Archive for the ‘506’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Will You Volunteer?

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

Goodchild’s article does a great job of giving an overview of the history, components, and some of the uses of Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI). Though he does a great job of highlighting the many benefits to this huge source of data, he also acknowledges some of the issues that arise with dependency on this type of data.

The are several issues in particular that I believe affect the future of the field. First of all, standardization of data is an issue when dealing with volunteered information. Contributors may not know the correct way to upload and cite data, which in turn could affect the results. This issue has been addressed somewhat by the use of volunteers who monitor the data, as well as agencies that have outlined the way to standardize certain types of data. Another issue is the ability of certain user to undermine the collective effort. This issue in particular is ever more relevant as larger and larger databases are compiled. Although it is generally accepted that contributors are working together for the collective good, there is a possibility that some people, with ulterior motives, could undermine the collective effort.One example of this is when anonymous users tamper with Wikipedia pages. Wikipedia allows any user to edit the content of its pages. And while there are some volunteers who monitor pages for legitimacy, there is a possibility of people propagating false information.

Overall, VGI has the ability to be a very useful field for current and future collective projects. However, there are still some issues that need to be addressed before it can be relied upon for important policy decisions.

-Victor Manuel

Tags:
Posted in 506, General | Comments Closed

Sensitive sensors?

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

Michael F. Goodchild argues that the most important value of volunteered geography might be provided by citizens sensors compiling information (unnoticed by other media) about their local environment and daily activities.

The authors briefly signalize issues related to volunteered geography (digital divide, authority and assertion, mention the issue of privacy, but do not engage in that topic further). Nonetheless, I found the point of view of the author a little optimistic and would have liked to hear more about the problems associated with the data, for example. The question of what drives citizens to be accurate or inaccurate is important, but there is also the notion of reliability. How reliable is data produced by a relatively homogeneous group of people sharing similar interests?

Life experiences are relative to the context in which they take place. To what extent are generalizations possible from these data? Accuracy might not be the best word to capture the complexity of the phenomena of volunteered geography which is based on a wide range of different realities.

Furthermore, to what extent can the technologies really allow the expression of what we can sense in our environment? For example, does tagging “like” or “dislike” reduce the complexity and limit the expression of the way we feel to a dualist point of view?

It is clear that volunteered information is a cheap way for corporate and governmental agencies to acquire information but is there a cost behind all this that we are missing. I’m thinking for example the compromise of confidentiality and individual privacy. The article doesn’t really engage with the issues of individual privacy as announced in the abstract. In another article Nadine Shuurman interviewed Goodchild and asked him if: “a world of citizen sensors change the way we experience privacy?”(p.575). Part of his answer was that: “if you volunteer the information yourself, how can you be said to be violating privacy if it’s information about you?” (p.576). The problems arise of course when it’s information about others. But is the volunteered geography ‘system’ set up so that the citizens sensors really know how the data that they produce will be used?

Schuurman, N. (2009). The new Brave New World: Geography, GIS, and the emergence of ubiquitous mapping and data. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 27(4), 571-572.

S_Ram

Posted in 506 | Comments Closed

Living in a Virtual World

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

As I was reading through Richardson’s article, I kept thinking to myself time and time again- why aren’t Virtual Environments and effective tool for learning the layouts of real environments? It stands to reason that if the real environment is reproduced at a digital level, a test subject should be able to gain a similar amount of knowledge about the environment as a person who walked through said environment in real life.

Therefore, as the authors outlined some of the limitations of a VE, I started to brainstorm how an accurate and effective VE could be constructed and displayed. One of the main issues withe using VE as a learning tool was the alignment effect- user of the VE could become disoriented, especially when rising sets of staircases. One potential solution to this conundrum could be the creation of a sort of “immersive” virtual environment, which visually surrounds the user. This could be achieved on a relatively portable scale through the use of some sort of “full experience” headset, which would make it appear as if the user is immersed in the real environment. Overall, the paper raises very though provoking questions about the limitations of Virtual Environments; especially how they are still not a viable substitute to experiencing said environment in real life.

-Victor Manuel

Tags:
Posted in 506, General | Comments Closed

Map memories

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

In their 1999 study, Richardson et al. compared how subjects learn to navigate their environments from maps, navigation, and virtual copies of the environments. They found that people tend to learn more effectively from maps than from virtual environments. The paper itself is thorough and describes in detail the authors’ procedure and findings. I happen to think the final discoveries, however, are not terribly surprising.

I have always thought that some people (such as myself) are naturally “map people” while others are more “trial and error” or experiential learners. While map readers are, according to Richardson et al., heavily dependent on consistent orientation, they are more aware of the greater surroundings and the bigger picture. Being aware of causality, such as “if I turn left, then I will see the elevator at the end of the hall,” enables one to form mental maps and think ahead in the navigation process. Experiential learners, on the other hand, will most likely navigate by landmark in a step-by-step process that is more shortsighted. Additionally, in terms of longer-term memory, I would not be surprised if map readers could, in a sense, recite a navigation process from memory more easily than could an experiential learner. These are just my conjectures, but if Richardson et al. had accurate conclusions, then it is fairly clear that map readers are already at an advantage.

– JMonterey

Tags:, ,
Posted in 506 | Comments Closed

Three Spaces of Spatial Cognition

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

Tversky and Morrison describe how we keep track of 3 different spaces – navigation, the space immediately around the body and the space of body. Linking these three spaces together, they are used concurrently as we interact with the world around us. The authors describe how each space is conceptualized differently in our minds from reference frames, categorically to salient features.

GISystem can easily map based on a hierarchy that is useful for the space of navigation, but less common (in my own exposure at least) is to use a GISystem to map a users immediate surroundings around the body and the space of bodies. Perhaps this is an opportunity to use the 3D modeler or a new geovisualization technique to represent the 3 axes of the body in which we associate objects to it. We usually deal with spatial phenomenon on such a large scale (relative to the body), that I’m curious if the same techniques of data model or data structures currently existing can be applied on a micro scale. Also, given the qualitative nature of spatial cognition data that doesn’t lend itself to columns and rows being able to integrate these unique datasets will a challenge in itself.

In Goodchild’s article, Geographical information science: fifteen years later he notes that GIScience “take two essentially distinct forms: research about GIS that would lead eventually to improvements in the technology, and research with GIS that would exploit the technology in the advancement of science” (2006, pp. 200). Then, spatial cognition may be applicable to both forms. Through developing new ways to display data on multiple scales and dimensions as well as representing spatial data that may not be easily categorized will no doubt contribute to the technology’s improvement. Furthermore, the disciple of cognitive science can exploit the technology of GISystems to further advance their theories and apply new visualization techniques previously unavailable.

-tranv

Goodchild, Michael F. “Geographical information science: fifteen years later.” Classics from IJGIS: twenty years of the International Journal of Geographical Information Science and Systems 2 (2006): 107-133.

Posted in 506 | Comments Closed

Virtual Environment in need of more development for spatial learning

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

In Michael Goodchild’s article “Citizens as Sensors: The World of Volunteered Geography” (2005), he summarizes the pros and cons of VGI, and some of the barriers that stand in the way of true citizen science. The debate over VGI is, in essence, a debate of privileged technically-proficient scientists versus the masses of under-educated (for the purposes of most applications of VGI) earth citizens. While those skilled individuals have the technical abilities to carry out analysis, there is a huge amount of untapped data that is available from citizens themselves. Using this data, however, might lead to a privacy dispute, underrepresentation in some people due to the digital divide, and a lack of accuracy in the data available.

 

While the Web 2.0 has much data to offer, much of it is in new data formats that might not be useable right now in commercial GIS software. It is the revolution that makes VGI possible. Digital divide aside, most people can provide useful information if provided with a clear, considerate, interface that makes them want to volunteer their information. Using the citizens as scientists themselves seems like a viable option, since 7 billion walking around a planet are likely to observe things faster and more accurately than a select group of scientists. However, the way this data is reported, processed, and analyzed is what the dispute is really about. Citizens must be involved in all steps of the process, and some way of ensuring equal representation of all citizens must be established. As Goodchild stresses, VGI has the potential to be a cheap and effective source of information if implemented properly.

 

Pointy McPolygon

 

Posted in 506 | Comments Closed

Spatial Learning: What works now and what might work later

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

Interestingly, in Richardson et al.’s (1999) study on spatial cognition and learning, distinctions were made between how people perceive space on a map, while walking the route themselves, and while walking the route on a virtual tour. Differences were noted between map and navigation methods, as well as between real and virtual environments. No differences were perceived between map and navigation users, leading the authors to believe that maps are a quick and easy way to give orientation of space. However, between real and virtual navigation environments, participants had much poorer spatial learning in the virtual environment. In particular, VE participants had trouble with spatial learning between floors, as opposed to on a flat plane.

 

While VE did not have the best results in this study, that is not to say that they should be abandoned entirely. They bring numerous benefits over real navigation, especially for handicapped people or those who do not have the financial capacity or time to visit some locations. The amount of spatial learning in a VE is surely related to the quality of the VE itself. With better geovisualiation and improved processing ability, the performance of the VE may be improved to the point where it becomes a viable option over a real environment. Currently, VEs are only effective at translation but not rotational updating, however this could change with improved technology.

 

Pointy McPolygon

 

Posted in 506 | Comments Closed

Technology: Changing Spatial Cognition

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

Tversky et al.’s article, “Three Spaces of Spatial Cognition” places human cognition of space in an easy to understand framework of 3 understandings; the space of navigation, the space around the body and the space of the body. In GIScience, it is important to understand how human perceive the world we live in, as it determines how we create the GISystems and how they are used to display and modify geographical data.

The article seems to represent the idea of spatial cognition well from the point of view of psychology, but lacks in how new adaptive systems and digital mediums are modifying the ideas within spatial cognition and how humans see the world. For example in my research, the use of an iPad with 3D maps and real time tracking. The use of this technology has caused me to now perceive the world in a vertical and dynamic manner. To elaborate, before I would look at the world and place objects or places in relation to myself (like in the article), but now I place them in relation to other objects and view them as being at dynamic locations, moving as I move. I like to think of it in the context of a video game where game play maps were once set in a player centric way. However, because technology has changed, the game maps have evolved into 3 dimensional dynamic maps with distances and locations that change with the movement of the player, the other characters, and changes in the game play environment itself (no longer N-S-E-W maps).

I feel that the article would have benefited from more computer scientist and geographer input into how GI programs and geographical education can help, hinder or change the perception and way we see our space and place. Furthermore, the addition of AI research ideas into how robots navigate (maps, gps, image navigation, range finders, etc.) would have provided a better understanding of spatial cognition in the digital world of today and not just a psychology interpretation.

C_N_Cycles

Tags:, ,
Posted in 506 | Comments Closed

VGI and the POWER LAW!!

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

Coleman, Georgiadou, and Labonte (2009) state that VGI causes a “more influential role [to be] assumed by the community” (p. 2). That’s great! But — is this influence level across the playing field of the “produsers” they talk about? Ross Mayfield’s Power Law of Participation says no.

WHERE DO YOU FIT???

WHERE DO YOU FIT???

 

As a produser, we fall somewhere along this graph which indicates our respective influence in the application, according to Mayfield. This Law affirms one of the fundamental characteristics of informational ‘produsage’ outlined in the article: the environment allows for fluid movement of individuals between different roles in the community. You can move along the Power Law graph whenever you want.With this in mind, we must consider who is located in each part for different participatory applications, and whether the produsers comprising the high engagement-collaborative intelligence are a good representation for the application’s purpose. After CGIS, power comes hand-in-hand with thoughts of who is being left behind; who is not being represented by the high engagement community.

—

The article provides a succinct overview of VGI, some of its applications, categories of users and their motivations, and potential data issues. Where does VGI fall short? In a world where collaboration and public participation see increasing popularity, will we be able to solely rely on VGI in the future? True, popularity != credibility — we still need to look at the holes in the maps.

 

-sidewalkballet

Posted in 506, General | Comments Closed

What to Use VGI For?

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

The advent of VGI has brought on a whole set of new issues including but not limited to, the reliability, motivations and frequency of users.  For example, Goodchild outlines that VGI can be known as asserted information, as there is no source of checks and balances or peer-review to ensure that the data is “correct.”  While someone uploading data about a specific phenomenon in their locale may think they are an expert themselves, there is still the potential for errors.  There is also the issue of people purposely sabotaging projects, similar to the way in which people create viruses to spread via the internet.

Nonetheless, VGI has tremendous value, as Goodchild pointed out at the end of the paper.  Personally, I believe that VGI must be evaluated on a case by case basis.  It all depends on what the VGI is being used for and how accurate it needs to be.  With this must come a level of reservation for the person actually using the data.  Because many of us are familiar with Wikipedia, I will use that as an example.  I use Wikipedia when I am looking for general information on a topic that will not necessarily have determential effects if it is incorrect, for example the history of a rock band I like.  I will not, however, use Wikipedia as a source of in depth analysis on an academic subject that I will be writing a paper on, such as Location Based Services.  It is in this manner that I think VGI needs to be evaluated.  If the information being gathered needs to be of utmost accuracy, take the necessary steps to ensure that contributors have the necessary credentials.  If not, let VGI run wild and see what kind of results you get!

-Geogman15

 

Tags:
Posted in 506 | Comments Closed

Spatial Cognition and Personal Preference

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

The study done by Richardson et al. gives us a very interesting look into the various ways individuals can conceive and understand a certain space.  However, problems tend to arise when trying to develop a solid understanding of the exact differences between direct learning, map learning and Virtual Environment learning.  It was mentioned that there are direct contradictions between this study and past studies, as well as among those past studies.

While it may not explain all the differences, I believe that personal preference plays a huge role in the effectiveness of using a VE to understand a space versus a map or directly walking through the area.  Thus, our ability to spatially comprehend a space, whether it is a series of halls or an entire city block depends heavily on what sort of sources of information we prefer over others.  While reading the paper, I thought of a similarity between this study and how we learn in a classroom.  It is obvious that all people do not like to learn concepts in the same way.  That is, some people prefer to learn by doing, while others prefer to have something explained to them in a very concise and clear manner.  I believe that this sort of preferential learning can be extended to these concepts of spatial cognition.  As VE becomes more advanced and ubiquitous, I think that some people will still find it difficult to use it as a means of learning about a place and would rather look at a bird’s-eye-view map to understand the space.  Others will tend to reject the “antiquated” notion of maps and prefer to virtually explore somewhere before they actually go there.   Regardless, I am very excited to see how far the use of VE goes in terms of understanding an area before we go there.  Will we get to the point where we could essentially “place” ourselves on any point on the Earth and explore it as if we are there?   Instead of a map of campus, will students be able to download a VE of the building they will spend the most time in and have a walkthrough to their classrooms and respective libraries?  All this could get very interesting within the next couple decades.

-Geogman15

 

 

Tags:
Posted in 506 | Comments Closed

Maps vs Reality vs Virtual Reality

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

To be very honest, I found the paper by Richardson et. al to be one of the more interesting papers that I have read. The comparisons that they make are intriguing and the results are still more surprising.

I found the experiment designed by the researchers to be very robust. Hence, the results of the experiment can be accepted to be quite accurate. The question that the results raised in my mind was about the effects that augmented reality systems have on our spatial cognition abilities. Considering GPS navigator to be an augmented reality system, does it mean that we are becoming less adept at navigating naturally because we rely on the GPS navigator? Has anyone conducted research to understand the effect GPS navigation systems have on an individual’s spatial cognition abilities? How accurately and efficiently can regular GPS navigator users find out the route between two places compared to non-navigator users?

-Dipto Sarkar

 

Tags:
Posted in 506, geographic information systems | Comments Closed

Humans as Sensors

Monday, February 25th, 2013

The paper by Goodchild provides an overview of the various enabling factors that have led to the success of VGIS. I found the concept of “Humans as sensors” to be particularly interesting. I feel that this is has been the primary driving force behind VGIS services like Wikimapia, Openstreet Maps and even Google Maps. When maps started becoming digital, one of the primary challenges was to gather enough data to represent an area at different scales. This problem was not particularly profound in case of paper maps which were produced at certain discrete scales only. To gather enough data for digital maps, mass public participation became inevitable. Collecting so much data at different granularity levels was made possible only because people with varying degree of knowledge about an area started to contribute to services like OpenStreet Maps; overtime generating enough information to provide a fairly complete “patchwork”. Despite all the public effort, Google Maps for India have been criticized to be incomplete, incorrect and even non-existent in certain cases. As a response, Google has organised an event called Mapathon 2013 (from 12th of February 2013 to the 25th of March 2013) in India. The event aims to incentivise the process of adding geographic information to Google Maps by giving out attractive prices to the top editors.

When it comes to the use of VGIS in case of emergency or disaster situations, where traditional data collection can become too slow to be useful, Ushahidi deserves special mention. “Ushahidi (Swahili for “testimony” or “witness”) created a website (http://legacy.ushahidi.com) in the aftermath of Kenya’s disputed 2007 presidential election that collected eyewitness reports of violence sent in by email and text-message and placed them on a Google Maps map” (Wikipedia). A visit to the Wikipedia entry for Ushahidi reveals several crisis situations where similar solutions based on the Ushahidi platform proved to be helpful. I also encourage a visit to the Ushahidi website (http://www.ushahidi.com/) to understand the wide range of technological support that it provides to build crisis/disaster mapping portals.

– Dipto Sarkar

Posted in 506, geographic information systems | Comments Closed

The future of critical GIS

Friday, February 22nd, 2013

It seems to a recurring theme in many GIScience papers that the topic in question lacks a distinct identity or field of study, and critical GIS is no exception. Who is interested in critical GIS? Well, most people should be… however as O’Sullivan points out in his paper on critical geography and GIS, not many people have a full understanding of this topic. GIS analysts lack geographic social theory, and human geographers may lack technical skills to analyze things.

 

In geography, we are all taught of the power of maps, although I doubt many of us (atleast in undergrad) fully grasp what this means. Maps lie. There is a reason there is a user in GIS, and that part of that reason involves having the flexible to display things as you wish. This is a double edged sword; while the flexibility is good for map making, it also allows for people to purposefully mislead and lie to the people the map is designed for. Not only is the user involved in making display decisions, but also in the development of the software, where a feminist geographer might argue has been an entirely one-sided endeavor.

 

After reading about critical geography, I am somewhat more confused and skeptical about everything than when I started. I’m not entirely sure this is a good thing, because too much skepticism leads to indecision. While it’s good to be aware of matters affecting the quality of what we take for granted, the role of a ‘critical geographer’ remains foggy to me. The review of this topic shows that we are aware of all of these issues, but without some sort of centralized critical geographer regime ruling over all software and data it seems like things will remain heading in the same direction.

 

Pointy McPolygon

 

Posted in 506 | Comments Closed

Advances in Augmented Reality – Where does it end?

Friday, February 22nd, 2013

Augmented reality supplements reality with computer technology. This is not to be confused with augmented virtuality or a virtual environment, where the ‘reality’ aspect is no longer the main focus of the interface. In their article on the recent advances in augmented reality, Azuma et al. point out that one of the issues with the current interface is that it lacks the resolution, extent, brightness and contrast to blend the real with the virtual. If the technology improves, this problem in the display may go away, but am I the only one who is slightly uncomfortable with this notion? I’ll elaborate…

 

I am pro augmented reality because it can add services and information to supplement what we see and what we know. Having improved environmental sensing and human computer interaction can vastly improve this. However, I feel uncomfortable looking at an image where I can no longer tell what is real and what isn’t . I am perfectly fine with an imperfect display. This speaks to the aspect of social acceptance in the Azuma et al. paper. While the other aspects of the technology may need to improve in order to fine-tune augmented reality, I think that display technologies have come far enough. And I feel like a grandfather for saying it…

 

Pointy McPolygon

 

Posted in 506 | Comments Closed

Explorations in the Use of Augmented Reality for Geographic Visualization

Thursday, February 21st, 2013

There is a small but significant difference that could make augmented reality boom or bust when it comes to GIS. It is the same problem that architects and engineers once faced as well. Only with the advent of computers and monitors were they able to rest their neck and sit down in a chair instead of hunching over a drafting board all day. GIS, for the most part, wasn’t subjected to such a fate.

Augmented reality could change that. Even now, similar displays are available to the public in shopping malls and showrooms, using the same table top, infrared projector method outlined in the article. What sets the visitors apart from GIS users is that they only use it for a couple of minutes at a time. As any GIS user knows, geospatial analysis rarely takes a short amount of time.

In light of that, augmented reality will need to make the jump from top-down to heads-up display before it makes significant inroads into the industry.

What part of the methodology that left something to be desired was the need for the user to place a flash card down on each section of the table that they wanted to view supplementary information at. Why not just display all the data at once? If it’s a matter of computing power, that is a simple fix. If, however, it is intrinsic to the software framework, it would greatly benefit the project if, instead of viewing a small section of a large map, the exocentric viewpoint was zoomed in to a smaller…bigger(?) scale so the data took up the extent of the display. After all, whens the last time you squinted at a map of the island of Montreal when trying to figure out how far your house is from the nearest depanneur.

AMac

Tags:,
Posted in 506, General | Comments Closed

AR: The issues left behind

Thursday, February 21st, 2013

Hedley’s article, although a great summary of the progress made in AR does not truly convey the issues of use. One of the biggest down falls for AR, currently, is that sensory feedback to the user is lacking. Although, a lot has been done to try and get input to and from the user (the creation of mice and touch screens; Both Steve Jobs inventions) that combine and provide physical (touch of tool), auditory (clicks), visual (screen illumination), nothing is 100% satisfactory. The “Holodeck” from Star Trek is an example of how feedbacks entertain all senses and provide a full range natural feedback; i.e. you can physical feel the change, hear the change, see the change, and smell the change.

Ipad screens and Microsoft connect modules may provide a link to the computer and bridge the gap in what is reality and how we can understand our surroundings, but lack that basic human need for satisfaction of a response. To elaborate even if physical objects can be manipulated to create change in the presented reality they are not perfect. The objects that are used are generic, such as balls or cubes, and do not provide a universal design for all settings or sensations. Basically, the texture of what is viewed is not necessarily the same as the object being manipulated. To correct for this an infinite amount of objects would have to be stored in order to represent the same object in reality and within an AR system. One solution I believe to this problem may be the use of non-Newtonian or electromagnetic fluids feedback mechanisms that can be altered to many states and textures.

Finally, Hedley’s article seems a little out of date as 3D no longer requires glasses and tough screen interfaces are leaps above what is discussed (Thanks to Apple’s and Steve Jobs’ push for natural interfaces). As a last note, I feel there is also a lack of discussion on digital representation of images in AR and how they can be too cartoony or not real enough.

C_N_Cycles

Tags:, ,
Posted in 506 | 1 Comment »

Critical GIS: Ethics, a Ghost of the Past

Thursday, February 21st, 2013

Robert Lake’s article “Planning and applied geography…” take the idea to have transcending ethics between field to the extreme. I believe that the type of ethics, or extent, is unique to a field of study and common and should not be pushed into areas where grey zones outnumber the black and white. This article seems to try and force the idea of practitioners as absent minded of ethics, void of the knowledge of technology’s impact on society. Maybe it is my “laissez-faire” attitude or ideals of “I do not care what you believe in, but just do not push it on me ” that is speaking, but I do not believe practitioners have forgotten ethics and their applicability to structuring research in the digital realm. I would argue that it is how the ethics are applied that has changed and is causing this misunderstanding. For instance equal access to GIS data is not truly flawed, as inferred by Lake, as this data can be altered by user and re-published as a modified version, i.e. multiple users can use the data and modify it for themselves to create multiple ethical data sets, that correspond to the user’s ideals and background.

When Lake talks about a means to an end, this is a theoretically flawed assumption, because any good researcher or user of GIS knows that there is no end only a variable set of conclusions that lead to more elaboration of data and a refinement of GIS systems. I personally consider GIS a dynamic tool for representing geographical data in a changing world. Furthermore is it not the idea to show the variety of data from differing backgrounds during analysis to create a mosaic of geographic data that can lead to new discoveries.

The way this article is written and the way GIS and the application of ethical thought are paired, seems disconnected to reality. To clarify the Ethical ideas that Lake speaks of are the old way, a ghost of past thought. Ethics, I believe are considered in a new way, a way that was never considered to older generations of researchers at the time. Ethics of how GIS is used is more loose today, as a global society with a million views cannot be held to the archaic structures of Freudian dynamics of how research is done and how the tools are used.

C_N_Cycles

Tags:, ,
Posted in 506, General | Comments Closed

Ontology in Augmented Reality

Thursday, February 21st, 2013

Reading through the paper by Azuma I could not help but get a little excited about all the sorts of AR applications we will see within as little as 5-10 years.  I envision video games that allow the gamer to feel like they are directly in and interacting with an environment by projecting it in their house.  I also see travelers wearing glasses and getting a tour of a foreign city without the help of a guide.  However, there are obviously a few limitations before Augmented Reality takes these jumps.  The one I want to focus on is User Interface Limitations.

This essentially comes down to how to display and allow interaction with the massive amounts of data that we have access to.  The amount of information that we could potentially display on a pair of glasses is astronomical in my mind.  But, how do we go about deciding what information to display, and how to display it?  To me, this comes down to an individual’s ontology of space.  Take my previous tour guide example; one person may want to know where all the museums in a city are while another would prefer to have the best bars in the area.  This is a bit of a trivial example, however it highlights how it may become a bit difficult to take this amazing technology and make it equally useful for everyone.  While this is an issue today, I agree with the paper in that there will likely be “significant growth” in the research of these problems.  It is now a matter of putting in the time, effort and money into improving the ubiquitous use of these AR systems.  With the great potential for business growth (e.g.), I do not see this being a problem.

-Geogman15

 

Tags:
Posted in 506, General | Comments Closed

Privacy vs. Efficiency in GIScience

Thursday, February 21st, 2013

O’Sullivan brings up three very important points when considering the direction of critical GIScience.  The one that struck home for me was the subjects of privacy, access and ethics.  It is hard to argue against Curry’s point, brought up by O’Sullivan, that the increasing availability of “spatial data forces us to reconceptualize privacy and associated ethical codes” (O’Sullivan, 2006:786).  With millions of people around the world constantly “sharing” their locational information via social networking sites such as Twitter or Facebook, it is easy to see that such information is no longer private.  The reconceptualization of privacy includes the fact that when something is shared on the internet, there is potential for that information becoming accessible to those other than the intended “target.”  We thus need to realize how easy it may be for locational information such as our home or school to essentially become public.  As a society, do we accept the fact that acquaintances (sometimes real, sometimes over the internet), will now know more about us than ever?  If not, how do we use these new applications in a way that respects individuals’ level of privacy while still allowing us to become more connected?

The traffic management is a great example of weighing privacy and increased connection.  Obviously, with increased surveillance, we will be able to detect traffic patterns better, allowing people to travel more efficiently.  However, everyone may not be comfortable with such surveillance, even if it does make their commute easier.  So, this is where the social theory of GIS meets the tool that is GIS.  We can come up with hundreds of ways to track human activity to allow us to travel more efficiently, but there may be a level at which people in a society are no longer comfortable with their location being readily available.  Furthermore, who has the right to use this information?  Is it the private businesses looking to create a useful traffic application, or is the government the only institution that should be able to use this data? It is here where critical GIS comes into play, as a way to evaluate the way different societies value privacy versus efficiency.  Again, this will be different across cultures, communities and individuals.  These issues make the application of GIS inherently tricky, as it is not just a tool that can be used objectively.

-Geogman15

 

Tags:
Posted in 506, General | Comments Closed

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »