All Maps in China are Transformed
home.wangjianshuo.com
home.wangjianshuo.com
- The map data is scrambled (GPS coordinates are encrypted). - To correlate a GPS position with the map data, you plug the HW position through an encryption library (which you have to compile in a specific government building in Beijing). - Border drawing is strongly regulated: no border line between Mainland China and Taiwan, Tibet is of course China, South East Asia Islands can't have border lines drawn and Kashmir is a big thing also with border lines. - You can't show pure GPS coordinates - You can't include a number or POIs in your map (mostly government buildings/facilities).
As a note, India as a certain degree of insanity as well: You can't export a map. Launching a PND there involved shipping a bunch of map technicians there to actually make sure we never got a map outside of India...
Cheers, R
what is the advantage of this? couldn't an attacker get a copy of the software? is there some kind of real-time authorisation step so that they can disable the transformation or change it?
[edit: thanks; wasn't thinking you thought it a good idea, just curious for more info]
I'm not questioning the advantage (in my view it's a small roadblock if you're motivated enough to actually get the data) just stating an inane regulation...
Do you guys put Tibet as disputed area on like 90% of the maps in the West? Really?
The case of Taiwan is even more confusing. A world globe I have from a decade ago, commercially published by a private business corporation rather than officially published, shows Taiwan and the mainland territories of China in the same color. (Usually this globe distinguishes different countries by different colors.) However, the globe also marks the location of both Beijing and Taipei (so spelled) with a star symbol indicating a capital city, suggesting that Taipei is the seat of a national government. United States law under the Taiwan Relations Act strikes a delicate balance between agreeing with the original assertion of both the P.R.C. and R.O.C. regimes that there is one China and Taiwan is a part of China and the current facts on the ground that China (the P.R.C.) and Taiwan (the island of Taiwan and various outlying islands, including some that historically were part of Fujian Province) are under distinct national administrations.
The Wikipedia article on Taiwan independence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_independence
seems to have enjoyed some good editing back-and-forth so that it is not entirely slanted to one point of view or another.
A bunch of Han Chinese moved to the island. The Dutch established a small colony there. Japan took over. Post-WW2 they were given independence from Japan. The pre-communist leader of China moved to Taiwan and took over politically. The KMT party ruled until recently, when Taiwan peacefully transitioned to a democracy and now has two main parties.
There is nothing in Taiwan under Chinese control. They have their own government, constitution, military, their own passports that are recognized worldwide, etc. However, there is a looming threat that China will attempt to take over which drives mandatory military service, and tight relations with the US.
Both PRC and ROC say that Taiwan is entirely under Chinese control, that there's only one China, and that they govern all of its territory.
Obviously, Taiwan has no plans to reconquer the mainland any time soon. However, PRC China threatens that if Taiwan formally declares independence it's back to a shooting war.
So yes, Taiwan still maintains governors for the areas of the mainland (last I heard they're all very old as they obviously are not standing for reelection back in their home district). This surprises people when they first learn of it.
It seems to a lot of outsiders like it is more about preserving the very carefully kept status quo than it is about a serious territorial claim.
But I don't really know that much about it. This topic tends to bring out strong opinions in people on one side or the other and I haven't come across many people who do know both sides who will chat freely.
Taiwan is a democracy, and one of the major parties firmly opposes any concept of Chinese rule and seeks recognition of Taiwan. The other party leans towards being the sole leader of all of China. However in practice (being currently elected) they just improve economic ties with China while opposing unification or formal recognition of Taiwan.
The PRC sees Taiwan as a province of China that they should rule, as you mentioned.
FYI the ROC also sees Taiwan as a province of China. There is another province called FuJian province, ROC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujian_Province,_Republic_of_Ch...
Already been one war fought along that border.
It's also worth noticing that India was never an integral country in the past.
I'm sure there are thousands of Chinese engineers with careers transforming map coordinates. You don't want to put these people out of a job, do you?
Humans are funny.
"There's China" I said. "And there's Taiwan."
"You know Taiwan is really not that big." she said.
"What do you mean?"
"Map makers show it larger than it really is in order to exaggerate its importance."
I was a little weirded out by that idea. This girl was pretty intelligent, she seemed to know some math and logical thinking. She was in the process of becoming a CPA.
For better or worse I responded with practical analysis: "How would that even work? You and I could go buy maps right now for navigating ships and airplanes, those would have to be accurate in order to function. We could compare them to this one and if they are noticeably different we could complain and the company that made the map would lose face. Why would Rand-McNally give a shit about the political importance of Taiwan anyway, enough to risk their own credibility?"
"They just do. All map makers do this." She would not be convinced.
I don't think it's unreasonable to think that China is manipulating its map data, particularly when other people here in the mapping industry have already said this is well known in their field.
No.
An interesting anecdote from my side, though not necessarily map-related. But in the same theme as gp. This summer, I was volunteering teaching English to rural kids in China. One of the kids kept writing this big message on blackboards and stuff that Osama bin Laden was still alive. One of the local volunteers read what he was writing and was upset at him for fooling around so much. Later, I asked her what's up, and she told me what he was writing.
WTF.
So in the team meeting later that night, I talk with my fellow volunteers about this, and wonder if I have some kind of crazy kid on my hands. Then the Chinese volunteers told me not to worry about it, he's just writing stuff. I'm like, "What do you mean, how do you know?" Then they started talking about how people distrust the government these days, are unhappy, etc. I'm like, "What the heck does that have to do with anything?"
Turns out that all over the Chinese web, this was a really popular meme where Chinese youth displayed their sarcasm at anything the government said. Even things that they knew to be true could not be true because the government said it. It was only a meme, much like the Hitler videos we see on Youtube.
Scared me for a day.
But suffice it to say, people in China aren't so trusting of what their nation says as before. Living here, I hear it from my colleagues and friends every day. That being said, there's very little right now that they can do to voice their opinion because it's still a touchy atmosphere.
This lady is very informative. http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/yang_lan.html
Or, people have it ingrained in them that Taiwan is small, and they all know that Chinese map-makers are politically motivated, so they assume that all map-makers are equally politically motivated.
The most common form of map, Mercator projection, greatly distorts the area of land around the equator, and makes northernly (& southerly) lands appear much larger. It makes Canada, Greenland, Alaska, et al. appear quite large compared to Africa & South America. But those areas are much larger.
All 2D map projections produce either distortion or discontinuity. Neither of these affects a map's functionality in the way that outright inaccuracy does.
The idea that the market will always produce the best map is not true.
As an aside, I have often wondered at the way North=up became, and remains, completely universal. An upside-down globe "looks" as wrong to me as an upside-down portrait. Obviously there's no reason this must be so; it's nothing more than familiarity with the shapes of the continents from a particular perspective.
Some day, I'd like to have a globe or a big mercator-type map with South at the top (i.e. with the written labels upside-down from normal), and see how long it would take to become accustomed to it.
THAT kind of inaccuracy bears almost no resemblance to gripes which emerge about the tradeoffs in 2d map projections regarding inevitable (as opposed to highly arbitrary, political) shape and area distortions.
Maps which have south at the top ARE sold and do just fine in the Southern Hemisphere.
The point actually remains that the market has not rewarded any maps which have the kind of distortions which would be required to specifically and artificially inflate the size of Taiwan relative to China, without much affecting anything else.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Huashan+Road,+Shanghai,+China&...
The locations are all still off and they're consistently off by an offset throughout Shanghai. There might be some deliberate dishonesty by map makers in China, but I don't think this is evidence of it - I think this is just an inaccurate projection. If you want to make bad maps to confuse people - first, that's probably pretty impossible with current information systems, even in China, and second, this would be a really bad attempt at it.
Indeed, the hole point of the projection was to make navigation easier by allowing rhumb lines (the shortest distances between two points on a curved surface) to be charted as perfectly straight lines on a two-dimensional map. From these lines of constant bearing, mariners could work out the precise - and constant - angle they should maintain in relation to the pole star in order to get from one point to another.
Without a reliable method for establishing longitude at sea, 17th Century navigators could never be exactly sure how far along their courses they were, but at least they could know that they were heading in the right direction. Given the level of uncertainty involved in these enterprises, this one piece of (relatively) hard and verifiable data was extraordinarily important, making the accuracy of the projection, and the mathematically - if not visually - correct placement of shorelines within it especially important.
Unfortunately, the iconic value of the Mercator projection has vastly outlived its utility - or at least, the common awareness of the once formidable navigational problems it addressed. Far from seeing it as a brilliant technical solution, it is often seen through a purely political filter that views its strengths as weaknesses, while completely missing the map's actual intent.
Rhumb lines are not, however, the shortest distance between two points on a sphere. Those would be great circles. In particular, note that along a rhumb line one can never reach the north or south pole. Indeed, rhumb lines are dependent on your choice of poles, which the actual shortest course clearly cannot be!
Unless you use a globe, every projection onto a flat rectangular surface distorts.
Now how does that make more plausible the claim that world map makers are inflating the area of Taiwan on purpose?
More to the point, there's a big difference between distorting scale in a way that's mathematically consistent throughout the projection (i.e. one in which you preserve shape or position at scale's expense), and simply fudging the scale in a particular spot.
You knew her disposition. (You were her friend). What was the goal of that comment, to incent a fruitless political discussion?
Edit: Whoa there. Why the downvotes? I am genuinely curious why the parent decided it was a good idea to stoke that discussion. I have friends whose political views are far from mine, and there are just DMZ topics that I don't dare bring up. For example, a discussion about the Federal Reserve and Operation Twist would be fruitless with my Libertarian friends, who just have a different opinion on that, which I believe is irreconcilable. I would say that's the same situation with Taiwan-strait politics.
There are a lot of topics I'd love to say aren't open to political debate, because I personally consider them axioms of basic sanity, but the existence of people who disagree unfortunately leaves the debate open.
Later, she, another friend from China, and I had a more in-depth discussion about Taiwan. It was really interesting to get that perspective.
P.S. I have no idea why you're being downvoted either.
http://noisydecentgraphics.typepad.com/design/2008/07/this-i...
http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=15&lat=31.21741&lon=121...
You can see the noticable difference in street geometry.
[edit] BTW: India is similar, they are not scrambling the map, but it cannot leave the country either. So as a map-maker you have to have a local company there in order to do business.
And if you want to know the depth of a ford, well you can go and measure it.
So I really don't get why they would make them secret.
It's helpful to know the ford depths of a river crossing before you get there with your tanks.
Take a fanciful example. One could not, say, send a U.S. Army survey team to measure the depth of the Orne before the allies landed in Normandy. The Germans would really object to that kind of thing.
[0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_China#Legalit...
The problem of OSM in China is its limited data-set. For example, in the city I developed the project OSM had only the major streets, and the map was quite old.
from paxswill's link:
"According to the Surveying and Mapping Law of the People's Republic of China, private surveying and mapping activities are illegal in mainland China."[0]
[0]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_China#Legalit...
For the record there is no public domain map data in a lot of countries in Europe. The USA has the sensible approach of 'all government data (incl. maps) should be public domain'. In Europe the state owned mapping organisations do the mapping and claim full copyright on the maps & data.
The 'illegal to make your own maps' is, obviously, not the case in EU
This is true here in Switzerland. You have to pay quite a bit for our maps. I think it's a good thing actually, because their quality is worth the price. They provide extreme detail even in very remote locations (well, remote for us at least ;)). And for doing quick lookups, there's a free online-map at http://map.geo.admin.ch/, which also provides a lot of statistical data.
However most people/businesses don't need that.
Just look at Google maps & OpenStreetMap. They don't have submetre accuracy, however there are still quite useful to people and businesses.
The naming of streets is also quite complex, if the street has been there for 1000years then it's likely that various of layers of government aren't quite in synch with what they are calling it.
so if google maps just uses a free public domain source it might not match what the city council or the post office use
A friend of a friend is a cartographer who works in DC. According to this person, the official subway map of DC distorts the true geography of the city -- and the subway lines -- as much for security purposes as it does graphic design purposes. The red line, in particular, apparently is drawn with a completely bogus path through the city on the maps. The true path of the line goes underneath the national mall and several important government buildings, if this person is to be believed.
But it wouldn't surprise me if an overlay on a cartographic map was intentionally inaccurate. One time I was in DC a cab driver was trying to get me to my hotel. His GPS went totally nonfunctional when we were in view of the Pentagon.
It would be an interesting research project to ride around subway systems with a data-logging accelerometer (like a smartphone). Integrate acceleration to get velocity, integrate velocity to get relative position, get GPS fixes when the signal is available, and diagram the results.
Which is pretty humorous since, once you're vaguely close to it, it's hard not to find it. If they built several other pentagonal buildings in the area, it would be a different story. :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_map has some examples of more realistic London underground maps (older editions). It's a common topic of graphic design / visualisation courses.
The red line does turn south a bit going west out of Gallery Place, but it doesn't go any further south than D street and doesn't go under any important federal buildings.
Besides, what would be the point? The National Mall is absolutely riddled with tunnels! West to east there's an old streetcar tunnel at 14th Street under the Bureau of Engraving, the 12th and 9th street road tunnels open to trucks, two tunnels apiece for the yellow/green and orange/blue lines with the latter going under dozens of federal buildings, the entire Smithsonian subway station, large underground art galleries south of the Smithsonian castle, the buried watercourses of Tiber Creek, the National Gallery gift shop & cafeteria under 4th street, the I-395 Center Leg Freeway that has the DOL built on top of it, the United States Capitol subway system, the old C Street streetcar tunnel under Senate Park, and the First Street heavy rail tunnel under the LOC / Supreme Court.
Orange and Blue lines go under the Mall: this is reflected on the map. IIRC there is one stop at the Mall, several close. There aren't any Red line stops near the Mall.
several important government buildings
It's D.C. You can't shake a stick without hitting an important government building.
it is a non uniformed transformation.being applied to.whole map , to lower the accruacy.
Secondly - I lived in Beijing for half a year in 2010 (ie. 2 years after this post was published). I used Google Maps often on my smartphone, and the GPS fix on the features map was incorrect (ie. I would be standing at a street corner and it would show me a few hundred meters down the street on the map).
take a look at this POI on 4sq: http://4sq.com/rArZMj
It starts with a street view. If you zoom in a little, turns out the bar is out in the water! When you switch to Satellite view, the bar is where it is supposed to be, on the shore.
I don't doubt there are issues, but in Beijing I haven't seen them.
If you switch between map and satellite mode here, you have a distance of about 390m between the location in both maps.
I do wonder how much trouble Google goes to fix up maps in China. I can't really see enough of the map to tell if this appears to be deliberate distortion, or just another error.
Hopefully Google is still keeping their maps up-to-date... When I was in Beijing, I found the Google map much easier for finding bus routes that the local alternative.
http://maps.yahoo.com/#lat=39.8908713496569&lon=116.4246...
(This isn't a vote for Yahoo Maps, just an observation)
Trying to get satellite and the map portions to line up is very difficult. Trying to do it on a global scale with data from multiple sources... you get the idea.
Now please get back to China bashing and don't let the facts get in the way of your political/religious feelings. Remember to include lots anecdotal evidence and use the word red. And as always bring up other countries that seem scary on fox news.
I don't know if the author's analysis is accurate, but I'm pretty sure the author is Chinese. I doubt he is repeating what he hears on Fox News.
An example in Shanghai: http://g.co/maps/m34n8 An example in Seoul: http://g.co/maps/4gk3t
Note the near perfect alignment in the latter, and way-off alignment in the former.
1 Hong Kong
2 New York City
3 Tokyo
4 Dubai
5 Shanghai
Beijing is #20.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_with_most_skyscr...
Not really. There are loads of different projection systems & coordinate system around the world, so all GIS software is able to deal with converting coordinates and reprojections etc.
Satellite & aerial imagery always has to be georectified and made 'location aware'. Once you've done that, it's trivial to reproject it to whatever system you want.
It really does much more harm to China than a simple misunderstanding about projection errors.