Why? Because American spies are better than Chinese spies? 
4 Likes
Facebookâs interest in the imagery and data is specifically for mapping purposes and especially for contributing to OpenStreetMap. The main metadata of interest is the location of that image, the time it was taken, and the make and model of the camera. This is all information that Mapillary has collected and utilised to build better tools.
The only difference now is that Facebook is actively reliant upon and improving OpenStreetMap. This means more emphasis on building tools and utilising imagery and data that support this effort.
3 Likes
I see so many problems with OSM that I would not mind if FB started a fresh map.
At least you get to fix things quickly in OSM. Took me years to get blatant errors fixed in Google maps!
2 Likes
What are the problems you see? I think itâs a marvelous project.
3 Likes
Excuse me? Maps should be public domain and not the âpropertyâ of one company anywhere. Example, Google shows different maps in different countryâs to not upset their (potential) customers/advertisers/usersâŚ:
Things like that are simply horrid, seated one the simple principle: donât offend, make money. The truth isnât always easy, donât hide from it, face it.
Thank you @eneerhut for finally someone from Mapillary joining the conversation on this important topic. 
Because many things are still unclear about what the Mapillary-Facebook merger means for the data and users.
Facebookâs interest in the imagery and data is specifically for mapping purposes and especially for contributing to OpenStreetMap. The main metadata of interest is the location of that image, the time it was taken, and the make and model of the camera. This is all information that Mapillary has collected and utilised to build better tools.
So you say. However, we do not know nor can be sure at this point in time that Facebook is not going to use the raw data for any other purposes than âspecifically for mappingâ some time in the future.
The only difference now is that Facebook is actively reliant upon and improving OpenStreetMap. This means more emphasis on building tools and utilising imagery and data that support this effort.
In fact, this is not true. Facebook could have used the data on Mapillary to contribute to OpenStreetMap without the acquisition of Mapillary, just like any other OpenStreetMap contributor and regardless of the fact what stake OpenStreetMap might have for Facebook. So, your statement is inconsistent. Facebook could have just licensed the data if they felt or knew that there was something they could not do with the data for mapping purposes. In that case, a major licensee like Facebook would have definitely helped with Mapillaryâs business model and would have also kept the balance of stake holders, especially for those with no voting power on any board of directors, namely community members and contributors.
Facebook could have also licensed the machine learning technology from Mapillary and developed it further in a primer partnership. Instead, what we got is the âempire firing the Death Star on a pacifist peaceful planetâ. Or, since Mapillary wasnât passive either in this deal, we maybe got more something like âjoining Sauron out of madnessâ.
Imho the communityâs major concern with Facebook is that Facebook is simply put unfit to be a good custodian of the data on Mapillary, or rather any data for that matter. Mapillary could/should have been that good custodian and a reliable gate keeper as to for what purpose the crowed sourced data should have been licensed. Now, none of this can happen anymore. Because with Mapillaryâs unconsidered and single handed action to merge with Facebook, all the trust which may have existed in the community for Mapillary being a good custodian of the data, has been vaporized. In other words, Mapillary has disproved itself to be a good custodian. All it took for Mapillary was some number X of 
to throw all of this trust overboard. So, the situation is even worse than most people perhaps realize; personally, I see little to no way for Mapillary/Facebook to restore this trust now.
4 Likes
I see so many problems with OSM that I would not mind if FB started a fresh map.
There is no issue with OpenStreetMap and Facebook. They are a valid contributor, just like any other. And, if you look closely at the ODbL it is extremely permissive. You are allowed to use OpenStreetMap data to build even weapons, i.e. automated drones, cruise missiles, targeting systems, layout mine fields, and the like!
2 Likes
@eneerhut, thank you for responding (quickly)!
Normally I would send personal messages with âsensitive subjectsâ, but I think it is important others can read along. I hope It helps to get (more) people âon the same pageâ.
Reading your response and the press release of @jesolem again I gather that FB sees value in maps. In trying to understand why, I read that good maps have value for their marketplace platform and I found this video:
That I did not know, that is a way where FB can actually really help. Up until now I have had the distinct impression that FB emphasizes extremes and therefore tends to devide more then it unites. Iâm actually impressed that they found a way where FB can genuinely âdo goodâ.
OK, thus, FB sees the benefits of improving maps and see the (greater) value in using & improving OSM, good.
In that goal FB sees the benefits in partnering up with Mapillary⌠ok, I tend to understand that. But FB âboughtâ Mapillary, did they not? I have a bunch of questions, but I think I can sum up a load of detail questions by just one word: privacy
My main concern is that I do not want, in any case, ever, what so ever, that imagery I entrust to Mapillary gets abused for face recognition or car/licence plate detection & recognition etc⌠Combine this with the beyond horrible idea of the combination with time & locationâŚ
I understand that Mapillary needs to keep the original image on file in the case of erroneous blurs, I think that I need to hear/read that Mapillary wil not, in no case, ever, with the only exception of a court order share an original image.
The imagery I uploaded contains a face or a license plate here and there. This can not always be avoided. I trusted Mapillary blurring them out correctly and trust Mapillary not (ab)using this data. Now, with this development with FB I read your terms again:
2.2: You hereby waive any moral [âŚ] rights you may have (including [âŚ] integrity, privacy, [âŚ]) in your Content that would otherwise preclude us from [âŚ] using, copying or distributing, in accordance with these Terms, your Content.
2.4: You agree not to upload [âŚ] infringement of the intellectual property [âŚ] or violation of a right of privacy [âŚ] or divulges other peopleâs private or personally identifiable information without their express authorization and permission
When I read the text snippets above, FB (and Mapillary) could do exactly what I donât want and when someone takes legal action I, the uploader of the image, am the one thatâs screwed?
I searched your terms for a part where it states that any personally identifiable sections of uploaded images are obscured/blurred out to safeguard privacy to the best of the ability of Mapillary, but that Mapillary can not be held accountable⌠or something to that scope⌠but I could not find it.
As I wrote earlier I trusted Mapillary not to misuse my additions to the Mapillary project. The reputation of FB is not as goed as that of Mapillary⌠afaik⌠Is there anything you can devulge cencerning this?
2 Likes
Thanks for the detailed reaction, I agree a lot with your reactions and feelings.
Here are a few of my thoughts after reading your reaction:
To be honest, I intensely dislike that âFacebook Data for Goodâ video. What Facebook is showing there is their ambition to drag both victims and helpers away from already available, often free and open, resources and instead lock them into their services. Every time they mention âFacebook mapsâ in that video, they are actually talking about OpenStreetMap with their (thin) Facebook skin applied over it. I donât know if you are familiar with the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (https://www.hotosm.org/), they have long been providing free and open mapping data âfor goodâ in partnership with organisations like the Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders.
As far as privacy is concerned, Facebook and Mapillary are both bound by the same laws (and have the same freedom) in this respect. Yes, you as an uploader are (and have always been) responsible for following the local laws in what you upload. However, with regard to masking license plates and faces, the general laws there are concerned with hosting/publishing of information (that is, Mapillary is responsible), not if you took a photos of it and/or stored that photo somewhere. However, if for example you took a photo of a state secret and uploaded that to Mapillary, then you could well be held responsible.
Reputation and trust are of course very important emotional factors, but I donât think they make much difference in actuality. Mapillary could well be doing much worse things than Facebook has done, but gotten away with it unnoticed because they are a much smaller company without all the public scrutiny.
2 Likes
I feel it is important to clarify that HOT is great at attracting OSM contributors and motivating them. We are still talking about OSM data here.
Similar as it wouldnât be good for Facebook to grab all credit for OSM data, it wouldnât be good for HOT to do so.
1 Like
@eesger Thank you for your hint at Facebookâs involvement in OpenStreetMap.
Facebook Data for Good
This title itself is very telling of Facebookâs mindset and the culture prevalent in this corporation. Because if you take a step back and look at the whole picture, this means that usually Facebook data is used for bad. So, they are well aware that they are doing bad stuff with the data they collect on their users (and others) in everyday business. And apparently, what they are trying to do with that âFacebook Data for Goodâ initiative, is to free their conscience and tell the public: Hey look, with the data we have collected, we do not only do bad stuff but also little bit of good stuff too! This is like if the mafia was supporting charities with blood money.
The problem they have is that their business model is twisted and malicious in the first place. So, they try hard to grasp any pseudo plausible explanation why they should carry on with it. Businesses, data, and basically anything should always be used for good only, and not just occasionally. Doing bad should be, if ever, a misstep only, unintentional. You should also try to fix your mistakes or missteps. However, they are not inclined nor willing to fix their business model. Instead, they are covering the existing bad business model with a few good examples, which in the end can still serve their initial bad business model. This is indeed twisted.
2 Likes
Since many community members are, to put it mildly, displeased with the current situation with Mapillary and Facebook, I thought I might offer a possible solution to this problem. Unless, Facebook considers the current situation no problem at all, then all of the following is rendered mute. Anyhow, I still hope that Facebook might have some sort of decency in their heart. And, if this is not the case, then at least I hope that Facebook finally realizes how badly damaged their reputation is, and that bad reputation is bad for business.
Imho, Mapillary could be transformed into a foundation, similar to how portions of Netscape have been transformed into the Mozilla Foundation. More specifically, data acquisition, data storage, data processing, data extraction, and serving would be run by a Mapillary Foundation. Intellectual property, that is technology, licenses, patents, etc. plus research and development would remain under the Facebook umbrella. The Mapillary Foundation would be granted a free of charge exclusive license to use the IP from former Mapillaryâs R&D division. Facebook, and (like) any other imagery licensee would have access to blurred, already publicly available imagery only. The Mapillary Foundation would provide Facebookâs Mapillary R&D with non-imagery crowed sourced data, like blurs, verifications, etc. based on request. The request would have to be reviewed and approved by a data privacy protection committee prior to implementation (on Mapillary Foundationâs side). The committee would consist of members of the contributor community, permanent members of the Mapillary Foundation, and sponsorâs representatives (initially probably Facebook). There would also need to be a Mapillary Foundation steering committee but this is a topic of its own.
In the long run, a Mapillary Foundation could be integrated into or fused with the OpenStreetMap Foundation.
The Mapillary Foundation would still (have to) be mainly sponsored by Facebook. At first glance, this may look a bit unfair but since all of Mapillaryâs operations are currently paid by Facebook, there would not be any additional burden for Facebook and also nothing more than Facebook has already committed to going forward. In the long run, other sponsors and donors could and should be found too. I am sure that organizations and individuals do exist which have a vested interest in what the Mapillary Foundation would have to offer and would also be ready to sponsor its mission.
There is still much more that is required for this idea to work, like drafting a charter etc. but this should suffice for the moment.
I am aware that this is just dreaming but those who do not dream do not reach the stars. I am sure there is a way, although I know too little to make any rational feasibility judgment. I still hope.
2 Likes
Without further information from Mapillary or Facebook there is simply not enough information to know in what part privacy was a subject in the takeoverâŚ
Without dialogue the conversation ends before it startsâŚ
its (too) quiet from both parties
In the meantime
1 Like
I heard that the number is closer to 100.000 now
Ouch. It dawned on me that with 8 million images you were in the 8th spot worldwide.
Thatâs a big loss of unique imagery - nobody can go back in time and capture that.
Perhaps more sad is that Mapillary has all gone silent, and nobody even tried to discuss your concerns.
Well, if someone considers removing his/her own imagery after Mapillary acquisition, maybe you could at least consider transferring your imagery to OSC first?
There is a great transfer tool available, works like a charm, no need to leave your computer up and running, takes 5 minutes to set things up and all the rest will be done on the server side.
http://mapillary.trydiscourse.com/t/mapillary-openstreetcam-synchronization-tool/4246
1 Like
Not that I am reading the entire thread⌠Just received a stack of messages from the Facebook Community Bot about mapillary_tools github pull requests now needing to sign a Contributor License Agreement.
I havent made a pull request. I just got to see all of them⌠(sigh)
Me too, long ago I did a pull request for my Create BookmarkletToGoogleMaps which was never accepted, as far as I understand.