Apple Maps vehicles to start touring Scotland & Wales later this month
Apple Maps vehicles will begin collecting street-level data in Scotland and Wales for the first time later in October, according to an updated schedule.
Vehicles will initially roam Fort William in Scotland, and Bridgend County Borough in Wales. Exact dates are unknown, but collection should kick off sometime between Oct. 9 and 22, ending by Nov. 5.
Apple has been vague about the reasons for needing vehicles, saying only that it wants to "collect data which will be used to improve Apple Maps," some of which should be "published in future Apple Maps updates." Like Google, the company has said it's blurring any faces and license plates in recorded images.
Apple, though, doesn't have an equivalent of the Street View mode in Google Maps, which suggests either that it will eventually add one, or that the company is simply looking to obtain high-level road detail. Indeed Apple's vehicles are fitted not just with cameras but advanced sensors such as LiDAR.
Apple could conceivably apply the data to its self-driving car platform. Work is currently believed to be focused on software, with the eventual goal of use in a ridehailing service -- likely a partner firm however, rather than one run by Apple.
Vehicles will initially roam Fort William in Scotland, and Bridgend County Borough in Wales. Exact dates are unknown, but collection should kick off sometime between Oct. 9 and 22, ending by Nov. 5.
Apple has been vague about the reasons for needing vehicles, saying only that it wants to "collect data which will be used to improve Apple Maps," some of which should be "published in future Apple Maps updates." Like Google, the company has said it's blurring any faces and license plates in recorded images.
Apple, though, doesn't have an equivalent of the Street View mode in Google Maps, which suggests either that it will eventually add one, or that the company is simply looking to obtain high-level road detail. Indeed Apple's vehicles are fitted not just with cameras but advanced sensors such as LiDAR.
Apple could conceivably apply the data to its self-driving car platform. Work is currently believed to be focused on software, with the eventual goal of use in a ridehailing service -- likely a partner firm however, rather than one run by Apple.
Comments
Meanwhile, the glaciers will melt first, and I feel like it's a bit like skating to where the puck was in last week's game.
Why would Google crowdsource this effort to the public as of recently ?
Are Apple's methodologies significantly better than Google's - or does their overload of cash make for some insane decision making ?
If Google is crowdsourcing the effort to the public then in my opinion Google is attempting to move faster to stay ahead of whatever Apple might develop. The problem I see for Google's outsourcing is data validation. Humanity has an uncanny knack for screwing data just for the fun of doing so.
My issue with Apple Maps in Scotland was the search - not the actual map itself. I'd search for a street or town I know is approx 20miles away and it gives me a result from somewhere in the USA and offers directions. wtf. Many of the streets in my own town were not found if I typed them in, but if I zoomed in, the street names showed up so I'm not sure if these camera cars will help with that.
Knowing the place well I can say for sure this was modified with in a photo editor to the point where it may as well be a painting. Picturesque sure, those colors ... not so much. It is one of my favorite parts of the world. I was based in Edinburgh for many years but I've been in USA for nearly 30 years and the north west of Scotland's scenery is about the only thing I miss from UK apart from pork pies and bacon with meat
http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/08/30/apples_ios_6_3d_flyovers_aim_to_be_more_helpful_less_creepy_than_google_street_view
Then again, we've been told that no one wants wireless charging, contactless payments, or a phone larger than an iPhone 5.
You can relax about the glaciers. AGW is about 90% myth. The following statements are verifiable facts:
-CO2 correlation does not equal causation, it is actually expected. When water (i.e. ocean) heats up, volatile gases, like CO2, are released.
-CO2 makes up only 0.04% of the earth's atmosphere, and furthermore, it doesn't even absorb the primary IR wavelengths emitted from earth's surface. In other words, the black body effect is minimal.
-Historically, CO2 rises *after* the temperature rises, which again is expected. And, historically, ice ages are triggered at *peak* CO2 levels. There is something else driving global temperature fluctuations, and scientists don't know what it is.
-Nearly every headline about the catastrophic effects of AGW are based on worst-case scenarios (from otherwise mild scientific studies) which are in turn based on historically inaccurate algorithms that are then extrapolated 60-1000 years into the future.
-Many of the proponents of AGW are hypocritical opportunists with no credibility. Take al gore, for example, who made $70-$100 million dollars by selling his Current TV to an oil-producing, terrorist-sponsoring country.
So you and a minuscule number scientists on Earth are in agreement, well whoop-de-doo.
1) I agree with the majority of scientists surveyed that humans have some impact on the climate.
However..
2) The (incontrovertible) evidence, some of which I posted above, shows that humans' affect on the climate* is minimal, at least insofar as CO2 is concerned. Those are not nitpicked facts I cited. They are established facts that address core theory of AGW.
Based on the repeated onslaughts of AGW hyperbole from the media, I can see how this would be difficult to accept. I encourage you to critically analyze my argument, and objectively verify, or challenge any statements or facts I presented.
*Not to be confused with the environment, on which humans have an enormous impact through habitat destruction, species extinction, pollution, etc. It's beyond sad that this CO2 bs draws so many needed resources away from these genuinely catastrophic issues that are occurring this moment, not issues that will theoretically occur 100 years from now based on worst-case scenarios.