Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql 1.2.0

[Sarah Hoffmann]

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 12:16:30AM +0100, wambac...@posteo.de wrote:
> i'm using osm2pgsql-0.96 right now. Is it possible (and meaningful) to
> switch to osm2pgsql-1.2.0?
> 
> Must i change anything in my database? Runing diff updates using a flatfile.

You can switch from 0.96 to 1.2 any time. The database layout
is compatible between the two versions. The only difference is
that 1.x no longer supports old-style multipolygons. That should
not be an issue with the curent planet anyway.

I'd always recommend using the latest release to get the latest fixes.
However, the main performance improvements for 1.2 are noticable during
import. If you prefer a packaged 0.96 over a self-compiled 1.2, then
it's not too much loss to remain with the packages version.

Sarah


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper

[Mateusz Konieczny]

4 Nov 2019, 12:53 by md...@xs4all.nl:

> In any case, I see that the "You must be 13 years or older to use the 
> Services." is still there.
> Really? Someone under 13 can not look at the OSM map? I'm sorry, but that is 
> completely laughable. And not enforcable at all.
>
It is probably necessary for legal reasons, such requirement is typical in TOUs.

Mostly result of COPPA[1] and similar laws. Extreme requirements on providing
service to children younger than 13 makes it is easier to ban all children 
younger than 13
from service than comply with them.

Especially in cases where children are not very likely to contribute
or will cooperate by ignoring laughable parts of ToU[2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Online_Privacy_Protection_Act 
 - not 
sure is 
OSM directly affected, but USA loves to enforce its laws outside its proper 
jurisdiction 

[2] I do not recommend admitting this, as it may be necessary (again for legal 
reasons)
to ban accounts operated by children. Also see 
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/may/31/twitter-blocking-users-who-were-underage-when-they-signed-up
 

for extreme case.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper

[Maarten Deen]

On 2019-11-05 10:12, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:

4 Nov 2019, 12:53 by md...@xs4all.nl:


In any case, I see that the "You must be 13 years or older to use
the Services." is still there.

Really? Someone under 13 can not look at the OSM map? I'm sorry, but
that is completely laughable. And not enforcable at all.


It is probably necessary for legal reasons, such requirement is
typical in TOUs.

Mostly result of COPPA[1] and similar laws. Extreme requirements on
providing
service to children younger than 13 makes it is easier to ban all
children younger than 13
from service than comply with them.

Especially in cases where children are not very likely to contribute


"Use" in this case is also viewing the website. There is no account 
needed for that and if you want to block this you would need to do age 
verification which is a lot more intrusive than not putting this clause 
in your ToU at all. If people think OSM should be doing this, they 
effectively say that children should not use the internet. That may be 
your choice, but it is just that: a choice. In no way a legal 
requirement.


COPPA does not seem to apply since OSM is not directed to children, let 
alone in commercial ventures. The only possible connection would be when 
children register since you would store information about them. That 
might be a sensible reason to block children from registering (I can 
also see that they probably would not have a significant positive 
contribution to the data), but again, at the moment any use of OSM by 
children is blocked.


Either no thought went into that, or it was thought that throwing a wide 
net would be better "to comply" than no net at all. The same thing I 
argue against with the "lots" comment that started this. Better to claim 
that lots of the things you might do to keep your privacy are not 
allowed according to the ToU than to make clear which things exactly are 
not allowed.

It looks more like FUD to me at the moment.

Regards,
Maarten

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper

[Tom Hughes]

On 05/11/2019 09:40, Maarten Deen wrote:

COPPA does not seem to apply since OSM is not directed to children, let 
alone in commercial ventures. The only possible connection would be when 
children register since you would store information about them. That 
might be a sensible reason to block children from registering (I can 
also see that they probably would not have a significant positive 
contribution to the data), but again, at the moment any use of OSM by 
children is blocked.


GDPR has similar requirements around getting parental consent
for people under a certain age before processing personal data
on the consent basis.

Specifically although the default is 16 some countries including
the UK have set that at 13 instead.

Tom

--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper

[Simon Poole]

The clause is mainly a consequence of the relevant GDPR rules and at the
time (not sure why we are having this discussion after the fact) we
spent a lot of time investigating what potential routes there could be
to working around this, but nobody came up with a workable solution.

Simon 

Am 05.11.2019 um 10:40 schrieb Maarten Deen:
> On 2019-11-05 10:12, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>> 4 Nov 2019, 12:53 by md...@xs4all.nl:
>>
>>> In any case, I see that the "You must be 13 years or older to use
>>> the Services." is still there.
>>>
>>> Really? Someone under 13 can not look at the OSM map? I'm sorry, but
>>> that is completely laughable. And not enforcable at all.
>>
>> It is probably necessary for legal reasons, such requirement is
>> typical in TOUs.
>>
>> Mostly result of COPPA[1] and similar laws. Extreme requirements on
>> providing
>> service to children younger than 13 makes it is easier to ban all
>> children younger than 13
>> from service than comply with them.
>>
>> Especially in cases where children are not very likely to contribute
>
> "Use" in this case is also viewing the website. There is no account
> needed for that and if you want to block this you would need to do age
> verification which is a lot more intrusive than not putting this
> clause in your ToU at all. If people think OSM should be doing this,
> they effectively say that children should not use the internet. That
> may be your choice, but it is just that: a choice. In no way a legal
> requirement.
>
> COPPA does not seem to apply since OSM is not directed to children,
> let alone in commercial ventures. The only possible connection would
> be when children register since you would store information about
> them. That might be a sensible reason to block children from
> registering (I can also see that they probably would not have a
> significant positive contribution to the data), but again, at the
> moment any use of OSM by children is blocked.
>
> Either no thought went into that, or it was thought that throwing a
> wide net would be better "to comply" than no net at all. The same
> thing I argue against with the "lots" comment that started this.
> Better to claim that lots of the things you might do to keep your
> privacy are not allowed according to the ToU than to make clear which
> things exactly are not allowed.
> It looks more like FUD to me at the moment.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper

[Maarten Deen]

On 2019-11-05 10:58, Simon Poole wrote:
The clause is mainly a consequence of the relevant GDPR rules and at 
the

time (not sure why we are having this discussion after the fact) we
spent a lot of time investigating what potential routes there could be
to working around this, but nobody came up with a workable solution.


Surely there could have been made a distinction between viewing the 
map/wiki/whatever and registering an account?
Is there anyone who believes that we should block children from looking 
at the map at www.openstreetmap.org? Or that that is required from a 
legal standpoint?


Regards,
Maarten


Am 05.11.2019 um 10:40 schrieb Maarten Deen:

On 2019-11-05 10:12, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:

4 Nov 2019, 12:53 by md...@xs4all.nl:


In any case, I see that the "You must be 13 years or older to use
the Services." is still there.

Really? Someone under 13 can not look at the OSM map? I'm sorry, but
that is completely laughable. And not enforcable at all.


It is probably necessary for legal reasons, such requirement is
typical in TOUs.

Mostly result of COPPA[1] and similar laws. Extreme requirements on
providing
service to children younger than 13 makes it is easier to ban all
children younger than 13
from service than comply with them.

Especially in cases where children are not very likely to contribute


"Use" in this case is also viewing the website. There is no account
needed for that and if you want to block this you would need to do age
verification which is a lot more intrusive than not putting this
clause in your ToU at all. If people think OSM should be doing this,
they effectively say that children should not use the internet. That
may be your choice, but it is just that: a choice. In no way a legal
requirement.

COPPA does not seem to apply since OSM is not directed to children,
let alone in commercial ventures. The only possible connection would
be when children register since you would store information about
them. That might be a sensible reason to block children from
registering (I can also see that they probably would not have a
significant positive contribution to the data), but again, at the
moment any use of OSM by children is blocked.

Either no thought went into that, or it was thought that throwing a
wide net would be better "to comply" than no net at all. The same
thing I argue against with the "lots" comment that started this.
Better to claim that lots of the things you might do to keep your
privacy are not allowed according to the ToU than to make clear which
things exactly are not allowed.
It looks more like FUD to me at the moment.

Regards,
Maarten

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



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


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

[OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Steve Coast]

Hello

Maps have three basic components: Display (does it look nice?), Routing (Can I 
get from a to b?) and Geocoding (Where is this address?).

OSM is extremely good at the first one, and pretty good at the second one. But 
it’s pretty deficient in the third area: address data.

The question is, how can we fix this? Addresses are a big, big problem in terms 
of how much data we need to go collect. There are a few ways forward with 
outside commercial or government data, but they tend to be difficult because 
the data is patchy or licensed in ways that aren’t very compatible with OSM.

It seems like it would be a good idea to think about this from the bottom up in 
a community way, and this doesn’t really exist in OSM right now. It seems like 
we need better feedback loops to:


  1.  Community can see where the address data is (and isn’t), because it’s not 
very obvious today when using osm.org
  2.  Make the tools to add address data better so that it’s easier to fix.

To that end, here’s a tile server that highlights address data:

   
http://ec2-52-50-19-165.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/#10/39.7561/-104.9574

It shows roads with address data normally and kind-of hides other roads, to 
make it obvious that “something is wrong with this map”. We could have a tag 
(maybe it exists already) that says “this road doesn’t have addresses” and/or a 
tag that says “this road is complete”. (right now it’s just got Colorado and 
Utah in it).

When OSM started, the map looked very broken and incomplete because there was 
missing data all over the place. This created a large incentive to go fix the 
map. The idea with this tileserver is to do the same thing and make the map 
look broken to create a large incentive to fix it. If we, one day, switched the 
main osm.org site to using this rendering then it would create an urgent need 
to find all the addresses in the places where they exist. It could also be done 
on a temporary basis for a few weeks, or on a per-country basis or some other 
slow introduction to see if it worked. It’s just an idea.

On the tools side, there’s much that can be done to make collecting and 
entering addresses easier. I’ve been collecting UI/UX changes to tools (e.g. iD 
or Go Map!) that would make addresses better:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address_SIG

It also seems worthwhile to create a group of people interested in addressing 
in OSM (an address special interest group or working group) to push these ideas 
forward so that we can “finish” OSM by getting all the addresses done.

What do you think?

Best

Steve

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[James]

It's a pretty cool concept, but doesn't necessarily invoke ALL addresses
have been found, what happens if a few addresses are there? What happens if
someone adds 1 or 2 addresses?

Pretty good QA tool I'm guessing?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper

[Warin]

On 03/11/19 21:42, Philippe Latulippe wrote:

Hello everyone!

I like to improve OSM casually, making small fixes as I use the map in
my day-to-day life. However, doing so without any precautions would
reveal a great deal of information about where I've been, since my
edits cover exactly the places where I'm active. A look at my edit
history would reveal where I live, where I work, where I've traveled.
If last night I had added a detailed POI of a restaurant and nothing
else, one could correctly assume that I was at that restaurant
recently.

I've managed to protect my privacy somewhat by creating one account
for every neighbourhood I want to map. This is time consuming and
error prone, and it's held me back from making improvements to the
map.

Are there better ways to maintain some privacy while editing the map?
Are there some tools? Or is there a way to make edits in a way that
doesn't reveal my username to regular users?



You can use multiple accounts. Each one may indicate a certain area, unless you 
map extensively.
Most mappers 'names' get associated with some area and probably some habits.

Eventually your local area will be well mapped ... and so you may 'run out of 
things to do'.

Note: This will not stop some mapper editing your entries to comply with their 
scheme.
They can simply look for things that don't comply with their scheme and alter 
those, no matter how many different names that have entered those.




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