Every map of China is wrong
medium.com
medium.com
That is overstating the situation; ITRS is the key standard here and it's maintained by IERS. I think WGS-84 and ITRS are somewhat aligned these days, but the exact relationship is not clear to me.
Various regional reference systems are also still widely used, for example ETRS89 in Europe, which is afaik semi-independently defined by EPN (EUREF Permanent Network).
Most notably Galileo GNSS does not use WGS-84.
The key difference between various other systems and the Chinese one is just that for the other systems the conversions to and from WGS-84 are available to high precision.
https://github.com/googollee/eviltransform/blob/master/java/...
https://github.com/googollee/eviltransform/blob/master/java/...
And converting the other way by a kind of binary search, I guess using a flaw in the obfuscation:
https://github.com/googollee/eviltransform/blob/master/java/...
All seems very silly by today standards and I would think it hardly made sense back in 2002 when this was apparently devised.
But as a means to force foreign companies to use Chinese data suppliers this works perfectly. Because using this software would be illegal in China and anyone looking to business there legally would end up having to use Chinese data centers, Chinese data suppliers, Chinese infrastructure, etc.
This is thinking from a military apparatus stuck in the 1950es.
Mapping is explicitly regulated so no need for an indirect barrier.
AFAIK it is the same other places. If a Chinese company wanted to do an extensive commercial map of the US it would face all sorts of regulative hurdles.
One-way knowledge flows is an ubiquitous and consistent facet of china's commercial policies.
It was very transparently an economic and technical development policy from the start, it was never intended as a military policy to hinder enemy mapping ability.
They do similar information control across many other industries besides maps. The CCP is very good at gatekeeping access to foreign/uncensored information through a few state-owned enterprises, then metering it out as they see fit for economic progress.
It's a bit less like that now as Xi drifts into a more personal dictatorship.
> This is thinking from a military apparatus stuck in the 1950es.
Even if it started like that, I wouldn't be surprised if they now appreciate the unintended consequence of it serving as a "elaborate technical trade barrier."
The real question is what happens when they inevitably have a major economic downturn. Will the cronies lose power? Will they cling to power using violence against the opposition? Will they start a war to distract and rally their population?
No money raining down on the poor workers who gotta buy their own safety equipment or just deal without having any. Your job is to drip your hands in mercury every day don't like it then there are a thousand waiting to step in to replace you.
Why do you think companies are leaving China? It's because the workers are now demanding more money because everyone is richer.
Also, infosec isn't binary. Obfuscating Google Maps might not prevent the DPRK from doing terrible things to Seoul, but not obfuscating it would probably make it easier for them to do so.
This may have gone past me (I mostly remember the highly non-genius tactics), do you have some examples?
https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-losses-casualties-ta...
Those bradleys and Abrams were 2000 vintage lol. The ATACMS are so old they are nearly expired. 200 bradleys and 100 western tanks gave russia pause, but the US has 3000 of each, in much better condition than the 3000 rusted out hulks russia is pulling from it's storage yards.
The only saving grace for russia has been the wests absolute unwillingness to donate anything more than table scraps to defend the sovereignty of Ukraine, forcing Ukraine to make do with basically nothing, causing needless Ukrainian blood to be spilled.
Ukraine could surrender tomorrow and this war would still have been a huge geopolitical blunder by Russia.
Now if only the West could copy the Shahed and Lancet, and I don't mean whatever the fuck "switchblade" sells that has a pissant warhead that couldn't disable a tent but costs ten times as much as the lancet. I know a lot of the cost of western precision munitions is about EW resistance and "military hardening" but the US has the entirety of the airforce budget dedicated to removing point targets that prevent you from attacking whatever you want, you won't always need a hardened weapon system. The Ukrainians hit that naval headquarters in Crimea with one of their duct-taped together homebuilt drones!
:-/
On the other hand, given that NK is using, what, WW2 vintage artillery, I can’t see how. They are probably aiming “south” with magnitude “lots,” right? What good is a 500 meter offset, or whatever, going to do when they are just aiming at the city in general.
> South Korea’s government has put a whole lot more thought into this than we have
in approximately 1998. and then never again. if it's not broken (for the chaebols), well...
China is at war with its people.
China and the US also fought in what is known as the Korean War.
You can't claim SK and NK are at war with each other while implying China and US are not at war with each other. It's exactly the same war.
Google, Bing, and others specifically have bitmap maps that are served out of Korea for this purpose. You can see it in Bing since the maps for Bing Maps use the classic Microsoft ~~ditches and diversions~~ Streets and Trips style maps.
In Google, there’s a few spots in Japan that are rendered in Korea at some zoom levels.
There’s been a lot of discussion on how to improve OSM in SK but it’s often through analog holes that are plausibly illegitimate.
I talked about it previously. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38555567
See also, https://blog.opencagedata.com/post/openstreetmap-in-korea, which relates the situation the same way. It doesn't seem like anyone is hassled for editing openstreetmap from here (and it is quite voluminous), so long as it is not a derivative work of the public surveys.
There is an alternative military-base removed tileset variant, but I believe this is to aid korean GIS users who may not want their application to show sensitive installations, which can generate controversy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Geospatial-Intelligen...
In 2024, with satellites producing imagery in ~10 cm resolution, the most important factor determining the quality of maps is probably the amount of money available for analyzing satellite imagery into maps, and you definitely can't hide militarily important features like roads, railways, bridges and buildings.
I recently learned that satellite images are often corrected to match known maps.
US spy satellites can take sharp pictures which look they were taken by a drone is flying close to the ground.
Reconnaissance planes were largely obsoleted by satellites when digital cameras were invented (before that, satellites physically dropped film to ground to be developed), and as Russian anti-air missiles got better. The primary use for optical reconnaissance planes these days is for up-to-the-minute coverage of rapidly developing situations, such as in war, where the next satellite flyover might not be until several hours later.
(RF & radar reconnaissance planes are very important to modern warfare.)
It's highly unlikely that a satellite-based telescope would rotate/turn the lens. Turn it relative to what? It's in 0g, there's no part that's held in place by friction to the ground. Any rotating joint would make the two sides move in opposite directions. And if you think about that, let one side be much smaller, and allow rotating by multiple turns instead of just 0-360 or such, you might just invent the gyroscope.
They turn the whole satellite with gyroscopes (flywheels) and/or propellant.
Pretty weird to think the US is the only country they might be worried about. Maybe not right now, but in general.
> 1. Promote the development of surveying and mapping in the service of national economic construction.
In other words, a senior party member's brother-in-law runs a civil engineering firm that, by pure coincidence, happens to offer a surveying service.
No one does regulatory capture better than a planned economy.
And indeed it is: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/China
Of course that doesn't stop people from mapping every bench in China https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=China#map=3/33.99...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_which_is_not_forbid...
Unless of course, if the camera gets too close to (say) a military/civil defense installation (often includes their office buildings), their security will probably do a check or just ask people to leave. They usually setup a sign near by to indicate "No trespassing" and maybe "No photographing" etc, just don't bring the camera over the line (I mean, better stay out completely if it says "No trespassing").
However, for the Camera which have GPS module, you will need additional filing to license your product. So some of the companies just hide the feature.
Clearly it is not "must have GPS removed".
Thanks for the additional info.
Of course, some of those devices get through, or are carried in by tourists, or are enabled by enthusiasts who load the non-China firmware. This seems to be understood. The Chinese are smart enough, one presumes, to know that actual state-level competitors can get accurate (in the chosen geodetic system) location data without relying on tourists' geotagged Google Photos uploads.
But that does lead to the question, "why, then?" -- if your adversaries know your secret, it's probably not worth the effort of protecting, anymore. (And why, in the US, we know about stuff like VENONA now.) The Chinese seem focused on a different threat: they don't care if a few people have good location data, even if some of them work for the US NGA, they just don't want everyone to have that data.
Which is interesting, because it suggests that that they're less concerned about a foreign government with strategic intelligence, than they are their own domestic population.
This isn't about state secrets vs other states; it's about denying their own population a capability that they find valuable, and thus threatening.
When you are a nobody, they wont care. When you are a person of interest this law will be applied to you.
If they want you are just a tourist, otherwise you are a spy who took 5000 photos.
The reality, of course, is that the people end up giving control and ownership to a one-party state.
The four remaining Marxist-Leninist states are China, Cuba, Laos and Vietnam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states#Marxi...)
In 2024, their Freedom Indices (out of 100) are:
China: 9
Cuba: 12
Laos: 13
Vietnam: 19
It's become it's own thing because anything "communist" is just lip service at this point. Public veneration of past Chinese empires and dynasties is way more common than some idealized view of a proletariat state.
Same with Vietnam (basically a crony capitalist country) and Laos (basically a buffer between Thailand, VN, and China where all three meddle)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states#Marxi...
Also the page on China, which states the government is a "Unitary Marxist–Leninist one-party socialist state"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd be interested to see how that edit would be received by other editors of the page.
It's basing "Marxist-Leninist" on national constitutions, which themselves are de facto useless when the Politburos in China, Vietnam, and Laos make drastic policy changes every decade (eg. 10 years ago it was expected for Chinese Premiers to step down after a 10 year term). Also, that list doesn't seem to actually link sources to assertions.
The CCP's charter calls itself "Marxist-Leninist" but every single "thought"/ideology pushed by the CCP's leadership when a new Premier arises is de facto diametric to Marxism-Leninism, and it has always been this case since Mao.
I recommend reading "The Chinese Reassessment of Socialism, 1976–1992" by Yan Sun , "A Nation-state by Construction: Dynamics of Modern Chinese Nationalism" by Suisheng Zhao, and "China: Development and Governance" by Yongian Zheng and Gunwu Wang if you want to actually understand the ideological underpinnings of Chinese governance.
I have Chinese language sources as well I'd recommend but that's a whole other issue.
> I'd be interested to see how that edit would be received by other editors of the page
Just like they taught all of us from elementary school to college - Wikipedia IS NOT a reliable source.
Wikipedia should always be used to spark conversations, but it is up to you to actually use Primary and Secondary sources to validate whether content on Wikipedia is valid or not.
Wikipedia as an editorial organization has a lot of issues, internal rivalries, and astroturfing (especially w/ regards to highly controversial topics such as Asian politics).
As such, it's best to use Primary and credible Secondary sources.
I cannot access BBC in China without using a VPN, and can potentially be prosecuted for either action.
I can say Biden/Trump are horrible and need to rot in jail, and my comment with not be deleted by a censor. If I say "Xi dada needs to step down and Li Keiqiang should have been Premier instead, and HK was never an integral part of China" it will get deleted on Sina, and if they really had it out for me prosecute me under NSL.
I can Google for Jan 6th photos without censorship. I cannot Baidu search photos of the Tiannamen square protests and subsequent massacre.
The freedom house index does have issues, but China is absolutely unfree.
Authoritarian states aren't completely unfree (it's organizationally impossible), but China is definetly fairly unfree compared to other authoritarian states like Russia or even Vietnam (though Vietnam is trending towards a more authoritarian future now that Tô Lâm is almost assured to be the next leader)
It might still be a bad idea to remove them, but if they were just doing standard protests in public areas, it'd be much less of an issue.
Absolute unfreedom also exists nowhere.
Still, some places are more free than others. alephnerd made a number of comparisons of the US to China; you have refuted none of them. You merely complain that the US is not absolutely free of consequences for your actions. Well, that's true, but if that's what you're looking for, try an uninhabited island (and you may not even find it there).
Merely arresting people and forcing them out of the square would've meant it would be a blip in history. The Tiananmen Square massacre is famous because it was a massacre. Even official figures said that hundreds of people died.
Police will inevitably crack down on protests everywhere, yet protests continue to happen on a daily basis in the US with minimal long term ramifications.
Also, none of what you pointed out actually refutes my points above about internet censorship, and as such clearly shows an attempt at whataboutism.
P.S. Both HRW [2] and Amnesty [3] have unequivocally voiced their support for the right to protest in the US, and as such if you try to say "oh human rights organizations are a tool of the west" it's complete bullshit.
[0] - https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/01/26/china-free-white-paper-p...
[1] - https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa17/3086/2020/en/
[2] - https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/04/26/us-universities-should-r...
[3] - https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/amnesty-internatio...
Wow, what a shocker. Next you're gonna tell me that the democracy indices people use come only from democracies.
Economic freedom is freedom.
In socialism and communism, only the state can own the means of production.
You mentioned cooperatives. This is tangential to the discussion as cooperatives are neither socialist nor capitalist, per se. They can freely exist in capitalist societies, and also in some socialist societies (although they are often tightly controlled by the state, and may be seized by the state).
Cooperatives are a socialist proposal. A country run solely by cooperatives is not a capitalist country.
You say the owners are “leeching” from workers. Sounds like they have it easy, right? So - become an owner! I think you’ll find building a company, employing people and taking on all the financial risk of doing so is harder than you thought. Perhaps if you give it a try, you’ll understand why company owners get the rewards they do.
You confuse legal possibility with real possibility. By the law and social norms, nothing forbids me from levitating in the street. Likewise, nothing forbids a worker to become a bourgeoisie. Sorry, but most people cannot start their own company. And the few that can, will be just providing services for the margins of the market, where the real big companies do not operate because it is not profitable enough. Doing this, they will keep needing to work like any other worker, in contrast with the burgoisie.
> You say the owners are “leeching” from workers. Sounds like they have it easy, right? So - become an owner!
Again the confusion with "legally allowed" with "real possibility". Contrary to most burgoisie, I did not inherited a lot of capital and money. So I cannot become part of the burgoisie, except with negligible probability. Even if the law does not forbid me (likewise, the law is not forbidding me to transform into a dinosaur).
> employing people
This is not a favor. They employ so that they can leech the fruits of other people's labor, and pay for them less than what they produced. A slave owner also provides an "employment" for his slaves, do you think this is a favor? The owner cannot produce without the workers. But workers can produce without the owner (like in a cooperative). The workers are the ones that are doing a "favor" to the owner.
> taking on all the financial risk
This is ridiculous. In capitalism, both the owner as the worker are sellers. The first has its company and sells what it produces. The second sells his labor force. Both of them can fail to sell their products and face risks: if the worker fails to sell his product, he becomes unemployed, and face risks like suffering hunger, dying of sickness because cannot afford treatment, and living in misery. If the owner fails to sell his product, the company fails, and the risk is losing some money, but not all the money because it is invested in lots of different companies. The worker deal with much more financial risks than the owner.
In any case, according to Wikipedia, open-source code is available to convert between WGS-84 and the obfuscated GJC-02 coordinates.
Since technology seems to have caught up with it, is there any advantage (military or otherwise) for China to persist with obfuscation? Much like the US gave up on GPS "selective availability" years ago, there would seem now days to be more economic advantage to ditching obfuscation than there is security advantage of keeping it. Is not as if the missiles of China's enemies are going to get confused by China's obfuscated coordinates.
Is it just because of inertia that GJC-02 still exists?
Does the CCP really think that the US military are going to use ordinary street msps to target their missiles and that this obfuscation will protect them from on-target hits? Sure, in WWII there were a few apocryphal instances of bad maps foiling an attack, but that was decades before mapping satellites.
As mentioned, it's been a long time since the US stopped limiting GPS resolution. This just makes CCP seem backward.
US allegedly used old map with wrong coordinates. Probably China knows well about US military tactics.
It's just an economic policy to help local mapping tech get good without international competition, and to control access to information by channeling it through domestic state-controlled enterprises.
https://www.militarytimes.com/veterans/military-history/2018...
In some cases using consumer-level street maps could make for more accurate targeting.
Many years ago I worked on command & control systems for a US military contractor. The mapping imagery our software used from military mapping providers were high resolution but often more out-of-date than commercial offerings. One example a warfighter showed me stuck with me because it was particularly embarrassing and egregious -- military imagery showed an area with a handful of shacks in the middle of the desert but Google's satellite imagery showed that it had become a sprawling town. Because of issues like that, army warfighters were forced to regularly cross-check with Google and/or Yahoo! maps when planning operations.
It is no longer an area I work in and I would expect that military imagery is now more up-to-date, but there are likely still datapoints uploaded to OpenStreetMap that are more timely and accurate than what government contractors provide. So I would not be surprised if there are still warfighters out there cross-checking with consumer mapping providers before ordering strikes.
So in general the commercial stuff is better, but in the specifics the military stuff will come out on top, depending on what the mission is and how much anyone cares about it.
If Google cared enough, I'm sure they could find a solution - since Google doesn't operate in China, they don't really have to respect Chinese laws. But Google doesn't operate in China so they don't care that much and are presumably happy to leave things the way they are.
Also, keeping things the way they are keeps drawing attention to the issue, which is probably better than to try and cover it up.
I suspect that in practice that’s not true; there are a lot of ways China could make life difficult for a big international tech company, from looking the other way regarding IP theft to arresting people associated with Google on spying charges when they’re there on personal trips
This isn't the first time they have done something like this, Germany was stuck with Street View imagery from 2008 (and limited to larger cities) until some time last year when they decided to finally start updating it again. This was due to some privacy hubbub back when StreetView was introduced that resulted in a law allowing building owners and/or inhabitants to request that their building be blurred on StreetView. Mind you, this law didn't forbid StreetView, but it looks like Google just lost interest, or decided to wait it out...
Well, they buy the data from one of the few blessed Chinese companies, which is a form of doing business, and regardless what Chinese law says Google has most likely a contractual obligation not to convert the data. In other words, if they did convert the data they'd probably not get updates anymore.
Google search may not operate in China, but that doesn't mean that we have no business or service presence in China. For instance, from 2017 up until 2022, Google Translate was available in-country [0].
[0] https://apnews.com/article/technology-business-china-social-...
It would be telling if despite that rejection, they were still open to taking direction from Beijing. Google at one point was fairly friendly with US DoD. Clearly the national loyalty of multinationals isn't guaranteed.
https://www.google.cn used to show censored search results, now it only has a link to https://www.google.com.hk , which is blocked because it lacks search result censorship. But Google could use the domain for something new in the future should they choose to.
In particular, Google Ads continue to be available: https://ads.google.cn They even offer WeChat customer service!
As long as they can keep the ad money flowing, Google will comply with all necessary laws and regulations.
I don't think so but it would be an embarrassment for the government to admit it no longer serves a use and such an action would be anathema to them.
And to answer your question, it's because anyone proposing to break away from the current model will be accused of being a Western agent.
Probably just China suffering from the same problem most of the world has, boomers that don't really understand technology running the government.
> Is it just because of inertia that GJC-02 still exists?
That could also be part of the problem, the 14 companies that currently provide all mapping services in China, and everyone who uses their services, would have to convert to WGS-84. No doubt those companies will do everything they can to keep the law as it is.
Back when the decision was made, most of the people running the government had studied engineering. A very common pattern in all industries in China are laws that ultimately lead to protectionism by forcing foreign companies to only work with local partners. This is exactly the consequence of this law. I'd be very surprised if that was not intended by law makers from the get go.
Standard issue Chinese protectionism, they do this with basically every industry. Create a problem and then only allow CCP-approved organizations to solve it.
Grand Coulee Dam, on the other hand, despite being decades older? It's dead-on level.
Another thing I don't understand is: OK, you are required to use GJC-02 for map data in China, and you are not allowed to convert to WGS-84. But then don't. You can directly project the map from GJC-02 to screen pixels, and from WGS-84 to screen pixels, and stuff would line up. And when you tap a point on the screen, you can report the legally mandated GJC-02 coordinates.
So at least back then Google Maps apparently didn't yet convert the GPS coordinates to the weird obfuscated Chinese system. But it was a big nuisance and took me a while to figure out. For the first days I thought my jailbreaking activity would have broken the GPS chip or something.
[1] https://wuyongzheng.wordpress.com/2010/01/22/china-map-devia....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpQQOQ__1ok&ab_channel=Johnn...
It's a detailed analysis of China's 2023 map, which many countries believe oversteps China's boundaries.
> Faced with such a "hard nut", Li Chengming strengthened his confidence: "In the war years, Communists were not afraid of death. This difficulty is nothing! We must do it! And we must do it beautifully!" Under the guidance of veteran experts, he led his team to fight for a thousand years. Over many days and nights, a set of nonlinear confidentiality processing technology for topographic maps suitable for national series of scales was developed.
https://archive.ph/20110804185923/http://cxzy.people.com.cn/...
> he led his team to fight for a thousand years
The page you linked to actually said "more than a thousand days and nights", not years.
Holy shit. I can't believe they created an adversarial mapping standard. That is insane. It really paints a picture of their worldview I think. The oppressed "middle kingdom" under siege. Wow, what it must be like to have that view that everyone else is against you, and you have to bulwark yourself at every opportunity. Yet somehow, balance that with the "historical trend of opening up". It's a scary attitude, and must be scary to try to implement it.
I never saw China like that before. This 1 article changes my mind about a few things. Even the map math is preparing for war! I kind of feel sorry for them. It's been like 70-some years but their war is not complete. And scary for the world: I hope they don't have to seek a cathartic resolution of whatever internal conflict they have by projecting it externally.
I don't see them like that, but details like this add support to that idea, I think. I had no idea maps were like this before today.... :(
Tho reading some other comments, it seems it's not so hard to undo this...maybe this is not really about war or such attitude tho...but then why? Why add that specialness to make it that much harder for people ? That in itself could speak volumes. It's a map, it's kind of representative of a national idea. How can you be for "opening up" but you make your maps different to everybody itself, and not necessarily better! Hahaha :) Maybe I'm just misunderstanding it.. haha :)
I honestly don't know why companies simply don't implement it. It's not really "secret" -- or if it is, it's an "open secret".
This is true. Anti-Chinese sentiment right now is high worldwide. And had been high since the 19th century. Look up Chinese Exclusion Act.
I know the Act, and it's awful. But I don't think it's "true". At least we can agree that Chinese seem to have a sense that the world is "against" them.
I'm sure it seems it's true if you're Chinese, but for a country that literally describes anyone "non Chinese" as "outsider", and thinks that's entirely normal, I think it's more likely the sense of "othering" is self-created.
Perhaps the sense of "world against us" is balanced by, and created by, a Chinese sense that they are "against" others and need to be? Supported by a particularly Chinese sense of manifest destiny where "rejuvenation" means reestablishing what they see as their rightful place of "specialness" and "centralness" in the world? Accelerated recently by the central government's focus on "external spies" and preparing for "struggle"?
Like on a sidewalk, if you need to be "central" don't you also need to push "others" aside? :) I get you need to then play the fake victim and pretend others started it, but if you're starting with "othering", and "centralness" and "specialness", isn't it you who's responsible? But just not bold enough to own it yet, explicitly? So need to pretend, "Oh it's other people doing this, therefore we're doing it."
But what if it's actually self-generated, this desire for "centralness" and the concomitant "othering" of "non Chinese?" I think that's likely. Whether it's a historical reaction or a persistent characteristic, I'm not sure, but I don't think it matters. The fruits right now are the same. Although, I think it's likely that it is a persistent idea: remember that China was the predominant economy worldwide for at least 1000 years over a span that included the "Dark Ages" for the West. China not being the most developed is a recent thing. See Ian Morris' books for analysis if interested :) So it would make sense if Chinese now hold onto a forgotten dream of being more great than everyone else, and are starting to act like it. In fact, "feel it" to be their identity in the world, and the "rejuvenation" is sending them back to that? :) I think it's likely. What do you think?
It's culturally highly xenophobic and insular, despite being globally mercantile. I don't think it's likely that people are "against" Chinese as much as Chinese are against "outsiders" and the effects that then creates, both internally and on the world stage. Sad tho definitely! :)
a country that literally describes anyone "non Chinese" as "outsider"
The US describes non US people as aliens. Both when they're from Mexico or from MarsBut in everyday parlance no, the US does not. But everyday Chinese describes "non Chinese" people as "outsiders". Hahaha! :) That's the point :)
so, if you're not Chinese, you will have Chinese people saying to your face "Oh, that outsider whatever whatever". Can you fucking believe that? That's not okay at all. But they've normalized this to be normal. To always use and normalize the use of an othering label. It's ridiculous.
It centralizes a kind of racist homogenity and monoculture. And anything outside of that? Outsider. Admittedly, I didn't see it at first. I thought, Oh okay whatever. But observe a lot and reflect a lot and you really see and feel what this does.
It's a normalization of othering encoded into the language, presented as okay.
I think if you don't see the problem with that, then you're either an "insider": a Chinese, for whom this is normalized, and like the water you grew up in, so you don't even see it, and you wouldn't see a problem because and you haven't experienced the other side of it. And verily this term and this othering creates this empathy gap.
Or if you have experienced this, maybe you haven't thought about it enough, or been around or living among Chinese people enough to really feel this. Idk, what's your story? :)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_mentality
See how other nations dealt with the Russian revolution, and subsequently.
From CCP's perspective it has been surrounded by enemies from even before the founding of the PRC.
Remember violence begets violence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_geographic_dat...
> There is a licence fee associated with using this mandatory algorithm in China.
Tax dollars? And appeasing the bureaucracy?
Also, looking at the citation note, I get the impression that a Mr. Li Chengming probably got closer to his next promotion by putting his name on it.
It's really not that big a deal either, if you're an autocracy where controlling all access to accurate information is seen as the natural, normal, default thing to do. "Preparing for war", perhaps you could call it, but as much against their own people.
Attributing to intention that which can be adequately explained by dysfunction?
Most of course avoid obfuscating their own maps, it seems like that is a result of 2002 legislation coming out of Beijing. There’s a long history of doing this, civilian Soviet maps often simply omitted a grid.
While mapping an adversary is comparatively trivial and cheap today, this sort of thinking wasn’t entirely unreasonable back during the cold war, when maps truly were hard to develop from afar (there’s a brilliant and beautiful book on this subject called “The Red Atlas”). There’s a saying that generals often fight the last war, maybe that’s why China chose to obfuscate their maps well into the satellite and GPS era.
Sorry what? Mapping is not anything close to trivial or cheap, even today. Apple took 4 years just to build a map of the SF Bay Area. Nor is it fixed or rapid, in an active war situation, presumably new targets would be built and moved quickly.
In the current climate, being paranoid is the sensible option.
A handful of US troops is not a significant deployment, and I think there's many ways that US and Chinese militaries actually collaborate and communicate, and one of these is (most likely) through the plausibly deniable route of Taiwan.
Forward deployment like this are not there to threaten China. They are there, to tie down USA politicians.
Suppose China makes a move on Taiwan, now they have to play around US troops or fear bringing USA into the war. US politicians now have troops stuck in a war zone, they can no longer just was their hands of the situation - that would be politically unacceptable.
Imagine if Russia had even symbolical amount of troops stationed in Gaza, Israel would be in a difficult position, indiscriminate fire can kill them and start an incident
Although your point is interesting and I hadn't considered it about the insurance policy aspect of the deployment.
What's your background? :) haha :)
What? Where? Can you give some examples?
> is about to give Taiwan billions of dollars for "defence"
Why quote defence? You think they give it for offence?
I suppose you're a citizen of the West; then US hegemony is certainly in your best interest.
I am guessing you are from US, and you guys do not notice that quite often, domestic US politics shifts and you have a schism and throw one of your ‘allies’ under the bus.
Mr. Macron he just made a speech about how Europe can no longer rely on US.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-04-25/macron-sa...
He called these "Defensive citadels"
When you start claiming international waters as your own, it is not "well founded paranoia" when others start viewing that as hostile, it is simply being a jackass.
https://www.ncesc.com/geographic-faq/what-is-the-difference-...
Also, making your employees fugitives of foreign law can make their weekend travel plans a little bit more complicated.
Apparently Google and Bing do not have access to these "corrected" maps.
It is not accurate. Straight lines become curvy at a 5 to 10 meter scale. This is obvious when you look at airport runways.
I haven't figured out what exactly leads to the different treatment from Google. I had too few opportunities to test it out. When I arrive at Germany it immediately shows wrong map of China. Another observation is that all the user-uploaded photos on Google Maps Community aren't accessible in China either.
I just compared two parts of Shanghai, and Apple seemingly had no issue overlaying the roads correctly where Google maps were offset.
I'm fairly certain that the NSA does.
Plus everyone who's involved will get richer.
https://wuyongzheng.github.io/china-map-deviation/paper.html
Maybe people just don't know how important a navigation app is. With enough usage data, you can know the traffic status of any area. Amap and Baidu already use these data to provide the countdown of traffic light. It has 90% accuracy. You can also have a deep understanding of the economic status, or find out some hidden buildings.
So for an algorithm which is already reverse engineered many years ago, it cannot protect anything. It is just a policy to stop foreign companies to join this game.
As for the reason, "national security", "unacceptable risk".
It's often off by whole second or two. Disaster, I know!
It'll also tell if it can you the ideal speed to drive to hit the next green light and join a "green wave".
Because of the threat of North Korea (surely North Koreans cannot find the local map application in the app store).
“Why Google Maps can’t map China” would have been accurate and not droll.
I just opened Apple Maps and it looks perfectly fine. Tested about 10 areas and even rural areas and there was no issue. Stopped reading immediately after. I have no interest in supporting this crap.
You should compare with https://m.amap.com/
You just don't have to play Chinas game.
Might this be a 2002 foreshadowing of the 2008 novel, in which GCJ-02 was meant as an anti-sophon measure?
(I checked to see when CIA had a network liquidated, but that was 2010, so —unless someone's been applying a temporal obsfucation algo— any earthling paranoia leading to metaphorical wallfacers was already in the zeitgeist before that action was taken)
Lagniappe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8dX-A4h2DU