Google Maps leads three men to death as car plunges from incomplete bridge(economictimes.indiatimes.com)
economictimes.indiatimes.com
Google Maps leads three men to death as car plunges from incomplete bridge
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/google-maps-leads-three-men-to-death-as-car-plunges-from-incomplete-bridge-into-river-in-bareilly-up/articleshow/115651260.cms?from=mdr
34 comments
The update of google maps for construction projects is still pretty pathetic.
I don't know if it is a lack of inability for US states to do the paperwork/updates, or if google maps isn't incorporating the updates fast enough. I strongly suspect it is falling between the cracks at the state/local level.
I don't know if it is a lack of inability for US states to do the paperwork/updates, or if google maps isn't incorporating the updates fast enough. I strongly suspect it is falling between the cracks at the state/local level.
I think it's more of the local authorities.
I was once on a drive from LA to SF along CA-1/Cabrillo Hwy. I got as far as Ragged Pt, where the road was closed due to a landslide further up. It had been closed for six weeks. There were no signs announcing this anywhere on the way.
I was once on a drive from LA to SF along CA-1/Cabrillo Hwy. I got as far as Ragged Pt, where the road was closed due to a landslide further up. It had been closed for six weeks. There were no signs announcing this anywhere on the way.
I don't think Google is to blame here. The local authority is for not blocking that road.
I used to do a great deal of local mapwork. Google Maps tends to not do rural areas as well as urban or suburban areas, usually missing the existence of Road A and then assigning the name of Road A to Road B, that kind of thing.
The naive approach is to expect a Single Source of Truth for roads, address points, and the like, but this turns out not to be true. The road network and address points are usually done on a per-county basis, each with its own standards (and boundaries), and gods help you if you expect that a road in County A that proceeds to County B to "line up" if you import data from each county. Sometimes, parcels are separate. Oh, and they'll use different projections and fields and whatnot.
Meanwhile, the Department of Transportation for my state had its own road network: fewer fields, often skipping the tiny roads entirely, irregularly updated.
This doesn't even begin to cover how bad the plats of a new neighborhood are versus reality, how infrequently updated and checked data is, height and weight limits for stretches of bridge and so forth.
The naive approach is to expect a Single Source of Truth for roads, address points, and the like, but this turns out not to be true. The road network and address points are usually done on a per-county basis, each with its own standards (and boundaries), and gods help you if you expect that a road in County A that proceeds to County B to "line up" if you import data from each county. Sometimes, parcels are separate. Oh, and they'll use different projections and fields and whatnot.
Meanwhile, the Department of Transportation for my state had its own road network: fewer fields, often skipping the tiny roads entirely, irregularly updated.
This doesn't even begin to cover how bad the plats of a new neighborhood are versus reality, how infrequently updated and checked data is, height and weight limits for stretches of bridge and so forth.
people rush through mountain roads as if the road continued after the curve. I drive through the mountains as if a goat was ambushing me at the turn of the curve.
I have been noticing a steady degradation in Google Map's ability to navigate and finding things. I'm nearing the tipping point where Apple Map or OpenStreet Maps is making more sense as the daily driver.
Poor drivers and poor city signs are not limited to India.
Near where I live in California is a pedestrian path that is paved with asphalt. It is definitely not a street. Every few months someone like an Uber driver will misunderstand their directions and drive down it at about 30 mph, putting pedestrians at risk. I've sent emails to the city, but they seem to ignore it.
Near where I live in California is a pedestrian path that is paved with asphalt. It is definitely not a street. Every few months someone like an Uber driver will misunderstand their directions and drive down it at about 30 mph, putting pedestrians at risk. I've sent emails to the city, but they seem to ignore it.
I don't know India. But I can confirm that google maps in Mexico and Central America hallucinates roads that aren’t there, sends you into restricted areas, and will happily send you down the craziest ungraded road that a lifted Jeep would struggle with. You never just follow it blindly.
Was in San Salvador, El Salvador not long ago and it seemed as though google Maps was straight up hallucinating eating establishments. Walked around a bunch trying to find spots for lunch that were in the map but there was nothing of the sort at the given addresses / locations. There were even pictures of legit looking places, was quite confusing.
Maybe dumb (or perversely incentivized) Maps contributors? I've found rural restaurants misplaced, even popular ones, and I enjoy correcting them if I can, for fun.
Many places all over the world including the Caribbean. The locals warn people not to use Google Maps.
My problem with Google is that they have a wildly inaccurate maps that would destroy the reputation of any cartographer, yet they publish their app giving dangerous and deadly routes happily gathering the ad revenue without so much a warning that their directions are certain to result in a horrible outcome. I am still appalled, but all we can do is warn people and share stories.
My problem with Google is that they have a wildly inaccurate maps that would destroy the reputation of any cartographer, yet they publish their app giving dangerous and deadly routes happily gathering the ad revenue without so much a warning that their directions are certain to result in a horrible outcome. I am still appalled, but all we can do is warn people and share stories.
There's an Ars Technica article titled Death by GPS, from 2016: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/05/death-by-gps/
Fascinating, but quite sad.
Fascinating, but quite sad.
This article was flagged because it makes Google look bad? (And a comment about hoping for India to develop their own alternative because of incentives was deleted after being down-voted to negative numbers.) Seriously when are people going to wake up to their biases here?
Does India have less rigorous people in charge?
India's civil institutions have more growing to do, certainly.
It's my sincere hope that India one day can drop the dependence on Google maps for a local alternative. Google has little incentive to get this right there, as they can really only monetize the product in cities.
This issue may be amplified by the heavy seasonal pollution which reduces visibility substantially
This issue may be amplified by the heavy seasonal pollution which reduces visibility substantially
[deleted]
Perhaps do more than hope?
Remember: Eyes on the road.
This happened at night, on an unlit road. You don’t have to blame google maps, but there is some responsibility on the transportation authority to mark a closed or dangerous road
Realistically most people don’t really do this but theoretically you should adjust your driving behavior to the environment. If you can’t see the road more than a few meters out, you can’t drive faster than the speed where you can break inside the visible area. If the road suddenly drops down vertically, you should still be able to stop. Theoretically.
In theory, yes, and for obstacles in the road that would usually be enough, but for the road just... ending... it's not so simple.
Aside from the obvious fact that you're not looking for signs that the road in front of you simply stopped existing, your ability to recognize when it does also depends a lot on the geometry of the bridge, the color of the surface you're driving on, and the presence or absence of lane markings. In ideal circumstances, the road is perfectly flat and you're driving on a cement surface with clear lane markings, so the sudden darkness of the missing road is easy to distinguish from the relatively bright surface. But those circumstances are unlikely to be a reality.
Roads in general and bridges in particular are often peaked, leading to less visibility on the other side of the peak. This peak is often low enough that you'd see an oncoming car or a deer no problem, but the sudden end of the road would be blocked, and also the change in angle as you drive directs your headlights up and away from the surface of the road. Then there's also the possibility that you're driving on black asphalt which would be hard to distinguish automatically from the back of "there's nothing at all for my lights to reflect off of", and lane markings are often not bright enough for their absence to be instantly recognized before it's too late.
In this particular case it's hard to see too much about the bridge's geometry from the picture, but from what I can see one thing that would definitely have slowed the drivers' reaction times is that the guard rails appear to extend a good 10-15 feet further than the road itself, which would have created an illusion of continuity.
All of these reasons are why it's neither Google nor the drivers who are primarily at fault here—as others have noted, there should have been at a minimum warning signs but better yet a full roadblock preventing access to the bridge.
Aside from the obvious fact that you're not looking for signs that the road in front of you simply stopped existing, your ability to recognize when it does also depends a lot on the geometry of the bridge, the color of the surface you're driving on, and the presence or absence of lane markings. In ideal circumstances, the road is perfectly flat and you're driving on a cement surface with clear lane markings, so the sudden darkness of the missing road is easy to distinguish from the relatively bright surface. But those circumstances are unlikely to be a reality.
Roads in general and bridges in particular are often peaked, leading to less visibility on the other side of the peak. This peak is often low enough that you'd see an oncoming car or a deer no problem, but the sudden end of the road would be blocked, and also the change in angle as you drive directs your headlights up and away from the surface of the road. Then there's also the possibility that you're driving on black asphalt which would be hard to distinguish automatically from the back of "there's nothing at all for my lights to reflect off of", and lane markings are often not bright enough for their absence to be instantly recognized before it's too late.
In this particular case it's hard to see too much about the bridge's geometry from the picture, but from what I can see one thing that would definitely have slowed the drivers' reaction times is that the guard rails appear to extend a good 10-15 feet further than the road itself, which would have created an illusion of continuity.
All of these reasons are why it's neither Google nor the drivers who are primarily at fault here—as others have noted, there should have been at a minimum warning signs but better yet a full roadblock preventing access to the bridge.
That's crazy talk.
It's common sense. Nobody is trained to drive a car using GPS navigation as their primary instrument for situational awareness. You're supposed to react to the conditions of the route to ensure the vehicle operates in favorable conditions - be it rain, snow or darkness. Military pilots are taught the same thing, because operating a vehicle is about maintaining control at all costs.
The road was lit by the car’s headlights. If they were going too fast to stop when an obstacle becomes illuminated and visible they should slow down or use the high beams.
I think it's a bit unrealistic to assume that people will correctly interpret "the road up ahead disappears" as an obstacle as quickly and at the same distance as they would see more common obstacles like something sitting in the road.
Also, even for changes that appear flush with the road-surface, it's probably easier for nighttime headlights to reveal a transition to dirt or grass, versus a yawning void that may resemble fresh asphalt or a big water puddle.
The problem was that there wasn’t an obstacle. In the dark a bridge abruptly ending is going to look very similar to the bridge curving downward after the peak, and the latter is a much more common occurrence.
Don't drive at night on unknown roads in a country with poor infrastructure - is a good general rule to live by.
Expecting Google to keep abreast of worldwide road damage is a bit of a stretch.