[Talk-it] Una mappa migliore Fwd: [OSM-talk] A Better Map

sabas88 sabas88 a gmail.com
Mer 22 Ott 2014 13:10:22 UTC


2014-10-22 14:23 GMT+02:00 Cristian Consonni <kikkocristian a gmail.com>:

> (Rinomino l'oggetto in italiano per attirare di più l'attenzione ed
> evitare il cross posting)
>
> Steve dice:
> * dobbiamo concentrarci sugli indirizzi
>

Certo, è là che c'è il cash $$$


> * in 3 anni diventeremo la migliore mappa del mondo sotto gni aspeto
>

Solo se continuano ad arrivare tizi pagati per fare QA ed inserire la roba
pallosa :-)


> * abbiamo bisogno di board (per OSMf) più snello e funzionante,
> possibilmente affiancato da uno staff.
>

I sistemisti sono pagati o sono su base volontaria? Nel secondo caso
bisognerebbe incominciare da loro ad assumere...


> Che ne dite?
>
> Ciao,
>
> C
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Steve Coast <steve a asklater.com>
> Date: 2014-10-22 12:15 GMT+02:00
> Subject: [OSM-talk] A Better Map
> To: "<osmf-talk a openstreetmap.org>" <osmf-talk a openstreetmap.org>,
> "talk a openstreetmap.org Talk" <talk a openstreetmap.org>
>
>
> Why are we here on these mailing lists? Why do we spend so much time
> making maps? I think ultimately because it’s fun. It’s a neat hobby
> and we’re making the world a slightly better place.
>
> You need the right environment for things to be fun. Someone has to
> install the toys in the playground. Someone needs to pay for the
> slides and install the swings so that the kids can run around. Then
> someone else needs to fix them when they fail and make sure you don’t
> break your neck unexpectedly.
>
> In the past I’ve tried hard to make OSM a fun playground, by doing
> things like taking all the warning labels off and letting people do
> whatever they like. Things like open tagging or letting anyone edit,
> which were crazy ideas in 2004. I’ve also at times been responsible
> for it not being fun. Partly because I was a kid learning the hard way
> and partly because sometimes you need to make decisions.
>
> I agree that in some ways OSM isn’t a fun playground right now. But
> that doesn’t mean it can’t be again.
>
> We had a lot of fun with our swings and our slides. But now there are
> a lot more people to join the fun from far away places and we’re
> older. Maybe we now prefer bumper cars and video games to the old
> swings and slides.
>
> We should keep the swings and the slides. People new to the playground
> will still enjoy them. But we should also build a bumper car arena and
> maybe a video game arcade. Sometimes we might go back and play on the
> slide too. We need some new skills to build these new toys.
>
> Together, we need a mission and then a couple of course corrections to
> make it happen.
>
> I think addressing should be our mission. We built the worlds best
> display map already. We won. If you print out any OSM map of
> practically anywhere, it’s the best. But we can’t find anything on it
> without comprehensive and global addressing information. It’s the
> hidden data behind the map we now need to go after. All the other
> things we need to do are also good things. Diversity in all it’s
> forms, faster servers, better tools, easier documentation and more.
>
> A clear mission provides a framework and guidance for achieving those
> things. “Map more stuff” got us very, very far. But now, we should
> focus on what’s stopping us replacing proprietary maps. And that is
> addressing.
>
> How would we go achieve that?
>
> There are two basic fixes. Make the board functional and give the
> board bandwidth.
>
> The board is too big. It grew for good reasons but now it’s just hard
> to achieve anything. Seven people mean that if everyone speaks for
> five minutes in a conversation on some issue, you use over half an
> hour. In an hour-long meeting that means you can barely discuss two
> things. Ignoring all the other issues, just the pure mechanics shows
> you how hard it is to talk through something let alone achieve a
> consensus. The board needs to be 3 people. 5 at maximum.
>
> Being on the board is a difficult job, especially as a volunteer. Most
> people aren’t used to such roles. They may think like I did that they
> need to please everybody all the time. They aren’t able to attend
> meetings because they have a day job and other life commitments. The
> board needs to meet in person regularly with a facilitator and also
> have guidance about what it means to be on a board. We can’t expect
> volunteers to naturally figure all this stuff out by themselves and
> then also devote the time to also achieve goals.
>
> The board needs paid staff. There are a variety of things those paid
> staff can do which the board can decide. It’s clear that there are
> things that volunteers don’t have fun doing and therefore they don’t
> happen at all, but are still very important for a functioning
> organization. Having paid staff isn’t about deprecating volunteer
> involvement, it’s about plugging the gaps. It’s not a perfect solution
> but the alternative is to rely on companies to do many of these
> things, and that really isn’t perfect either.
>
> In terms of the mechanics,
>
> 1. Change the mission statement of OSM to be something like “The
> world’s best addressable map”
> 2. The board figures out how to voluntarily shrink to 3-5 people, and,
> meets in person 2-4 times a year
> 3. Consulting with the community on exact roles and remit, hire 1-3 people
> [*]
>
> Together, we could do this in 6-12 months and finish addressing in 1-3
> years. At that point we wouldn’t have just made the world slightly
> better, we would have put a big dent in the universe. Nobody would use
> a closed map ever again, and it would be people like you that made it
> happen.
>
> So why don’t we go do that?
>
>>
> A digression.
>
> In Peter Thiel’s book “Zero-to-One” he catalogs the fate of HP’s
> board. HP used to be a very innovative place and then it wasn’t any
> more. Thiel posits that there were two board factions at a critical
> time. On the one hand there were people who wanted to chart out things
> to build and then go build them. On the other hand there was a group
> who felt the board wasn’t competent to do that, and they should focus
> on making sure all the rules were being followed. The latter
> apparently won.
>
> What happened next is that HP's board blew up over wiretapping in
> search of someone leaking things to the press. HP collapsed in value
> making sure all the rules were followed while people who build new
> things did very well, like Apple.
>
> Let’s not be HP. Let’s be Apple.
>
> Steve
>
> [*] - I could speak at length on funding, but I don’t think finding
> money will be a hard problem.
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk a openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it a openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
-------------- parte successiva --------------
Un allegato HTML è stato rimosso...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/attachments/20141022/abca2a9a/attachment-0001.html>


Maggiori informazioni sulla lista Talk-it