OpenStreetMap Is in Trouble
This post seems half right, half wrong.<p>Wrong that OSM should be a service provider and not a database - I think it should be a database, and corporations are good for OSM. The post calls for OSM to essentially become Mapbox. It's insanely expensive to be Mapbox, and Mapzen just failed trying to be a less corporate version of Mapbox. And then the usage policy part of the article is moot or at least not that consequential if you don't believe OSM should be a service provider.<p>Right: Moderation tools need to be created/fixed. New mappers need to be encouraged/onboarded better. Vandalism is a problem. OSMF culture is toxic. Hidden gatekeepers are toxic. Imports need to be supported. Bots need to be enabled, and we need to consider people who contribute code/tech/imports first class OSM contributors and not just glorify the individual mapper.<p>Probably right: OSM needs layers, or even a more sweeping re-architecture to allow better versioning, moderation, better tooling, and easier understanding of the data.<p>Probably wrong: Expanding the scope of OpenStreetMap to include transient data. Too much other work to do, maybe later for this.