Does it work with a database of word triples to locations, or is it a list of words, and an algo to convert between word triples and locations?<p>I would think the latter would be much smaller to keep on one&#x27;s phone.<p>the surface area of the earth divided by 9 square meters is around 57 trillion (source: wolfram|alpha ) , so for word triples, you would only need around 4000 words stored in the phone. But, that wouldn&#x27;t have the redundancy (any of the 3 words wrong would get the wrong result), so if you have any two of the words be enough to encode the result (so, getting 1 word wrong would result in the area you mean, and maybe two other areas you didn&#x27;t mean), then you need uh, about 8 million words?<p>I&#x27;m not sure english has that many words.<p>oh wait maybe its only on land.<p>That would uh, actually only help a little...<p>Ok I don&#x27;t understand their claim that it is redundant, but I&#x27;m pretty sure they don&#x27;t &#x2F;need&#x2F; to make it use a central lookup table when you can just convert coords into lists of words.<p>IDK if they have their algo being open though. If they don&#x27;t I guess I should make an open clone of it, because not having it be open is dumb. A standard to refer to a location should be open if it is to be useful.