Presentation at DRCOG in Denver on the Geospatial Revolution. Some additional material on data sharing compared to previous versions of the same talk (but a lot of common material)

1. The Geospatial
Revolution
Peter Batty
Spatial Networking
DRCOG / DRDC
January 14, 2010
1

2. Overview
• Mainstream at last!
• Data sharing
• A real-time, multimedia view of the world
• Crowdsourcing
2

3. GIS was a specialized backroom
technology for many years
3

4. “1995: the year that GIS disappeared”
Doug Seaborn
AM/FM conference, 1992
4

5. Disruptive technology
Functionality / lo gy
performance chno
he d te
bl is
E sta Mainstream
Market
requirements
lo gy
chno
e te
ru ptiv
Dis
Time
5

6. Now much easier to
include location data
Free or cheap Location
Geocoding
map data tracking
6

7. Finally, geospatial data is
just another data type
flickr.com/photos/26664862@N04/2499573972/
7

8. The neogeographers
Google
Microsoft
Open Source
... and more
8

9. Geo moving to
the mainstream
1996 MapQuest
2005 Google Earth
(Keyhole)
2005 Google Maps
9

10. Fun and cool
Performance
Ease of use
API
Continued innovation
10

11. 3D buildings
Birds eye view
Photosynth
SQL Server
11

12. Strong in database
Strong in web mapping
Weaker on desktop
Data improving fast
Spans both “GIS” and
“neogeo” spaces
12

13. “But these new systems are just simple
web mapping, they’re not GIS”
13

14. Cartography
Andy Allan, Cloudmade
14

15. 15

16. Data creation and maintenance
Upcoming Mapzen editor
Cloudmade
16

17. Data creation and maintenance
“Walking Papers” for OpenStreetMap Stamen Design
Here’s a print of Chinatown, San Francisco. 17

18. Geospatial
analysis
Stamen Design
18

19. Geospatial analysis
FortiusOne / GeoCommons
19

20. Graphic showing “peace”
Maybe hippies holding hands
(Shouldn’t fight neogeo vs GIS - all same problem)
neogeography = GIS
20

21. Data Sharing
21

22. Geodata standards
KML
GML
geoRSS
WMS Shape
geoJSON WFS
Lightweight Heavyweight
Mashups OGC*
Google Search Portals
22

23. 3 rules for evolvable systems
Only solutions that produce partial results
when partially implemented can succeed
What is, is wrong
Orgel's Rule: "Evolution is
cleverer than you are".
Evolvable
Centrally designed
Clay Shirky, 1996
shirky.com/writings/evolve.html
23

24. “If a dataset available on the web is in
a format that can't be indexed by
Google, does it make a sound?”
Kevin Wiebe
Safe Software
24

25. Jason Birch
City of Nanaimo
<Picture of Jason>
25

26. 26

27. 27

28. 28

29. 29

30. 30

31. 31

32. 32

33. 33

34. Places to share data in
the cloud ...
34

35. Google Maps
35

36. Google Maps
36

37. Google Transit
37

38. GeoCommons
38

39. OpenStreetMap
39

40. PublicEarth
40

41. Economics of data
sharing
41

42. 42

43. 43

44. Economics of data sharing
“Information wants to be free”
44

45. A real-time, multimedia
view of the world
45

46. September 7, 2009
46

47. October 19, 2009
47

48. 48

49. 49

50. 50

51. Microsoft Photosynth
51

52. Google Streetview
52

53. maps
Microsoft Virtual Earth
Manhattan
53

54. C3 Technologies
Las Vegas
54

55. prototypegame.org
Manhattan
55

56. Live
Video
Live
56

57. The Sensor Web
Need a spatial context to
make sense of all this
57

58. Location sensing
UWB GPS
Wi-Fi RFID
Cell towers
58

59. New TomTom traffic speed dataset
derived from
600 billion
speed readings from users
real time data within
3 minutes
flickr.com/photos/rutlo/3164449930/
59

60. location based services
are real at last!
60

61. Smart Grid
“The Internet brought to our electric system”
Storage Renewable Energy
Demand Response Intelligent devices and
control systems
61

62. Will have the ability to know where everything is
- and what is happening - all the time
62

63. Crowdsourcing
63

64. Web Web
1.0 2.0
publishing participation
64

65. Wikipedia
65

66. Hurricane Katrina
New Orleans
66

67. Community generated data
scipionus.com
67

68. Landgate
Perth, Western Australia
68

69. 69

70. “The future is user
created data” Google MapMaker
Michael Jones, Google
70

71. 71

72. OpenStreetMap
72

73. December 3, 2007
Google OpenStreetMap
July 7, 2009
73

74. Denver, CO Denver, CO
USA USA
“Mousetrap” junction
of I-25 and I-70
Cape Royal
Grand Canyon, AZ Cropston
USA England
74

75. 132,764
200,000+ users
24m km of highways
crazy
34m km of ways
momentum!!
OSM stats from May 2009
NAVTEQ had 18m km of highways in Dec 2007
flickr.com/photos/pimpmasterjazz/2601898276/
75

76. What about quality?
Dr Muki Haklay of UCL
“OSM quality is beyond good enough, it is a product
that can be used for a wide range of activities”
Based on a detailed analysis
http://tinyurl.com/mukiosm
76

77. Database
2007 data
69 countries
11m miles (18m km) of roads
18m points of interest
People “Creating, maintaining and delivering a
comprehensive, high quality map database is a
Field force 700 multi-step, labor-intensive process. We
Central production 270 currently employ over 270 employees in our
centralized production facility and a global
Technology 500 workforce of over 700 geographic analysts in
32 countries”
Total 3349
Financial
Revenue $853m (~€604m)
Data creation & distribution costs $396m (~€280m)
77

78. Crowdsourcing is a paradigm shift for data creation
flickr.com/photos/jamescridland/613445810/
78

79. Food for thought
Simplicity
Evolvability
Searchability
Crowdsourcing
Existing infrastructure
Cloud
Public impact
Free
http://flic.kr/p/5TeTqw
79

80. In summary ... a wild ride ahead!
80

81. ?
peter@ebatty.com
geothought.blogspot.com
twitter.com/pmbatty
81