Re: [OSM-talk] vandolism on OSM
On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 6:34 AM, Dave Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > > I think my idea deals with non-obvious vandalism very well. > > A user of the data can choose to use data that has only certain > > tags by certain groups or individuals and therefore have an idea of how > > accurate that data might be. > > > > > Yes, but in a world of 65000 users you're left with a lot less data. > It may be enough for your purpose in which case that's great. For > smaller areas it probably works quite well, but I'm fairly sure it'll > hit a scalability problem. With OSM as a whole we rely on there being > more good guys than bad guys, and that's generally worked so far, but > you do have that instability problem in that it can take a while for > errors to be detected and corrected. > > The subtle vandalism is hard to spot because it looks genuine. You > only determine it isn't genuine with local knowledge or on the ground > observations. That means you can't trust anything until it's been > checked out by a trusted member and the more people you bring in as > members to hit your coverage goals, the more chance you get > compromised and start letting in lower quality data. > > How much of this is actually a problem depends a lot on what you are > actually trying to achieve. > > Dave > I think my idea would scale quite well. The key is that it's very flexible. If you and a few friends are interested in post box locations then you can tag areas as having correct post box data. I come along and add another post box. Until someone in the London Post Box Fanatics group tags it as accurate then the box I added would not have the tag and I could choose to only look at post box data approved by the group or not. We could then form another group; World Postal United. World Postal United would select the best groups based on reputation and give data tagged by those groups the World Postal United tag. Now if the London Postal Experts group started to get a better reputation then the Postal United might start giving approval to London Postal Experts instead of London Post Box Fanatics. Would I download all the data and sort on my PC or would I selectively download data? I'm not sure what would be best. Here in Korea I might tag areas as having accurate or semi-accurate street data. -- http://bowlad.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] vandolism on OSM
> > I think my idea deals with non-obvious vandalism very well. > A user of the data can choose to use data that has only certain > tags by certain groups or individuals and therefore have an idea of how > accurate that data might be. > Yes, but in a world of 65000 users you're left with a lot less data. It may be enough for your purpose in which case that's great. For smaller areas it probably works quite well, but I'm fairly sure it'll hit a scalability problem. With OSM as a whole we rely on there being more good guys than bad guys, and that's generally worked so far, but you do have that instability problem in that it can take a while for errors to be detected and corrected. The subtle vandalism is hard to spot because it looks genuine. You only determine it isn't genuine with local knowledge or on the ground observations. That means you can't trust anything until it's been checked out by a trusted member and the more people you bring in as members to hit your coverage goals, the more chance you get compromised and start letting in lower quality data. How much of this is actually a problem depends a lot on what you are actually trying to achieve. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] vandolism on OSM
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 8:49 PM, Dave Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Barnett, Phillip > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > vegard wrote: > >> But we'll need a more permanent measure against vandalism. > >> Something that'll make it easy to reverse things. > > > > But note that our most potent weapon against vandalism is the ease and > > speed with which it can be undone. > > > > > > > > Frederick, > > That's only the case for OBVIOUS vandalism or accident, as in the OP, > that can be seen in a casual 'fly-over' the map. What about subtle vandalism > (renaming random streets, changing one-way directions etc) > > Even in areas that I have personally mapped, I doubt that I'd be able to > tell at a glance that this had happened without digging out my original > notes and comparing street by street(in effect, remapping the area) which I > wouldn't do without a huge visual clue. > > > > Well, none of the schemes proposed so far actually deal with the case > of subtle vandalism. They're all assuming it's possible to determine > whether an edit is good or not. The only fool proof way of doing that > is to send someone to check it out in reality, which is going to be a > fairly intractable problem. The obvious vandalism is the low hanging > fruit, and the obvious place to start if you're aiming for a more > stable map. I'd imagine people will do this for smaller areas in a > similar fashion to how we handle the coastlines for the cyclemap (ie: > we grab the data every so often, and just keep the old data if the new > looks too broken in a critical place -- at that point I usually try > and fix it of course). > > Dave > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > I think my idea deals with non-obvious vandalism very well. A user of the data can choose to use data that has only certain tags by certain groups or individuals and therefore have an idea of how accurate that data might be. -- http://bowlad.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] vandolism on OSM
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Barnett, Phillip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > vegard wrote: >> But we'll need a more permanent measure against vandalism. >> Something that'll make it easy to reverse things. > > But note that our most potent weapon against vandalism is the ease and > speed with which it can be undone. > > > > Frederick, > That's only the case for OBVIOUS vandalism or accident, as in the OP, that > can be seen in a casual 'fly-over' the map. What about subtle vandalism > (renaming random streets, changing one-way directions etc) > Even in areas that I have personally mapped, I doubt that I'd be able to tell > at a glance that this had happened without digging out my original notes and > comparing street by street(in effect, remapping the area) which I wouldn't do > without a huge visual clue. > Well, none of the schemes proposed so far actually deal with the case of subtle vandalism. They're all assuming it's possible to determine whether an edit is good or not. The only fool proof way of doing that is to send someone to check it out in reality, which is going to be a fairly intractable problem. The obvious vandalism is the low hanging fruit, and the obvious place to start if you're aiming for a more stable map. I'd imagine people will do this for smaller areas in a similar fashion to how we handle the coastlines for the cyclemap (ie: we grab the data every so often, and just keep the old data if the new looks too broken in a critical place -- at that point I usually try and fix it of course). Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] vandolism on OSM
PHILLIP BARNETT SERVER MANAGER 200 GRAY'S INN ROAD LONDON WC1X 8XZ UNITED KINGDOM T +44 (0)20 7430 4474 F E [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://WWW.ITN.CO.UK P Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frederik Ramm Sent: 03 October 2008 11:25 To: vegard Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] vandolism on OSM Hi, vegard wrote: > But we'll need a more permanent measure against vandalism. > Something that'll make it easy to reverse things. But note that our most potent weapon against vandalism is the ease and speed with which it can be undone. Frederick, That's only the case for OBVIOUS vandalism or accident, as in the OP, that can be seen in a casual 'fly-over' the map. What about subtle vandalism (renaming random streets, changing one-way directions etc) Even in areas that I have personally mapped, I doubt that I'd be able to tell at a glance that this had happened without digging out my original notes and comparing street by street(in effect, remapping the area) which I wouldn't do without a huge visual clue. Cheers Please Note: Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems. Thank You. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] vandolism on OSM
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 7:24 PM, Frederik Ramm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > vegard wrote: > > But we'll need a more permanent measure against vandalism. > > Something that'll make it easy to reverse things. > > We have some good changes in store with API 0.6. > > > An idea I've had, is to add "revised"-tags to OSM data. > > Which is what Wikipedia is currently experimenting with. > > But note that our most potent weapon against vandalism is the ease and > speed with which it can be undone. > > > unless we put up a way to avoid random vandalism to > > pollute "the production" set of data, noone is gonna dare use our data > > Every day someone says "noone is going to use our data unless...". I > don't really take that seriously because reality proves them wrong. > > If anyone wants to have a strictly quality controlled OSM they can > easily do that and sell it as a paid service. But I believe it is going > to be much more expensive than just buying a set of TeleAtlas data, and > will have all the disadvantages of commercial geodata (errors take long > to get fixed, data is a year old, etc.) > > Bye > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > Here is my proposal for Wikipedia. I hope they someday adopt it. Have a variety of tags concerning quality and let people filter with those tags. Anyone can form a group and each group would have its own tags that only that group can change. In this specific case some people can form a no vandalism group and tag data that looks to be vandalism free. People looking at the data could then filter based on the reputation of the groups. -- http://bowlad.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] vandolism on OSM
Hi, vegard wrote: > But we'll need a more permanent measure against vandalism. > Something that'll make it easy to reverse things. We have some good changes in store with API 0.6. > An idea I've had, is to add "revised"-tags to OSM data. Which is what Wikipedia is currently experimenting with. But note that our most potent weapon against vandalism is the ease and speed with which it can be undone. > unless we put up a way to avoid random vandalism to > pollute "the production" set of data, noone is gonna dare use our data Every day someone says "noone is going to use our data unless...". I don't really take that seriously because reality proves them wrong. If anyone wants to have a strictly quality controlled OSM they can easily do that and sell it as a paid service. But I believe it is going to be much more expensive than just buying a set of TeleAtlas data, and will have all the disadvantages of commercial geodata (errors take long to get fixed, data is a year old, etc.) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] vandolism on OSM
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 02:51:01AM -0700, Nicholas Vetrovec wrote: > Check out this Chicago area totally messed up by user: Mekhyl > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.9626&lon=-87.8045&zoom=14&layers=0B00FTF > What to do about this problem?? > Reversing these actual changes, I'm sure someone can dig into. But we'll need a more permanent measure against vandalism. Something that'll make it easy to reverse things. An idea I've had, is to add "revised"-tags to OSM data. Which means that 1) You can choose to check out only the "stable" map, or 2) You can choose the development version. But this isn't at all gonna be easy, we need to devise a plan to make it as little hassle as possible to review OSM data and put a quality stamp on it, and to diff the area between the last "revised" tag and what exists today, see if the changes looks good, and then just approve it. And yes: I know - I should sit down and code it :) This *is* a proposal, and I'm no coder. And I also know that a fair amount of people will disagree, but unless we put up a way to avoid random vandalism to pollute "the production" set of data, noone is gonna dare use our data to anything except small things that can be manually verified. -- - Vegard Engen, member of the first RFC1149 implementation team. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] vandolism on OSM
2008/10/3 Nicholas Vetrovec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Check out this Chicago area totally messed up by user: Mekhyl > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.9626&lon=-87.8045&zoom=14&layers=0B00FTF > What to do about this problem?? > Wouldn't call it vandalism, just an accident. I believe their is a role back option, easy enough to revert. I'd drop the guy a message, letting him know his mistake, so that he can be more careful in future. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
