Have you been running this for long? I've looked for something in this space for the last couple of years but only came across MapTiler /AGOL and a few others, that were either pretty expensive (for small datasets) or restrictive functionality.
If so I'd say you need to work on the SEO and findability side.
Large amount of US popular is clustered around key areas (East Coast corridor, West Coast Corridor, Midwestern cities etc.
No reason these couldn't be linked up and are more populous than many equivalent regions with HSR. It's like power grids, noone is arguing that one big one from SF to NY is the right solution.
China is even more densely packed behind the Heihe–Tengchong Line. Oh, don't misunderstand, China has it even harder than we do, if you look at eastern China...where people live, a lot of it is not flat and they are tunneling through lots of mountains to make these HSR lines work. Actually, that might make it easier for them, since their population is much more focused (no room for huge suburbs), and their only real challenge is building tunnels and viaducts.
Well it's more like Google is victim of rent seeking. Pay me $26b or Bing will be the default. Google has clear first choice preference across a large swathe of the market.
Yep I've contributed a fair few Mapillary images! I like that OpenStreetMap integrates with it well; I don't like that it no longer shows _who_ contributed an image (whether in the OSM viewer or the Mapillary viewer).
I believe OpenDroneMap uses OpenSfM which Mapillary open sourced:
> OpenSfM is also used internally by the OpenDroneMap project. OpenDroneMap creates 3D models and orthophotos from drone imagery. It includes all the steps of the pipeline so one can go from images to 3D models in one command. It uses OpenSfM to get the camera positions, and can now use it to compute the dense point clouds as well.
I would love to agree but it's simply not correct. They are buying existing tunneling machines and there is nothing yet to suggest a step change.
The radical proposals in terms of stripping out safety equipment for operational tunnels may prod some development, but ultimately any gains here are not going to be captive and will just result in revised client expectations (outside Boring funding & delivering projects worth $10bn+ individually themselves, with no public involvement).
> They are buying existing tunneling machines and there is nothing yet to suggest a step change.
That is incorrect. That is how they started, but they are now using Prufrock 2, which is both designed and built by The Boring Company, though I agree there has yet to be much of a step change in technology. Prufrock 2 is not the fastest tunnel boring machine in the world, and its porpoising feature has had some setbacks, needing to be dug out.
But all of this kind of misses the point. It ultimately doesn't matter if the tunnel boring machine is extraordinarily better. The Boring Company is applying the exact same philosophies that has made Tesla and SpaceX successful: extreme vertical integration and rapid iteration.
What matters is that TBC controls the boring machine. They control the design, they control the manufacturing process, and they have a willingness to experiment and iterate. The company is 5 years old and is now on its fourth tunnel boring machine.
And given the design of TBC transportation systems, there's no reason you can't have a dozen tunnel boring machines running simultaneously.
There was nothing remarkable about Falcon 9 when it launched. It was old tech, with a few good ideas, and one killer feature: extraordinary cost savings.
I tried Felt and it looked good. However for me the marker / polygon moved significantly with different zoom levels which is a fairly big issue. This was in 54,-1 area (lat/lng) - I don't know if it could be as simple as different coordinate systems on markers vs mapping?
(Felt engineer here) That does sounds like a big issue! Are you able to reproduce the marker or polygon moving based on zoom levels? I tried for a bit and I wasn't able to reproduce this. How are you changing the map zoom?
I watched your video with the Crusher. For most places having a subgrade of rock or good granular material as seen in the video would be a luxury for road construction. In general roads on this material are fairly stable and it is the more common subgrades of clay, silts and sands that have problems normally related to drainage issues. Does your solution offer anything for these scenariosm?
Thanks for diving into this! Yes, our Crusher, method and the Lignin binds sand and silts in a great way. If there is a lot of clay, we would also like to add some lime to help with the internal moist, here we have several carbon neutral solutions. Our finished road is more waterproof (compared to a gravel road without Lignin f.ex) and our roads helps a lot with the draining of water from the road. However, as on every road, the shape of the road is important so the water finds the shortest way out of the road, and the ditches should be maintained as for any other road.
I don't think that's obvious, e.g. an Apple or Facebook could take OSM and fork it privately and invest all their efforts into that, without releasing upstream for competitive advantage.
If so I'd say you need to work on the SEO and findability side.