[OSM-talk] The long tail

[Nick Black]

hi guys,

I just have to think.  This is still the only real Free geodata site out
there.  Whether we are in this because it is something to do with a GPS or
because we think that geodata should be *free*, we are still in this
together.  So who wants to fork the project?  I doubt that anyone actually
wants to do that, if they did then why not do it from the .osm data?
It would be easy just setp up five boxes, find hostinig somewhere, or pay
for it your selves.  Then spend all your time as sys admin (being paid
nothing) whilst sorting out your own life too.  Throw in a mailing list that
is practically a soap opera in itselft.. few...... just about there.
 I'm in, fuck it, I'll do a Masters degree and run OSM too! - who's joining
me?

So what *everyone*  is  after -  just what does history add to the data -
why do people want history, I just dont get it - please enlighten
me!  So you need history to code: much code has been contributed
without history?


So guys, I've just got broadband back, so I'm choked.  But who volunteers to
run OSM? - like Sys Admin (name on the
documents), not giving a server, like, legal (get taken to the cleaners in
the
UK), one person saying "yes" dpes not help as the licence for OSM
means that if one contributor wants to remoce their work, all
subsequent edits must be removed - that's right, if I sau that all my
edits have to go, everyone's edits that are based on mine have to go
as well.  That's the limit with the current license.
So back the the Sys admin burden, as well as the legal potential for being
totally screwed, you have a massive mailing list to reply to, and shit....
OSM dont pay no money.  How can you live?  Giving
talks and gaining 'academic credit' does not pay the kind of bills we hit in
London (rent is £120+ per week).

If Steve wanted to rip you all off, he would do it in a much more convincing
way than through OSM: really, who thinks that Steve is lying to you?

So me belegered point is:  think about what you are proposing.

Nick



On 7/7/06, Nick Black <nickblack1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/7/06, Erik Johansson <erjohan at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 7/6/06, Tom Carden <tom at tom-carden.co.uk> wrote:>
> > > I would add to David's suggestion that not only might the police look
> > > at speed information from tracklogs,
> >
> > A healthy thing to do in this argument is to split the issues, traces
> > and map data. Everything looks scarier when you see them en masse. I
> > just wonder what do you see should be published when we have
> > OSMF/privacy policy/License?
>
>
> I'd imagine that everythhing you'd ever wanted would be publised with a privacy policy written by actual lawayers and the foundation  to
> take the legal responsibility.  Why would Steve withold *your* information.
>  What does he have to gain from it?  Come on guys, all of you:  what does
> Steve have to gain from your traces?  Answers to me...
>
> th
> >
>
>
> Wikipedia publishes
> > 1. full user list
> > 2. IP address for all changes of non logged in users
> > 3. full timestamps
> > 4. full history data for each article
> >
> > Will OSM supply a similar thing?
> >
> > /Erik
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > talk at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20060707/ec3af354/attachment.html>