Via The Atlantic
-----
Behind every Google Map, there is a much more complex map that's the
key to your queries but hidden from your view. The deep map contains the
logic of places: their no-left-turns and freeway on-ramps, speed limits
and traffic conditions. This is the data that you're drawing from when
you ask Google to navigate you from point A to point B -- and last week,
Google showed me the internal map and demonstrated how it was built.
It's the first time the company has let anyone watch how the project it
calls GT, or "Ground Truth," actually works.
Google opened up at a
key moment in its evolution. The company began as an online search
company that made money almost exclusively from selling ads based on
what you were querying for. But then the mobile world exploded. Where you're searching from has become almost as important as what
you're searching for. Google responded by creating an operating system,
brand, and ecosystem in Android that has become the only significant
rival to Apple's iOS.
And for good reason. If Google's mission is
to organize all the world's information, the most important challenge --
far larger than indexing the web -- is to take the world's physical
information and make it accessible and useful.
"If you look at the
offline world, the real world in which we live, that information is not
entirely online," Manik Gupta, the senior product manager for Google
Maps, told me. "Increasingly as we go about our lives, we are trying to
bridge that gap between what we see in the real world and [the online
world], and Maps really plays that part."
This is not just a
theoretical concern. Mapping systems matter on phones precisely because
they are the interface between the offline and online worlds. If you're
at all like me, you use mapping more than any other application except
for the communications suite (phone, email, social networks, and text
messaging).
Google is locked in a battle with the world's largest
company, Apple, about who will control the future of mobile phones.
Whereas Apple's strengths are in product design, supply chain
management, and retail marketing, Google's most obvious realm of
competitive advantage is in information. Geo data -- and the apps built
to use it -- are where Google can win just by being Google. That didn't
matter on previous generations of iPhones because they used Google Maps,
but now Apple's created its own service. How the two operating systems
incorporate geo data and present it to users could become a key
battleground in the phone wars.
But that would entail actually building a better map.
***
The office where Google has been building the best representation of
the world is not a remarkable place. It has all the free food, ping
pong, and Google Maps-inspired Christoph Niemann cartoons that you'd expect, but it's still a low-slung office building just off the 101 in Mountain View in the burbs.
I
was slated to meet with Gupta and the engineering ringleader on his
team, former NASA engineer Michael Weiss-Malik, who'd spent his 20
percent time working on Google Mars, and Nick Volmar, an "operator" who
actually massages map data.
"So you want to make a map," Weiss-Malik tells me as we sit down in
front of a massive monitor. "There are a couple of steps. You acquire
data through partners. You do a bunch of engineering on that data to get
it into the right format and conflate it with other sources of data,
and then you do a bunch of operations, which is what this tool is about,
to hand massage the data. And out the other end pops something that is
higher quality than the sum of its parts."
This is what they started out with, the TIGER data from the US Census Bureau (though the base layer could and does come from a variety of sources in different countries).
On first inspection, this data looks great. The roads look like they
are all there and you've got the freeways differentiated. This is a good
map to the untrained eye. But let's look closer. There are issues where
the digital data does not match the physical world. I've circled a few
obvious ones below.

And
that's just from comparing the map to the satellite imagery. But there
are also a variety of other tools at Google's disposal. One is bringing
in data from other sources, say the US Geological Survey. But Google's
Ground Truthers can also bring another exclusive asset to bear on the
maps problem: the Street View cars' tracks and imagery. In keeping with
Google's more-data-is-better-data mantra, the maps team, largely driven
by Street View, is publishing more imagery data every two weeks than
Google possessed total in 2006.*
Let's step
back a tiny bit to recall with wonderment the idea that a single company
decided to drive cars with custom cameras over every road they could
access. Google is up to five million miles driven now. Each drive
generates two kinds of really useful data for mapping. One is the actual
tracks the cars have taken; these are proof-positive that certain
routes can be taken. The other are all the photos. And what's
significant about the photographs in Street View is that Google can run
algorithms that extract the traffic signs and can even paste them onto
the deep map within their Atlas tool. So, for a particularly complicated
intersection like this one in downtown San Francisco, that could look
like this:

Google
Street View wasn't built to create maps like this, but the geo team
quickly realized that computer vision could get them incredible data for
ground truthing their maps. Not to detour too much, but what you see
above is just the beginning of how Google is going to use Street View
imagery. Think of them as the early web crawlers (remember those?) going
out in the world, looking for the words on pages. That's what Street
View is doing. One of its first uses is finding street signs (and
addresses) so that Google's maps can better understand the logic of
human transportation systems. But as computer vision and OCR improve,
any word that is visible from a road will become a part of Google's
index of the physical world.
Later in the day, Google Maps
VP Brian McClendon put it like this: "We can actually organize the
world's physical written information if we can OCR it and place it,"
McClendon said. "We use that to create our maps right now by extracting
street names and addresses, but there is a lot more there."
More
like what? "We already have what we call 'view codes' for 6 million
businesses and 20 million addresses, where we know exactly what we're
looking at," McClendon continued. "We're able to use logo matching and
find out where are the Kentucky Fried Chicken signs ... We're able to
identify and make a semantic understanding of all the pixels we've
acquired. That's fundamental to what we do."
For now, though, computer vision transforming Street View images
directly into geo-understanding remains in the future. The best way to
figure out if you can make a left turn at a particular intersection is
still to have a person look at a sign -- whether that's a human driving
or a human looking at an image generated by a Street View car.
There is an analogy to be made to one of Google's other impressive
projects: Google Translate. What looks like machine intelligence is
actually only a recombination of human intelligence. Translate relies on
massive bodies of text that have been translated into different
languages by humans; it then is able to extract words and phrases that
match up. The algorithms are not actually that complex, but they work
because of the massive amounts of data (i.e. human intelligence) that go
into the task on the front end.
Google Maps has executed a similar operation. Humans are coding every
bit of the logic of the road onto a representation of the world so that
computers can simply duplicate (infinitely, instantly) the judgments
that a person already made.
This reality is incarnated in Nick Volmar, the operator who has been
showing off Atlas while Weiss-Malik and Gupta explain it. He probably
uses twenty-five keyboard shortcuts switching between types of data on
the map and he shows the kind of twitchy speed that I associate with
long-time designers working with Adobe products or professional
Starcraft players. Volmar has clearly spent thousands of hours working
with this data. Weiss-Malik told me that it takes hundreds of operators
to map a country. (Rumor has it many of these people work in the Bangalore office, out of which Gupta was promoted.)
The
sheer amount of human effort that goes into Google's maps is just
mind-boggling. Every road that you see slightly askew in the top image
has been hand-massaged by a human. The most telling moment for me came
when we looked at couple of the several thousand user reports of
problems with Google Maps that come in every day. The Geo team tries to
address the majority of fixable problems within minutes. One complaint
reported that Google did not show a new roundabout that had been built
in a rural part of the country. The satellite imagery did not show the
change, but a Street View car had recently driven down the street and
its tracks showed the new road perfectly.
Volmar began to fix the
map, quickly drawing the new road and connecting it to the existing
infrastructure. In his haste (and perhaps with the added pressure of
three people watching his every move), he did not draw a perfect circle
of points. Weiss-Malik and I detoured into another conversation for a
couple of minutes. By the time I looked back at the screen, Volmar had
redrawn the circle with perfect precision and upgraded a few other
things while he was at it. The actions were impressively automatic. This
is an operation that promotes perfectionism.
And that's how you get your maps to look this this:

Some
details are worth pointing out. In the top at the center, trails have
been mapped out and coded as places for walking. All the parking lots
have been mapped out. All the little roads, say, to the left of the
small dirt patch on the right, have also been coded. Several of the
actual buildings have been outlined. Down at the bottom left, a road has
been marked as a no-go. At each and every intersection, there are
arrows that delineate precisely where cars can and cannot turn.
Now
imagine doing this for every tile on Google's map in the United States
and 30 other countries over the last four years. Every roundabout
perfectly circular, every intersection with the correct logic. Every new
development. Every one-way street. This is a task of a nearly
unimaginable scale. This is not something you can put together with a
few dozen smart engineers.
I came away
convinced that the geographic data Google has assembled is not likely to
be matched by any other company. The secret to this success isn't, as
you might expect, Google's facility with data, but rather its
willingness to commit humans to combining and cleaning data about the
physical world. Google's map offerings build in the human intelligence
on the front end, and that's what allows its computers to tell you the
best route from San Francisco to Boston.
***
It's
probably better not to think of Google Maps as a thing like a paper
map. Geographic information systems represent a jump from paper maps
like the abacus to the computer. "I honestly think we're seeing a more
profound change, for map-making, than the switch from manuscript to
print in the Renaissance," University of London cartographic historian
Jerry Brotton told the Sydney Morning Herald. "That was huge. But this is bigger."
The
maps we used to keep folded in our glove compartments were a collection
of lines and shapes that we overlaid with human intelligence. Now, as
we've seen, a map is a collection of lines and shapes with Nick Volmar's
(and hundreds of others') intelligence encoded within.
It's common when we discuss the future of maps to reference
the Borgesian dream of a 1:1 map of the entire world. It seems like a
ridiculous notion that we would need a complete representation of the
world when we already have the world itself. But to take scholar Nathan
Jurgenson's conception of augmented reality seriously, we would have to
believe that every physical space is, in his words, "interpenetrated"
with information. All physical spaces already are also informational
spaces. We humans all hold a Borgesian map in our heads of the places we
know and we use it to navigate and compute physical space. Google's
strategy is to bring all our mental maps together and process them into
accessible, useful forms.
Their MapMaker product makes that
ambition clear. Project managed by Gupta during his time in India, it's
the "bottom up" version of Ground Truth. It's a publicly accessible way
to edit Google Maps by adding landmarks and data about your piece of the
world. It's a way of sucking data out of human brains and onto the
Internet. And it's a lot like Google's open competitor, Open Street Map, which has proven that it, too, can harness the crowd's intelligence.
As
we slip and slide into a world where our augmented reality is
increasingly visible to us off and online, Google's geographic data may
become its most valuable asset. Not solely because of this data alone,
but because location data makes everything else Google does and knows
more valuable.
Or as my friend and sci-fi novelist
Robin Sloan put it to me, "I maintain that this is Google's core asset.
In 50 years, Google will be the self-driving car company (powered by
this deep map of the world) and, oh, P.S. they still have a search
engine somewhere."
Of course, they will always need one more piece of geographic
information to make all this effort worthwhile: You. Where you are, that
is. Your location is the current that makes Google's giant geodata
machine run. They've built this whole playground as an elaborate lure
for you. As good and smart and useful as it is, good luck resisting
taking the bait.
* Due to a
transcription error, an earlier version of this story stated that Google
published 20PB of imagery data every two weeks.