Yeah, it seems I’ve pulled the trigger a bit soon. I was just about to head to bed when I noticed, which is arguably not the best moment to be posting haha…

That’s correct, I’ve also added some ALPRs to OSM; which is why I decided to check it once more. There’s other websites, which also render ALPRs (alongside other surveillance POIs) on a map. However, DeFlock’s is the most clear for ALPRs in specific, at least for what I’ve seen, and also providing information on the subject. I simply noticed it being offline, and figured it might be relevant to the community.

Which in practice will simply drive up the price: like refundable deposits

Deploying its roughly $1.4 billion worth of reserves to support “mission driven” tech businesses and nonprofits, including its own

I mean, how else can you deplete a non-profit’s reserves?

E2EE isn’t really relevant, when the “ends” have the functionality, to share data with Meta directly: as “reports”, “customer support”, “assistance” (Meta AI); where a UI element is the separation.

Edit: it turns out cloud backups aren’t E2E encrypted by default… meaning: any backup data, which passes through Meta’s servers, to the cloud providers (like iCloud or Google Account), is unobscured to Meta; unless E2EE is explicitly enabled. And even then, WhatsApp’s privacy policy states: “if you use a data backup service integrated with our Services (like iCloud or Google Account), they will receive information you share with them, such as your WhatsApp messages.” So the encryption happens on the server side, meaning: Apple and Google still have full access to the content. It doesn’t matter if you, personally, refuse to use the “feature”: if the other end does, your interactions will be included in their backups.

Cross-posting my comment from the cross-posted post

Yeah, I guess if you want users to keep sharing “confessions, [] difficult debates, or silly inside jokes” through a platform you’ve acquired, E2EE might give the WhatsApp user the false sense of privacy required.

One would almost start to think the lawyers were out for the settlement money…

E2EE isn’t really relevant, when the “ends” have the functionality, to share data with Meta directly: as “reports”, “customer support”, “assistance” (Meta AI); where a UI element is the separation.

Edit: it turns out cloud backups aren’t E2E encrypted by default… meaning: any backup data, which passes through Meta’s servers, to the cloud providers (like iCloud or Google Account), is unobscured to Meta; unless E2EE is explicitly enabled. And even then, WhatsApp’s privacy policy states: “if you use a data backup service integrated with our Services (like iCloud or Google Account), they will receive information you share with them, such as your WhatsApp messages.” So the encryption happens on the server side, meaning: Apple and Google still have full access to the content. It doesn’t matter if you, personally, refuse to use the “feature”: if the other end does, your interactions will be included in their backups.

I still prefer mobile users adding features, even if they are of an unusual object type; effectively being another type of fixme to desktop users. But instead of another desktop user integrating these elements, I rather have mobile users on the desktop as well; as to integrate their mobile changes when at home. If you’re sightseeing, these applications are very helpful, for creating/editing POIs and effectively sketching out non-POI features; but the latter does require some work to integrate them.

Quoting another comment of mine. Your use of the tool is something I’m advocating for, really; I recognize it’s usefulness, but am not treating it as a substitute for desktop editors.

Editing geometries is hard enough as it is on the desktop (especially with glued points), so I can’t imagine making such changes on the mobile. I think it’s best to not allow editing geometries, and to leave such changes to devices better suited for the task.

Oh, you can add new things, that’s perfectly fine. I still prefer mobile users adding features, even if they are of an unusual object type; effectively being another type of fixme to desktop users. But instead of another desktop user integrating these elements, I rather have mobile users on the desktop as well; as to integrate their mobile changes when at home. If you’re sightseeing, these applications are very helpful, for creating/editing POIs and effectively sketching out non-POI features; but the latter does require some work to integrate them.

If that’s the only way you’re going to contribute to OSM, by all means, go for it. But as a desktop OSM editor, I really dislike some of the incentives pushed by mobile applications. Primarily not adding objects as polygons (as it would be difficult to draw on such devices), but adding them as POIs (parking, amenities, etc.) and paths (waterways for instance: where paths are often used for just naming, or as water"ways", like for marine traffic). This often leads me to correct these changes, as they really stand out compared to the rest of the map. So generally, I view these tools as complementary, rather than final changes; unless it’s changes to POIs or something, which is where these applications shine, in my opinion.

I personally quite like OsmAnd’s granular control, but understand how others might experience this as being overwhelming; which big-tech’s restrictive… I mean “modern” user-experience (UX) might be to blame for. There are however quite some alternatives to pick from, if you wanted a more minimalist approach to UX; which OsmAnd could also provide by default (while allowing advanced users to toggle additional “expert” settings).

What makes Google “Maps” superior to OSM-based maps, is not its inferior “map”, but rather the navigational aspect: businesses and other ‘points of interests’ (POIs) registering their location to Google, public transit data being supplied to it (allowing for planning), traffic statistics (through creepy location tracking, even in the background unless opted out), etc.; and bundles all into a single, undeniably convenient application.

I would argue OSM data is primarily mass imports, from other permissive or open (government) databases; which are strongly dependent on region. For The Netherlands: BAG (basic registration of addresses and buildings) and BGT (basic registration of large-scale topography), make up a large portion of the data presented (which are either directly imported or used as a reference). Although, relative to real-world changes they might temporarily lack behind, and users add details based on satellite imagery.

Regarding satellite imagery: editors don’t always have up-to-date imagery, leading to some users undoing changes others have made. In The Netherlands, the government provides relatively recent satellite imagery: which can be imported into the alternative JOSM editor as an WMTS layer. And you may also want to check the comments of the last change: in OSM’s own iD editor you can click the “last modified …” link, all the way at the bottom of the “Edit object” tab, for the selected object.

Another thing I would really recommend, is checking how other mappers have added certain features. Which is sometimes easier to understand than OSM’s documentation; which doesn’t always correspond to practice (possibly dependent on region). A very useful tool for this is Overpass Turbo, which you can use to search for certain elements, to see how others have implemented these.

I know this might all feel a little overwhelming, but I wish I had known these things earlier in my mapping journey. I started doing it because I noticed things missing, that I knew existed as a mailman. Just starting with smaller changes to get my feet wet, and gradually working my way to larger changes. As long as you don’t start taring up large roads (including their often many relationships), you’ll be just fine; and might even become hooked (as it can be quite satisfying, having created another beautiful part).

I don’t turn my face towards houses while I’m walking if I notice a doorbell camera

I do that haha… In all seriousness, I’ve recently quit my job as mailman, in part because of this. Year after year I saw the number of doorbell cameras increase, and so grew my discomfort of my job requiring me to expose myself, to these privacy-hostile situations. The worst case scenarios were semi-detached houses: since the doors to the paired addresses are right beside another. Between the entries there’s often (decorative) separation, requiring some acrobatics to shortcut to the next address. If the second address would have a doorbell camera, while requiring me to sidestep between the obstructions, I could either: A) face the door and have my face right up to the camera, or B) turn my back to it and spin back into position. I did the latter, and I HATED having to adapt my seemingly simple job to this extend, just to protect my dignity.

The Netherlands technically requires a sign which indicates camera surveillance, besides having to direct cameras in such a way that they cannot capture the public sphere. But have a guess at how much enforcement there is in this regard…