This blog post compares various geocoding APIs, focusing on pricing, free tiers, and terms of service. It covers prominent providers like Google Maps Platform, Mapbox, OpenCage, LocationIQ, Positionstack, and Here, examining their cost structures which range from usage-based billing to subscription models. The post highlights free tier limitations, including request quotas, feature restrictions, and commercial usage allowances. It also analyzes terms of use, particularly concerning data ownership, caching policies, and attribution requirements. The comparison aims to help developers select the most suitable geocoding API based on their specific needs and budget.
The blog post encourages readers to experiment with a provided Python script that demonstrates how easily location can be estimated using publicly available Wi-Fi network data and the Wigle.net API. By inputting the BSSIDs (unique identifiers) of nearby Wi-Fi networks, even without connecting to them, the script queries Wigle.net and returns a surprisingly accurate location estimate. The post highlights the privacy implications of this accessible technology, emphasizing how readily available information about wireless networks can be used to pinpoint someone's location with a simple script, regardless of whether location services are enabled on a device. This reinforces the previous post's message about the pervasiveness of location tracking.
Hacker News users generally agreed with the article's premise, expressing concern over the ease with which location can be approximated or even precisely determined using readily available data and relatively simple techniques. Several commenters shared their own experiences replicating the author's methods, often with similar success in pinpointing locations. Some highlighted the chilling implications for privacy, particularly in light of data breaches and the potential for malicious actors to exploit this vulnerability. A few offered suggestions for mitigating the risk, such as VPN usage or scrutinizing browser extensions, while others debated the feasibility and effectiveness of such measures. Some questioned the novelty of the findings, pointing to prior discussions on similar topics, while others emphasized the importance of continued awareness and education about these privacy risks.
Jeff Geerling's blog post highlights Beidou Position System (BPS), China's independently developed global navigation satellite system, as a lesser-known alternative to GPS. He details its development, global coverage, and increasing accuracy, emphasizing its potential as a backup or even primary navigation system, particularly for those needing to operate independently of US-controlled infrastructure. Geerling shares his experience testing BPS receivers, noting its comparable performance to GPS in his basic experiments and the growing availability of BPS-compatible devices. He concludes by advocating for greater awareness of BPS as a viable option in the GNSS landscape.
HN commenters discuss the viability and practicality of BPS, noting it's largely theoretical and faces significant hurdles. Several point out the immense infrastructure investment required for terrestrial positioning systems like BPS, especially compared to the established satellite-based GPS. Some question the accuracy claims and highlight potential interference issues in dense urban environments. Others express skepticism about BPS's resistance to jamming and spoofing, crucial for critical infrastructure. A few comments mention Loran-C as a more mature terrestrial alternative, although it has its limitations. Overall, there's a consensus that while intriguing, BPS lacks the development and backing to become a serious competitor to GPS in the foreseeable future.
Summary of Comments ( 63 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43770446
Hacker News users discussed the practicality of self-hosting geocoding, with some pointing out the hidden costs and complexities involved in maintaining a reliable and performant service, especially with data updates. Several commenters highlighted the value proposition of paid services like Positionstack and LocationIQ for their ease of use and comprehensive features. The adequacy of free tiers for hobby projects was also mentioned, with Nominatim being a popular choice despite its usage limitations. Some users shared their experiences with specific APIs, citing performance differences and quirks in their data. The difficulty in finding a truly free and unrestricted geocoding API was a recurring theme.
The Hacker News post discussing the Geocoding API comparison article has a modest number of comments, focusing primarily on the practicality of self-hosting a geocoding solution and highlighting alternatives not mentioned in the original comparison.
One commenter suggests Nominatim as a viable self-hosted option, pointing out that while it requires substantial resources (specifically mentioning 64GB of RAM), it offers complete control over data and avoids external dependencies. They further clarify that the high RAM requirement is mainly due to needing to hold the entire database in memory for optimal performance, but for less demanding use cases, smaller datasets could suffice, reducing the hardware requirements. This comment sparked a brief discussion about the feasibility of self-hosting for different levels of usage. Another user responded, corroborating the resource intensity of Nominatim, but highlighting the benefit of avoiding recurring costs associated with commercial solutions. They acknowledge the setup can be complex but ultimately rewarding for those with the technical expertise.
Another thread discusses the absence of Pelias from the original comparison. A user points out that Pelias, being an open-source geocoder built on Elasticsearch, is a strong contender, offering flexibility and customization. However, they also acknowledge that the setup and maintenance can be more involved than some other solutions. This comment prompted a response mentioning the operational overhead and complexity of Pelias, agreeing that it’s a powerful tool but requires dedicated effort to manage.
Further down, a commenter mentions LocationIQ as a provider they have had a positive experience with, particularly praising their generous free tier. This comment stands alone without further discussion.
Finally, a short exchange discusses the importance of data freshness for geocoding applications, with one user emphasizing how quickly location data can become outdated, and another suggesting regular updates and potentially supplementing with real-time data sources depending on the specific application’s requirements.
In summary, the comments offer valuable insights into the nuances of choosing a geocoding solution, emphasizing considerations beyond just pricing and free tiers, such as the trade-offs between self-hosting and using a third-party service, the complexities of maintaining open-source solutions, and the crucial role of data freshness.