, the biggest news here is that (a subsidiary of) Google is using
 > OSM data in a high-profile product.

OR PoGo is using the fact that a bunch of people walk that way playing
Pokemon Go than other places.

-- 
--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

[Ian Dees]

Hi everyone! I think it's safe to say that this thread has wandered way off
topic. Please keep messages constructive and on-topic.

A great place to discuss the license and implications of others' use of OSM
data are the couple legal mailing lists.

Thanks, and happy new year!
-Ian, your friendly list moderator

On Dec 30, 2016 18:38, "Bill Ricker"  wrote:


On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Simon Poole  wrote:

> The ODbL is very clear on what "Publicly" is:
>
> “Publicly” – means to Persons other than You or under Your control by
> either more than 50% ownership or by the power to direct their
> activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant).
> No need to speculate on that point.
>

​Plenty of edge cases remain ... e.g. if a personal work for only family,
is it "public"?  I don't own my mother or adult child 50%+ ... and my
ability to direct their activities has proven limited.
​


> On the other hand, if they were using OSM data to trigger to spawning in a
> specific locations it would still be rather open if that is actually a use
> that is substantial.


​If it's a critical function of the derived work, it's at least arguably
"substantial". ​
PoGo without Pokemon spawning would be no fun at all.


> Up to now I haven't seen any evidence that couldn't be explained in
> numerous other ways that they are really using OSM data.


​Agreed. Hence "Hypothetical" and other hedge words.

I joined this tread to discuss whether a Trap Close would be detectable, to
see if the question is answerable. ​(Is the Poke-rookery named for the
feature it is based upon?)

​Since the # edits with Pokemon in the comment has dropped off sharply,
people aren't being rewarded for doing it; so (at least) one of the
​following is true -
(a) word has gotten out not to put Pokemon in the comment as we'll revert
bogus updates easier that way;
(b) the game has already been fixed to prevent cheating
*  (which may mean delayed data hypothesis is intentionally true )
(c) video's theory isn't true at all
   (the announcement was either hoax or jumping to conclusions based on
coincidence)
(d) delayed data hypothesis is approximately true *but not* by Niantic's
direct intent
 * co-causal: changes to reality induces convergent data changes. Maybe
Google base maps get _some_ approved changes from _their_ (so-called)
"community" eventually, but not coincident with ours (E.g., they got Sarah
Long bridge closure before OSM since it was routing-urgent (i marked it
impassable when it became routing urgent to me!), but we'll often get those
footpaths and local pocket parks first since we our "approval process" is
Admiral Grace M Hopper Approved.)
 * indirect pipeline: or someone (internally or externally to Google)
is filtering our subsets of our changesets into GM/GE inputs and relying
upon (a) not "substantial" use &/or (b) not being noticed &/or (c) not
caring

I think you and I are in general agreement that there is so far little to
no evidence that anything much is happening, so we're just quibbling over
hypothetical potential severity if it were (which would of course depend on
exact particulars and require lawyers) and wondering aloud how/whether we
could ever notice or prove it if so.

Without specific evidence, on the Interwebs, the Bayesian Prior (default
conclusion) should always be high confidence that
 (c) "Someone is Wrong on the Internet" [1]
and low confidence otherwise;
with that as a Prior, the low peak and rapidly decreasing popularity
of "Pokemon" change-set comments in last week increases the other
alternatives somewhat (and the powerset elements likewise as they are NOT
fully mutually exclusive) but doesn't actually degrade (c)'s likelihood
much. I

​[1]  http://m.xkcd.com/386/​

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

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

[Bill Ricker]

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Simon Poole  wrote:

> The ODbL is very clear on what "Publicly" is:
>
> “Publicly” – means to Persons other than You or under Your control by
> either more than 50% ownership or by the power to direct their
> activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant).
> No need to speculate on that point.
>

​Plenty of edge cases remain ... e.g. if a personal work for only family,
is it "public"?  I don't own my mother or adult child 50%+ ... and my
ability to direct their activities has proven limited.
​


> On the other hand, if they were using OSM data to trigger to spawning in a
> specific locations it would still be rather open if that is actually a use
> that is substantial.


​If it's a critical function of the derived work, it's at least arguably
"substantial". ​
PoGo without Pokemon spawning would be no fun at all.


> Up to now I haven't seen any evidence that couldn't be explained in
> numerous other ways that they are really using OSM data.


​Agreed. Hence "Hypothetical" and other hedge words.

I joined this tread to discuss whether a Trap Close would be detectable, to
see if the question is answerable. ​(Is the Poke-rookery named for the
feature it is based upon?)

​Since the # edits with Pokemon in the comment has dropped off sharply,
people aren't being rewarded for doing it; so (at least) one of the
​following is true -
(a) word has gotten out not to put Pokemon in the comment as we'll revert
bogus updates easier that way;
(b) the game has already been fixed to prevent cheating
*  (which may mean delayed data hypothesis is intentionally true )
(c) video's theory isn't true at all
   (the announcement was either hoax or jumping to conclusions based on
coincidence)
(d) delayed data hypothesis is approximately true *but not* by Niantic's
direct intent
 * co-causal: changes to reality induces convergent data changes. Maybe
Google base maps get _some_ approved changes from _their_ (so-called)
"community" eventually, but not coincident with ours (E.g., they got Sarah
Long bridge closure before OSM since it was routing-urgent (i marked it
impassable when it became routing urgent to me!), but we'll often get those
footpaths and local pocket parks first since we our "approval process" is
Admiral Grace M Hopper Approved.)
 * indirect pipeline: or someone (internally or externally to Google)
is filtering our subsets of our changesets into GM/GE inputs and relying
upon (a) not "substantial" use &/or (b) not being noticed &/or (c) not
caring

I think you and I are in general agreement that there is so far little to
no evidence that anything much is happening, so we're just quibbling over
hypothetical potential severity if it were (which would of course depend on
exact particulars and require lawyers) and wondering aloud how/whether we
could ever notice or prove it if so.

Without specific evidence, on the Interwebs, the Bayesian Prior (default
conclusion) should always be high confidence that
 (c) "Someone is Wrong on the Internet" [1]
and low confidence otherwise;
with that as a Prior, the low peak and rapidly decreasing popularity
of "Pokemon" change-set comments in last week increases the other
alternatives somewhat (and the powerset elements likewise as they are NOT
fully mutually exclusive) but doesn't actually degrade (c)'s likelihood
much. I

​[1]  http://m.xkcd.com/386/​

-- 
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

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

[Simon Poole]

The ODbL is very clear on what "Publicly" is:

“Publicly” – means to Persons other than You or under Your control by
either more than 50% ownership or by the power to direct their
activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant).

No need to speculate on that point.

On the other hand, if they were using OSM data to trigger to spawning in
a specific locations it would still be rather open if that is actually a
use that is substantial. Up to now I haven't seen any evidence that
couldn't be explained in numerous other ways that they are really using
OSM data.

Simon


Am 30.12.2016 um 22:08 schrieb Bill Ricker:
>
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Clifford Snow
> > wrote:
>
>
> Can you help me understand what part of the ODbL [1] they are
> violating? As far I can tell, they don't modify the data nor do
> they display OSM tiles or make any of the data available
>
>
> (​It was not my assertion, I was hypothetically answering a HOW question.)
>
> OTOH & IANAL
>
> Hypothetically speaking,
> Not making available tiles or data extracts based on OSM data 
> relieves a hypothetical potential infringer from having to make data
> available (Share Alike & Keep Open clauses).
> Any published use* requires Attribution.
> * (Which i interpret as non-intramural use, not contained within a
> household or corporate entity, although that is the sort of think
> lawyers could argue. It's safest to attribute even intramural use
> cases, but not required by license.)
>
> If indeed they are reaping OSM nodes and ways to populate PoGo
> rookeries [an unproven assertion], that would make the whole game a
> "use ... or work[s] produced from the database" and if PoGo doesn't
> count as "public", I don't know what is.  (The players are not
> employees, contractors, or family members of Niantic Labs.)
>
> Hiding the _use_ of OSM data doesn't make the derived work private;
> only hiding the derived work (game, web map, whatever) does; and i
> doubt having to register to play the game would be accepted as making
> all Niantic properties "private" not "public".
> (IANAL but I would wonder if hiding the use could be construed as
> willful and malicious infringement.)
> (If Niantic claims any copyright in their work, it is by definition of
> "copyright" a "published" work. In theory Trade Secret, Patent, and
> Copyright are incompatible IP protections. Only TradeMark plays nicely
> with others.)
>
> #IANAL
>
>
>
> -- 
> 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



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
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]

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Clifford Snow 
wrote:

>
> Can you help me understand what part of the ODbL [1] they are violating?
> As far I can tell, they don't modify the data nor do they display OSM tiles
> or make any of the data available


(​It was not my assertion, I was hypothetically answering a HOW question.)

OTOH & IANAL

Hypothetically speaking,
Not making available tiles or data extracts based on OSM data  relieves a
hypothetical potential infringer from having to make data available (Share
Alike & Keep Open clauses).
Any published use* requires Attribution.
* (Which i interpret as non-intramural use, not contained within a
household or corporate entity, although that is the sort of think lawyers
could argue. It's safest to attribute even intramural use cases, but not
required by license.)

If indeed they are reaping OSM nodes and ways to populate PoGo rookeries
[an unproven assertion], that would make the whole game a "use ... or
work[s] produced from the database" and if PoGo doesn't count as "public",
I don't know what is.  (The players are not employees, contractors, or
family members of Niantic Labs.)

Hiding the _use_ of OSM data doesn't make the derived work private; only
hiding the derived work (game, web map, whatever) does; and i doubt having
to register to play the game would be accepted as making all Niantic
properties "private" not "public".
(IANAL but I would wonder if hiding the use could be construed as willful
and malicious infringement.)
(If Niantic claims any copyright in their work, it is by definition of
"copyright" a "published" work. In theory Trade Secret, Patent, and
Copyright are incompatible IP protections. Only TradeMark plays nicely with
others.)

#IANAL



-- 
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

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

[Clifford Snow]

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Bill Ricker  wrote:

>
> ​Traditional map copyright violation proof would be adding a Trap Close​
> ... do the have a map that shows name of feature that spawns critters?
> Adding a nonsense footpath to no-where (shaped like a P ? ) in a
> non-existent park and checking if it shows up in the PoGo in a few days
> would do.
>

Can you help me understand what part of the ODbL [1] they are violating? As
far I can tell, they don't modify the data nor do they display OSM tiles or
make any of the data available. In fact Niantic makes every effort to keep
the use of OSM private. It's only through the sleuth work of their users
that we are aware its use.

[1] http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/summary/

Best,
Clifford
-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
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 2016.12.30. 21:19, Bill Ricker wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Paul Johnson  > wrote:
> 
> I wonder how we would politely license-check Niantic... 
> 
> 
> ​Traditional map copyright violation proof would be adding a Trap Close​
> ... do the have a map that shows name of feature that spawns critters?
> Adding a nonsense footpath to no-where (shaped like a P ? ) in a
> non-existent park and checking if it shows up in the PoGo in a few days
> would do.

the reports on this seem to indicate that they do not use anything close
to realtime data - more like a year or more old, according to some
anecdotal evidence.

also, this is not about the visible map data (that still seems to be the
assumption here and there). map data is clearly from google maps.
what the pokemon go community is suggesting - that some of the osm data
is used to make pokemon spawn there more often - or to make specific
types appear. that's vague enough to require a pretty large dataset to
prove to a reasonable degree.

besides the potential lack of attribution, we should concentrate on
attracting pokemon go players as mappers and advertise this potential
connection as a reason to improve the map. even if there turns out to be
no connection, we are better off publicity wise already.

> -- 
> Bill Ricker
> bill.n1...@gmail.com 
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux 
-- 
 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]

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> I wonder how we would politely license-check Niantic...


​Traditional map copyright violation proof would be adding a Trap Close​
... do the have a map that shows name of feature that spawns critters?
Adding a nonsense footpath to no-where (shaped like a P ? ) in a
non-existent park and checking if it shows up in the PoGo in a few days
would do.



-- 
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

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

[Andrew Wiseman]

Warin said: "Targeting Pokemon contributors falls into a trap... the
assumption that a particular activity/group are all inclined to vandalism.

These new contributors could be very usefull ... if 'we' don't tar them all
with abusive thoughts."

Most definitely, we should assume good faith -- but I've been browsing my
area and noticed some inaccurate edits that are Pokemon related, like users
drawing tons of nonexistent footpaths over what is presumably their house
so they can catch Pokemon there, complete with names like "Looking for
Pokemon", "testing to see if Pokemon spawn here" and "I hope I catch some
here" -- clearly not official names or accurate data. We should definitely
be polite and suggest the correct way to edit, but also be aware of people
making bad or test edits. Some people are mapping the paths and
parks correctly, but a significant number aren't. Who knows, maybe this
could even be a good way to encourage folks to map hiking trails, parks and
so on. Engage Pokemon fans to do their own mapathons!

I was using this to find changesets that included the word "pokemon"
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-changesets?comment=pokemon#2/10.7/-4.9
 --- not the complete set of all Pokemon-related edits, of course, but it's
a start.

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Jack Burke  wrote:

> They're using the same map they used in Ingress, a game they launched when
> still part of Google. That one is known to have come from Google. It makes
> sense that any map databases they had when the break happened would still
> be owned by the company; they just wouldn't have maps that included changes
> since then.
>
> A co-worker plays that game, and he and I compared Pokémon places in our
> area with the ones in that game, and they're identical.
>
> -jack
> --
> Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology
>
> On December 30, 2016 9:40:56 AM EST, Paul Johnson 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Targeting Pokemon contributors falls into a trap... the assumption that
>>> a particular activity/group are all inclined to vandalism.
>>
>>
>> Another trap, too:  Assuming that Niantic and/or Nintendo are using
>> OpenStreetMap for this game.  And if they are, then they're doing so
>> without attribution.  Without any attribution and with Niantic no longer
>> part of Alphabet (Google's parent company), it's not clear where they're
>> getting their map from.
>>
>> --
>>
>> 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
>
>


-- 

600,000 DC residents don't have a vote in Congress -- http://www.dcvote.org/

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

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

[Paul Johnson]

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Jack Burke  wrote:

> They're using the same map they used in Ingress, a game they launched when
> still part of Google. That one is known to have come from Google. It makes
> sense that any map databases they had when the break happened would still
> be owned by the company; they just wouldn't have maps that included changes
> since then.
>
> A co-worker plays that game, and he and I compared Pokémon places in our
> area with the ones in that game, and they're identical.
>

I wonder how we would politely license-check Niantic...
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

[Jack Burke]

They're using the same map they used in Ingress, a game they launched when 
still part of Google. That one is known to have come from Google. It makes 
sense that any map databases they had when the break happened would still be 
owned by the company; they just wouldn't have maps that included changes since 
then. 

A co-worker plays that game, and he and I compared Pokémon places in our area 
with the ones in that game, and they're identical. 

-jack 
-- 
Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology

On December 30, 2016 9:40:56 AM EST, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Targeting Pokemon contributors falls into a trap... the assumption
>that a
>> particular activity/group are all inclined to vandalism.
>
>
>Another trap, too:  Assuming that Niantic and/or Nintendo are using
>OpenStreetMap for this game.  And if they are, then they're doing so
>without attribution.  Without any attribution and with Niantic no
>longer
>part of Alphabet (Google's parent company), it's not clear where
>they're
>getting their map from.
>
>
>
>
>___
>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] [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users

[Paul Johnson]

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Targeting Pokemon contributors falls into a trap... the assumption that a
> particular activity/group are all inclined to vandalism.


Another trap, too:  Assuming that Niantic and/or Nintendo are using
OpenStreetMap for this game.  And if they are, then they're doing so
without attribution.  Without any attribution and with Niantic no longer
part of Alphabet (Google's parent company), it's not clear where they're
getting their map from.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

[Clifford Snow]

I've been seeing a number of new users adding paths and parks. I deleted
three "parks" in Tacoma Washington just this morning. One was covering a
residential area, another was a group of trees behind some houses and the
third was a vacant lot. The area with the trees might have been an attempt
to add a landcover feature. But they were all done by the same user. None
of the changeset comments mentioned pokemon.

One user did reply to my welcome message. I had asked him if he was mapping
as part of a school project. He replied "No, a game I play uses path
information to generate its data, so I'm uploading my common walk paths,
getting familiar with OSM and its toolset. Me adding those paths is just
filling in gaps in that data that others may find useful. Thank you for the
welcome email! Happy holidays!" His edits were good for a new user.

Since Dec 17th over 20 new people have started mapping in Washington State.
A good number of them have been adding footways and paths. Unfortunately I
haven't been keeping records on how many corrections I've had to make.

There is some good coming from Pokemon, however I worry about the increase
in vandalism.



On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Toby Murray  wrote:

> There was a video uploaded to YouTube a couple of days ago that claims to
> show some possible evidence that Pokemon Go uses data from OSM to determine
> good spawn locations for Pokemon. There are also several threads on reddit
> under /r/TheSilphRoad that have similar claims. It is amusing to see their
> speculation and methods of testing their "evidence" which include adding a
> footway to OSM and then going out and playing Pokemon Go a couple hours
> later so see if it affected anything.
>
> Anyway, the theory being proposed is that highway=footway features in OSM
> lead to increased Pokemon spawn activity. Also, nests are supposedly
> located inside of recreation type landuse areas (golf course, park, play
> ground, etc) This has led to some players attempting to influence the game
> mechanics by, for example, adding a bunch of footways around their house.
> While that is a relatively benign change, some others have taken to
> retagging paths, cycleways and even residential roads to highway=footway.
>
> I have been watching any changesets that come in with the word "pokemon"
> in the changeset comments and have reverted a bunch of them. However I am
> worried about users who may not be using changeset comments so I thought I
> would at least let the wider community know that this is happening and if
> you see any odd reclassification of features to highway=footway, this is
> probably why. I have also seen some legit and useful edits so it isn't all
> bad.
>
> Some places where these discussions are happening:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiJ000T8GbE
> https://www.reddit.com/r/TheSilphRoad/comments/5jfnrm/
> how_to_find_the_new_rural_spawn_points/
> https://www.reddit.com/r/TheSilphRoad/comments/50ni6g/
> osm_data_spawn_points_relation_confirmed/
> https://www.reddit.com/r/TheSilphRoad/comments/54sy36/
> osm_query_to_identify_possible_nests/
> https://www.reddit.com/r/TheSilphRoad/comments/5jw4ep/
> new_spawn_points_in_my_area_align_with_osm/
>
> I would call their evidence circumstantial at best.
>
> Toby
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> t...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>


-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us