[HN Gopher] A Critical Analysis of the What3Words Geocoding Algo...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A Critical Analysis of the What3Words Geocoding Algorithm
        
       Author : ColinWright
       Score  : 144 points
       Date   : 2023-09-02 07:31 UTC (15 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arxiv.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org)
        
       | mwexler wrote:
       | I was surprised by the claims of the "ease" of sending your GPS
       | coordinates. I had no idea how to do this before this post. I dug
       | around a bit to see what I had missed.
       | 
       | Some apps make this easier than others, with Google Maps still a
       | mystery. In an emergency, or if I really needed a try location,
       | I'd feel more comfortable with the dirt-simple nature of w3w then
       | remembering how to find the lat/long and copying or saying all
       | the digits (there are a lot of them!)
       | 
       | Apple Maps surprised me by being the easiest. It shows lat/long
       | under the "My Location" pane which appears when I tap the blue
       | dot. They make it easy to copy /paste.
       | 
       | Google Maps on iOS replaces that with a "Plus code". I can't find
       | where my lat/long is in this thing, and gave up. (Hints and
       | Spoilers welcome!)
       | 
       | Over the years, I have tried other map apps which I pulled up to
       | see how they handled lat/long:
       | 
       | * Maps.me acts similarly to Apple Maps, tap the blue dot.
       | 
       | * Here We Go maps makes you drop a pin at your location, but then
       | displays lat/long. Magic Earth has same problem/approach. Who
       | would remember how to do that in a rush?
       | 
       | * Organic Maps over engineered this one: tap the blue arrow and
       | lat/long appears, but when you tap it to copy, it changes to a
       | new format each time (no commas, an alph-numeric I don't know, a
       | url, a UTM, an MGRS, and then back to lat/long). Turns out you
       | can press and hold to get a copy menu.
       | 
       | * Google Earth displays the lat/long right on the screen... But
       | it's not copyable.
       | 
       | W3w may have implementation problems, but it does a great start
       | on simplifying the answer to a verbal "where are you?". The rest
       | of these, esp Google Maps, just aren't quite there yet.
        
         | MaxMatti wrote:
         | My last two (android) phones showed a screen that included my
         | current coordinates whenever I call any emergency number. I
         | would say putting your phone on speaker and reading out the
         | numbers that are right there on the screen could be considered
         | "easy".
        
         | rozab wrote:
         | Google Maps pushes Plus Codes instead, they appear for every
         | location:
         | 
         | https://maps.google.com/pluscodes/
         | 
         | But normal co-ords also appear for me when I long tap anywhere
        
           | mwexler wrote:
           | Got it. You have to press and hold to get to the "non-Google"
           | standard info. Thanks for the pointer!
        
           | verytrivial wrote:
           | It's a disappointing experience, isn't it? You can only get a
           | raw lat/long if Maps can't generate an address. If it does,
           | you're out of luck for lat/long -- it's gone from the UI as
           | far as I can see.
        
       | rplnt wrote:
       | The one single reason, no need to look any futher, for why it
       | shouldn't be used by public services is because it's a private
       | for profit operation. A simple concept that might have been
       | useful, but is closed, so it won't be.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | mort96 wrote:
         | And, to my understanding, the concept is patented, so nobody
         | else can make an open version of it. So yes, the concept is
         | kept from being useful through the power of the state.
         | 
         | I really don't like patents.
        
           | dtgriscom wrote:
           | Patents are a great idea, and essential to technological
           | progress. It's a bargain you make with the state: in return
           | for publishing complete details on your idea, you get a
           | twenty-year monopoly on use of the idea. You get value for
           | your research, and the public gets full access to the idea
           | after twenty years.
           | 
           | Patents as currently implemented are a problem. Too many are
           | granted for too-vague ideas; patent trolls buy those vague
           | ideas and then milk them for rent; companies game the system
           | to get far more than the specified twenty years of
           | exclusivity.
           | 
           | So, it's a mixed bag.
        
           | DaiPlusPlus wrote:
           | IANAL - but (in most countries) you can't patent a concept or
           | an idea - only specific implementations of an idea (I.e. a
           | physical invention) - software patents and business-process
           | patents notwithstanding.
           | 
           | But that doesn't stop companies (especially those with a weak
           | technical moat) from abusing the system.
        
             | mort96 wrote:
             | "You can't patent a concept or an idea" also doesn't
             | prevent patent offices from granting patents on concepts
             | and ideas.
             | 
             | IMO, if we are to have patents at all, the patent offices
             | should be robust, well-funded systems which make sure that
             | no patent that's not genuinely a novel _implementation_ of
             | an idea gets granted. In reality, it seems like patent
             | offices more or less accept anything that 's written in
             | dense enough lawyerese, and it's up to the legal system to
             | slowly invalidate the bad patents _after_ they 've done a
             | ton of harm.
             | 
             | The fault here doesn't lie with the companies, but with the
             | whole patent system where governments are way too quick to
             | give out a state-backed monopoly of an idea. I find the
             | whole practice despicable.
             | 
             | Here's the What3Words patent:
             | https://patents.google.com/patent/CA2909524A1/en
             | 
             | The first claim of the patent is:                   > 1. A
             | computer implemented method of producing a location
             | identifier comprising:         > receiving at a processor
             | geographical coordinates of a location;         > at said
             | processor performing the steps of:         > converting the
             | geographical coordinates into a single unique value n;
             | > converting the single unique value n into a unique group
             | of a plurality of         > values; and converting the
             | plurality of values into an equal plurality of         >
             | respective words; and making the plurality of words
             | available as a location         > identifier.
             | 
             | It's hard to imagine anything remotely based around the
             | idea to "convert a location to a set of words" which
             | doesn't infringe on that claim.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | matkoniecz wrote:
         | Or more specifically, private company having monopoly on
         | addressing - with any decoding/encoding between location and
         | mnemonic format - controlled solely by them is not acceptable.
         | 
         | "The algorithm is patented in several countries, preventing
         | anyone from implementing a compatible algorithm or developing
         | anything like it as a competing standard. Notably the patent is
         | not restricted to schemes which use three words, so a
         | hypothetical "what4words" would potentially also violate the
         | patent.
         | 
         | The wordlist necessary for encoding/decoding what3words
         | locations is copyrighted, and is stored in an encrypted form in
         | the what3words mobile apps (so decrypting the wordlist would
         | likely trigger "anti-circumvention" laws such as DMCA SS1201)."
         | 
         | (from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/What3words )
        
         | trollied wrote:
         | It is for-profit, but they have yet to turn a profit. Their
         | financial situation is a disaster. 10s of millions of PS
         | burned, with very little income. Look for yourself:
         | https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/c...
         | 
         | PS31m loss in FY22.
         | 
         | Cybergibbons has also done a very good critique on how unsafe
         | it is. See here: https://cybergibbons.com/security-2/why-
         | what3words-is-not-su...
         | 
         | They are also very litigious towards people that call them out.
        
           | lioeters wrote:
           | > 10s of millions of PS burned
           | 
           | Sounds like it's been a great "success" for the people who
           | did the burning.
        
           | czechdeveloper wrote:
           | All the more reason to not use it as they may turn to some
           | way of aggressive monetization to fix that.
        
             | Nextgrid wrote:
             | > they may turn to some way of aggressive monetization to
             | fix that
             | 
             | That's the plan all along. The end-game is to become the
             | ultimate rent-seeker on the whole concept of addresses, so
             | that any device capable of looking up or resolving an
             | address is obligated to pay rent to them.
        
       | mytailorisrich wrote:
       | I don't really understand the need for W3W in most cases, at
       | least in Europe.
       | 
       | Can someone come up with something convincing?
        
         | stevekemp wrote:
         | The UK has had a bunch of news stories about using the app, as
         | it "could save your life". For example:
         | 
         | https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-49319760
         | 
         | But if you need internet access anyway I'm sure that GPS would
         | be a better thing to use, and there are also stories about the
         | use being questioned for accuracy reasons:
         | 
         | https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57156797
         | 
         | Really though I think it's a cute hack to use such a small
         | number of words to define points - but as a closed source, and
         | sue-happy company, there's really nothign to recommend it. Sure
         | the average Joe might not be familiar with reading/writing GPS
         | coordinates, but over a phone I'm sure an emergency dispatcher
         | could walk them through it.
        
           | Nextgrid wrote:
           | I have doubts the first story is true because telling a lost
           | victim with unknown bandwidth and battery level to download a
           | ~130MB (!) app just to get their location is completely
           | irresponsible and people should be fired for this if it
           | actually happened.
        
             | politelemon wrote:
             | These read like the weekly Apple watch ~~adverts~~
             | "technology news articles" on reddit, it keeps saving
             | people's lives and receives thousands of upvotes.
        
         | arlort wrote:
         | The most convincing use case (for plus codes, not w3w but same
         | logic) I've seen is that it can be used instead of an address
         | in slums and similar places where addresses aren't
         | available/practical
         | 
         | The problem is that it's useless without a phone but if you
         | have access to a phone then a gps location is better, unless
         | you have to remember it or put it in by hand
        
           | MaxBarraclough wrote:
           | There's a counterpoint in another comment, [0] that it works
           | poorly if you can't clearly hear each word. Plain old
           | longitude and latitude numbers perform better in that regard.
           | 
           | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37359790
        
           | ElFitz wrote:
           | > unless you have to remember it or put it in by hand
           | 
           | Or spell it out while in distress.
           | 
           | But it seems w3w fits best in the "interesting but ultimately
           | bad idea" bin.
        
         | zaxomi wrote:
         | Money (for w3w)
         | 
         | For everyone else: No.
        
         | RowanH wrote:
         | I'm from NZ which has logical addressing. Trying to find some
         | random business on some random shed, down some random lane in
         | the middle of nowhere in the UK can be quite the challenge -
         | post codes don't help and "turn left at the white post, go down
         | the lane till you get to a crow that's staring south, then
         | drive up past the.... " directions are terrible. What3Words has
         | been great for finding those places that use it... easier than
         | writing down a GPS co-ordinate.
        
           | mytailorisrich wrote:
           | The UK is a special case in that we have quite narrowly
           | defined postcodes, each of them restricted to a small area.
           | So if you manage to get there you're not far to wherever you
           | want to go.
           | 
           | In any case, do people really need to _write down_
           | coordinates these days. It 's probably all copy-paste or just
           | click a link.
           | 
           | I have just noticed that the Google Maps app now gives you
           | the Plus Code of any location.
        
           | growse wrote:
           | Why not plus codes? At least that's an open standard that
           | won't get rug-pulled.
        
         | delecti wrote:
         | I'll try my best attempt at a steel man: It can be a useful way
         | to convey location information via language (spoken or written
         | word), when there isn't a direct digital connection between
         | sources. That's genuinely a non-negligible use case.
         | 
         | So if you see an advertisement for a restaurant at
         | giant.purple.monkey, you can get there. Or maybe you're
         | coordinating plans on a non-smartphone call. Or you could put
         | the location on flyers (a QR code could work, but lots of
         | people hate those). Or you're dictating a location to a smart
         | assistant (Mercedes-Benz did a partnership, and AFAIK the in-
         | car assistant accepts W3W locations; I don't know for sure
         | though, I use android auto in mine; disclaimer: I work at MB).
         | 
         | In practice there are problems with plurals, homophones, and
         | other similar pronunciations (did he say heavy.monkey.dress
         | (near SF) or heavy.monkeys.dress (near LA)). I think
         | realistically W3W is almost never the best option, but I do
         | quite like the idea. Maybe if they did a better job filtering
         | words to avoid collisions, and made it 4 words? I imagine it
         | could actually be a pretty memorable way to describe a location
         | if it were something like adjective.noun.adjective.noun, and
         | with fewer near-collisions in the library (heavy/heady).
        
         | callalex wrote:
         | It's very lucrative for a few investors and public funds never
         | run out.
        
         | ZeroGravitas wrote:
         | Part of the reason, or at least a reason for a gap in the
         | market that this could establish itself in, was that some
         | countries who had built there own (quasi-)equivalents were
         | similarly protective of their "intellectual property" and
         | trying to charge for or just being awkward when providing
         | geolocation data.
         | 
         | https://longair.net/blog/2021/08/23/open-data-gb-postcode-un...
        
       | paulgb wrote:
       | Interesting that the researchers didn't analyze W3W directly
       | because it would violate their ToS, but instead constructed their
       | own word list. I would think that this sort of criticism of a
       | technology used by the government (for emergency services) would
       | be acceptable, similar to "fair use" in the US.
       | 
       | Edit: it looks like the list itself is not even available, they
       | would have had to reverse-engineer the app, so using a synthetic
       | list makes more sense.
        
         | PeterisP wrote:
         | It's worth noting that some _huge_ limitations /risks of W3W
         | are there because of the flaws in their word list choice, so if
         | you're analyzing a different wordlist, you explicitly aren't
         | looking at a big source of problems.
        
         | regularfry wrote:
         | It's interesting because I'm fairly sure that work has already
         | been done. Even without criticising the geocoding itself, the
         | fact that there are singlular/plural pairs in the word list
         | along with easily-confusable homophones says a lot about the
         | product.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | paulgb wrote:
           | It looks like a security researcher has looked into it and
           | was threatened with legal action for releasing his source
           | code.
           | 
           | https://cybergibbons.com/security-2/why-what3words-is-not-
           | su...
           | 
           | https://techcrunch.com/2021/04/30/what3words-legal-threat-
           | wh...
           | 
           | Edit: initially I said "sued", which was inaccurate. And the
           | repo included the proprietary word list, not just code.
        
             | jonatron wrote:
             | Your own previous comment doesn't match this take:
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21218385
        
               | paulgb wrote:
               | Ah, you got me! I didn't realize from reading the
               | TechCrunch article that the repo contained the actual
               | word list, I stand by my original opinion that the
               | takedown was legally valid.
        
               | kryptiskt wrote:
               | Based on what law? You can't copyright mere facts like a
               | list of words.
        
               | growse wrote:
               | If creative effort was involved in curating that list,
               | sure you can.
               | 
               | A book is just a list of words.
        
               | paulgb wrote:
               | You can't copyright the GPS coordinates of cities,
               | because those are facts. The data would be the same
               | whether you compiled it or not, and it would be absurd to
               | grant someone a monopoly on that data.
               | 
               | If you compile a word list yourself, you've created
               | something that doesn't describe the factual state of the
               | world; you've created something new.
               | 
               | FWIW, before the debacle, even the (apparent) author of
               | it appears to have admitted that it flaunted copyright:
               | 
               | > FWIW, I have reverse-engineered the what3words address
               | decoding algorithm. If anyone else with the luxury of
               | flaunting patents and copyrights is curious, check out
               | the demo at https://cardinalhood.github.io/what3words/.
               | It's written in JS, and runs in browsers and Node.js.
               | 
               | https://blog.ldodds.com/2016/06/14/what-3-words-jog-on-
               | mate/
        
               | mjg59 wrote:
               | Whether or not a collection of facts can be subject to
               | copyright varies across jurisdiction - in the US you
               | can't copyright the phone book, while the EU has a
               | specific concept of database rights. What's critical in
               | the US case is whether there's any creative expression in
               | the collection of facts or whether it's effectively
               | mechanical, and whether the w3w wordlist would be
               | protected under that would seem like an interesting case.
        
               | karaterobot wrote:
               | You can copyright lists of words if their selection or
               | arrangement amounts to creative work. I mean, a poem is a
               | list of words. A list of words that have been picked
               | because they have a certain length or because, when
               | combined with other lists, they produce a memorable,
               | unique combination may (and I guess _does_ in practice)
               | amount to a copyrightable creation.
        
               | 1970-01-01 wrote:
               | I believe it's patent infringement. You should never give
               | all the secrets of your patented device away, just the
               | concept to secure the patent.
        
             | regularfry wrote:
             | Well, threatened with legal action and wasn't up for
             | fighting it. It didn't get as far as him being sued, and
             | while I can't blame him in the slightest for that choice, I
             | would have been absolutely fascinated if it did go to
             | court. A compatible reimplementation of something that's
             | being sold to emergency services being slapped down
             | _because it 's compatible_ sounds like the sort of thing
             | useful precedent could have come out of.
        
         | NelsonMinar wrote:
         | There's a reverse engineering of What3Words from a few years
         | ago floating around out there called "What Free Words". It
         | includes what claims to be their word list. I imagine the
         | researcher is familiar with this but has chosen not to include
         | it in their research.
         | 
         | (W3W is very aggressive about pursuing possibly spurious IP
         | claims to remove any trace of What Free Words. In the past,
         | even mentioning it in a comment like this is enough to attract
         | a DMCA complaint.)
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | realusername wrote:
       | In French and (potentially other languages), I can add another
       | criticism on top of the paper, some the words used in the
       | dictionary are so obscure that a native speaker would not know
       | them. They probably generated them randomly from a dictionary
       | instead of asking native speakers.
       | 
       | The whole project has then no real purpose if you have to spell
       | unknown words.
        
         | lifthrasiir wrote:
         | It also doesn't work well with agglutinative languages like
         | Korean. The wordlist contains a lot of word sets only
         | differentiated by postpositions (e.g. gibbeun _delightful_ vs.
         | gibbeum _delight_ ).
        
       | pseudotrash wrote:
       | "Cybergibbons" from PentestPartners has done a teardown of W3W in
       | 2021 on twitter. It was very spicy and the takeaway was not that
       | it is just ugly implementation as some here suggest, but flawed
       | by design:
       | 
       | What3Words - The Algorithm
       | https://cybergibbons.com/security-2/what3words-the-algorithm...
       | 
       | Why What3Words is not suitable for safety critical applications
       | https://cybergibbons.com/security-2/why-what3words-is-not-su...
        
       | thelittlenag wrote:
       | Yep. I was (and to some extent still am) part of a startup that
       | found a better alternative to W3W. Our solution is the geohash
       | phrase, which you can find a discussion of here:
       | https://www.qalocate.com/solutions/geohashphrase/
       | 
       | The only major thing W3W has going for it is a very, very good
       | marketing department.
        
         | NelsonMinar wrote:
         | Will there be a free, open source system for resolving a
         | geohash phrase into a location? The #1 problem with What3Words
         | is its proprietary rent-seeking business.
         | 
         | Your link has ambiguous answers to "open source" and "free".
        
       | kmschaal wrote:
       | I think What3Words is in principle a nice idea, but it could have
       | been implemented much better. I am thinking of the following:
       | 
       | - have a fixed pattern, e.g. adjective.adjective.noun.
       | 
       | - create groups of words and put them in hierarchies. E.g.
       | noun->animal->predator
       | 
       | - cover the world with a one-dimensional Hilbert curve
       | 
       | - Increment the noun along the curve. When all nouns are
       | exhausted, start with the first noun again and increment the
       | adjective in the middle, a.s.o. (analog to how incrementing a
       | number with several digits works).
       | 
       | With this approach, the location purple.flying.tiger would be
       | next to purple.flying.lion.
        
         | thelittlenag wrote:
         | You should check out
         | https://www.qalocate.com/solutions/geohashphrase/
        
         | Gys wrote:
         | It is not like that by design. Remember, this is backed by VCs
         | that already put in a lot of money and in some future will want
         | to make a lot of money.
         | 
         | The 3 words idea is patented and the basic idea is to have a
         | drm protected database that is needed to find the actual
         | location. The play the long game. Ultimately selling access to
         | the database will make them money.
        
         | hgomersall wrote:
         | That's specifically problematic: what was their location again?
         | Uhm, it was purple flying something.. some kind of big cat..
         | lion or tiger..
         | 
         | Large conceptual distance between close physical locations is a
         | feature not a bug.
        
         | lhl wrote:
         | I spent a few minutes exploring a similar. Using the EFF
         | wordlist (7776 words designed to be unambiguous)[1] you should
         | be able to get down to about 100m^2 blocks (good enough for
         | SAR), the BIP39 word list (2048) is a bit too resolution, but
         | is a lot easier to pronounce, maybe worth some encoding
         | shenanigans to get it to work).
         | 
         | For my POC, I also used a simple 1D hilbert curve. Running a
         | simulation and plotting the words, you actually get pretty
         | decent resolution, and it's even alphabetical by distance.
         | Output from simple demo w/ BIP39 (math might not be correct):
         | https://ibb.co/MnmcRFk but you can see that the word order
         | actually make sense (although "winner" and "winter" are too
         | phonetically similar, but still, gets the point across).
         | 
         | [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/07/new-wordlists-
         | random-p...
        
       | jokoon wrote:
       | Generally, I would say standard addresses are better, because
       | streets are already a form of information compression, since you
       | always indicate a position on a street, you almost never indicate
       | a position in the middle on a forest of a field.
       | 
       | Streets are already transforming 2D information on a 1D line, a
       | bit like a hilbert curve.
       | 
       | GPS has a military use because the military go off-road, but
       | citizens really don't (99.999% of the time).
       | 
       | So yeah, it's another one of those case where software engineers
       | are trying to solve a problem where there was no problem in the
       | first place, because they don't like dealing with standard
       | addresses.
       | 
       | If you want to share a GPS coordinate, just use geohash, and use
       | NATO alphabet if you need to share it orally.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Closi wrote:
         | > Generally, I would say standard addresses are better, because
         | streets are already a form of information compression, since
         | you always indicate a position on a street, you almost never
         | indicate a position in the middle on a forest of a field.
         | 
         | > GPS has a military use because the military go off-road, but
         | citizens really don't (99.999% of the time)
         | 
         | This is true for most of the world but not true for a lot of
         | Africa - which does not have a real address system and relies
         | on describing where a person lives and then doing a pin drop
         | (websites will just accept pin drop).
        
           | jokoon wrote:
           | Sure, but this still mean western society should encode
           | streets, not coordinates
        
         | lifthrasiir wrote:
         | > GPS has a military use because the military go off-road, but
         | citizens really don't (99.999% of the time).
         | 
         | Lots of people do go off-road as a hobby. It's still probably
         | something like 90% or more, but alternatives to addresses do
         | have some utility. W3W happens to be an extremely bad solution
         | to somewhat legitimate problem.
        
         | Condition1952 wrote:
         | I used to live in a European city where many streets of a given
         | neighbourhood belonged to the same lexical field. If somebody
         | lived in "Falcon" street, you could go to their neighbourhood
         | without knowing the exact street. There were neighbourhoods
         | about birds, doctors, journalists, and IDK what else. I do not
         | know why people do not do that more often.
         | 
         | Roads that have consecutive numbers are also useful.
         | 
         | These w3w words can be useful for logistics but they seem to be
         | useless for human beings.
        
           | NikkiA wrote:
           | I live in such a lexical area, and you'd be surprised how
           | often we have to explain to DPD 'no, it says <X> Court, not
           | <X> Street, not <X> Rise, those are other addresses and we
           | don't live there, what is printed on the label? Oh, it's '<X>
           | Court'? How surprising'
        
             | bazzargh wrote:
             | in my hometown, there's a whole set of streets (<X> Avenue,
             | Drive, Place) that got built in the 90s with <X> being the
             | surname of the chair of the council planning committee at
             | the time, who was about to retire (ie the person who grants
             | permission to build those houses). You almost have to
             | admire the blatantness of the grift.
        
         | ElFitz wrote:
         | Adresses are anything but standard, many words can easily sound
         | alike, and in some places that address couldn't be properly
         | spoken by a someone not familiar with the language. That's when
         | there even are adresses for your location. Many places simply
         | don't have one.
         | 
         | As for gps coordinates, they are rather long and enunciating
         | long sequences of characters can be quite tedious as anyone who
         | has ever had to deal with game cd keys could tell.
         | 
         | That, and most people don't know NATO alphabet.
         | 
         | So I'd, on the contrary, say a geohash-ish approache relying on
         | a dictionary of carefully chosen hard to confuse and easy to
         | enunciate words has its merits.
         | 
         | But the optimal solution to me would be "press here to send
         | your exact location".
        
       | twodave wrote:
       | I feel like we could just boil this down to a math problem?
       | Classic lat long uses, what? 10 decimal digits? Grouped into 2
       | sets of 5? Switching to base 26 can only really eliminate 1 digit
       | from each set. That alone should make it pretty clear we aren't
       | going to make it much simpler. I suppose you could encode the
       | whole thing as one set of 10 digits and maybe represent that as 7
       | alphanumeric characters, but now to share it over the phone you
       | have to know a phonetic alphabet. Nah, let's stick to numbers...
        
         | joe__f wrote:
         | If you're working with three words I don't see why base 26
         | would be relevant, I think you'd be looking at n^3 where n is
         | the size of the set of words that you're considering. So
         | wouldn't you just, split the 2-sphere into N squares of a
         | certain size, and then each square has (lat,long) associated
         | with it, and then you pick n so that n^3 > N and come up with a
         | mapping between your N (lat, long) points and your set of n^3
         | three word sentences?
        
           | twodave wrote:
           | I guess I wasn't specifically trying to use 3 words but more
           | just demonstrate that 10 decimal digits is about as simple as
           | it gets in terms of clearly being able to communicate with
           | that much precision over a low quality connection.
        
             | joe__f wrote:
             | It seems to me that you're demonstrating that What3Words
             | doesn't provide precise coordinates on the globe to 3
             | decimal places. This is not surprising, given that they
             | don't intend to do that, they chop the globe up into
             | squares and provide less precision with easier human
             | readability.
        
       | solarkraft wrote:
       | > What3Words has grown rapidly in popularity over the past few
       | years and is used in logistical applications worldwide, including
       | by emergency services
       | 
       | It has? It is?
       | 
       | I've known about it for many years and even seen billboards by
       | them, yet never seen it used in practice.
        
         | dspillett wrote:
         | It has certainly picked up popularity, or at least use, in
         | certain outdoor communities. I've noticed running events are
         | increasingly noting the W3W address of their registration and
         | start locations for instance, and associations related to
         | emergency services have allowed themselves to be linked to the
         | app (https://www.airambulancesuk.org/news-knowexactlyewhere/
         | for instance).
         | 
         | I _thought_ I 'd seen adverts from official emergency bodies
         | mentioning W3W, but a quick search finds nothing mentioning the
         | fact that call-centres have the facility available that isn't
         | directly from W3W, a straight copy from one of their press
         | releases, or a discussion about the system's deficiencies (i.e.
         | https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56901363), so that might
         | be me having not been cynical enough to identify an astroturf
         | campaign!
        
         | croes wrote:
         | Especially when you can easily send your exact GPS location if
         | you make an emergency call with your smartphone.
        
           | matkoniecz wrote:
           | Note that GPS can be often unreliable or not precise enough.
           | For example, it would be pretty useful to specify correct
           | side of river/road/railway. Arriving at wrong side may result
           | in needing to do very long detour.
        
             | croes wrote:
             | And how do you get those 3 words?
             | 
             | Don't you need GPS to get the coordinates to translate them
             | to three words?
        
             | dspillett wrote:
             | True, but no pure coordinate encoding system is going to
             | help there. You need the user to be able to read a map of
             | some sort to:
             | 
             | 1. first verify that the position reading is accurate at
             | all
             | 
             | 2. adjust the reading appropriately
             | 
             | 3. note any further navigation issues that could be
             | important to people trying to head towards them (even with
             | a 100% accurate position that could be a problem).
             | 
             | The selling point of W3W is neither accuracy nor precision,
             | but the claim that it reduces transcription errors that
             | might send rescuers off in the wrong direction - for
             | instance the difference between OSMAP references 680287 and
             | 680278 putting you on the wrong side of the river with a
             | few mile trip in either direction to get to the other side
             | due to where crossing points are (there are no doubt better
             | examples than this, I arbitrarily picked an example close
             | by where I often run). This claim is disputed by a number
             | of people some of whom make a good case (for instance
             | https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56901363) and the
             | fact that W3W has often chosen to respond to criticism with
             | legal slaps instead of technical explanations suggests to
             | me that the criticism is right.
        
         | acc_297 wrote:
         | We used it at a remote forestry work camp a year or so ago
         | 
         | It was great for the supervisor to just tell everyone 3 words
         | to remember instead of UTC or LATLONG coordinates which I for
         | one probably would not have remembered in an emergency
         | 
         | You can kind of shop around for an easy set to remember too if
         | you get a weird set of words you can most likely just take the
         | grid box next to you
         | 
         | I'm sure it's not perfect but it was very convenient for our
         | particular use case
        
       | intunderflow wrote:
       | Publishing this from the UK is rather risky given What3Words have
       | a tendency to engage in SLAPPs on anyone who pulls back the
       | curtain on their product
        
         | urschrei wrote:
         | No, it isn't risky in the least. The analysis makes no use of
         | proprietary data and illustrates potential problems which arise
         | from choices made in the algorithm's design in an abstract way,
         | using a different word list from the claimed proprietary one
         | that W3W use. The legal threat in question was made because W3W
         | claimed that Andrew Toponce was linking to a product which used
         | their allegedly proprietary word list in a series of tweets.
         | Please don't make unfounded fear-mongering comments about
         | academic research - they cumulatively have the same effect as
         | the threats you claim to be drawing attention to.
        
       | eternityforest wrote:
       | Seems like a great opportunity for a new alternative system.
       | 
       | Preferably with an error correcting code built in. Homophones
       | shouldn't really matter, if you mess it up, the ECC could just
       | fix it.
       | 
       | Go with 4 words instead of 3.
       | 
       | Take Diceware, treat the words as a base 7775 number, convert to
       | binary, you get 50 bits.
       | 
       | You could do some fancy reshuffling, reorder the words by
       | similarity(Start with the first, then repeatedly pick the one
       | with the smallest edit distance), and do the conversion to an
       | integer such that any one word swapped to a close neighbor only
       | produces a small change.
       | 
       | My math knowledge is too limited to do this myself unless there's
       | something to copy and paste or a brute force hack, but couldn't
       | you do that by treating each word as a digit in 7775-ary gray
       | code?
       | 
       | Any one word being off to a nearby word, would then just give you
       | an error in the low order bits of the latitude.
       | 
       | Then you protect those bits with a hamming code, and have an
       | overall 2 or 3 but checksum for everything, so at least some of
       | the easy to make mistakes will be corrected, and most will
       | probably be detected.
       | 
       | Reliability could probably be better than reading off
       | coordinates, still faster, with only one extra word.
       | 
       | Plus the words themselves already have redundancy in them, if you
       | make a typo, autocorrect can fix it, and if it gets the wrong
       | one, the correction will likely catch it or flag the issue.
        
         | gpt5 wrote:
         | Good luck bypassing their patents.
        
       | karussell wrote:
       | Is it really "geocoding" what they provide and is the 3 words
       | code an "address equivalent"?
       | 
       | Wikipedia says geocoding is:
       | 
       |  _the process of taking a text-based description of a location,
       | such as an address or the name of a place, and returning
       | geographic coordinates, frequently latitude /longitude pair, to
       | identify a location on the Earth's surface._
       | 
       | In my opinion the 3 words are already geographic codes and not
       | something like an address. It sounds like nit-pick but it shows
       | the big problem of how they advertise that their service is a
       | solution to vagueness of an address. Because if you have a phone
       | with GPS available (or a similar device) you don't need
       | "geocoding" because you already have the precise
       | latitude/longitude pair. And if you do not have a device with GPS
       | you'll also have a problem getting the 3 words.
        
         | Waterluvian wrote:
         | Studied GIS for 8 years in university and I still cannot
         | understand the use case for W3W. It removes information with
         | little benefit.
         | 
         | If you have a position using a CRS you've got lots of
         | information about where it is relative to other positions in
         | the same CRS. If you have a street address, you have
         | hierarchical information of that location, and yea you can
         | geocode it if you want to exchange topology for position.
         | 
         | If you have a W3W you've got a memorable hash that tells you
         | nothing at all until you geocode it. Making a W3W really feels
         | like the opposite of geocoding.
         | 
         | Or consider it like this:
         | 
         | A coordinate pair tells you in some unit (degrees, metres, etc)
         | where something is relative to other coordinates (or the
         | datum).
         | 
         | An address tells you where things are topologically: "it's
         | inside this city. Along this street. Beside these other
         | addresses." (Usually...)
         | 
         | What does a W3W tell you?
         | 
         | And let me guess... to get any information out of a W3W you
         | must use their proprietary system. If that's the case, what an
         | absolutely moronic system to use.
        
           | 1970-01-01 wrote:
           | >What does a W3W tell you?
           | 
           | I'll bite. Using it as intended, both as a service and a
           | physical coordinator (via 3 text chars), reveals a location
           | with 3mx3m bounded precision. No other options exist that
           | provide a solution to "where's the thing" without losing this
           | key precision boundary.
        
             | Waterluvian wrote:
             | It's a memorable hash, yes. But you can't reason about
             | anything else using the hash alone, and being slightly off
             | can easily send you to the other side of the planet.
        
           | acc_297 wrote:
           | It's not a perfect system clearly but we used the 3-word code
           | when I worked in forestry because everyone needed to memorize
           | some kind of coordinates for emergencies requiring evacuation
           | from our camp but nobody had a GPS or a map just an old beat
           | up sat phone kept in the glove box
           | 
           | The words we had were pretty good ones something like banana-
           | sink-trampoline I don't remember now but using UTC or lat-
           | long would definitely have been harder to memorize
           | 
           | If you get a bad set of three words it's not so hard to
           | choose a neighbouring set if I remember the grid was pretty
           | fine grained I think our foreman "shopped around" for a nice
           | easy set somewhere on the nearby logging road reasonably
           | close to us
        
             | Waterluvian wrote:
             | Instead of memorizing some set of words, have a proper
             | emergency plan with a named set of locations. Militaries do
             | this all the time.
             | 
             | This basically replaces "okay so this is evacuation point
             | Alfa" with "okay so this is evacuation point carrots-bacon-
             | ovens"
             | 
             | In either case you still must consult an additional source
             | if you need it translated to a coordinate system. And if
             | you mix up "oven" with "ovens" you might end up evacuating
             | to the other side of the planet.
        
               | acc_297 wrote:
               | the 3 words aren't for us they are exclusively for the
               | search and rescue team who we talk to when buddy breaks
               | his spine and needs an airlift
               | 
               | And you can avoid the ovens vs oven problem by just
               | picking a coordinate with good simple words the
               | helicopter is fine to find you within a few hundred
               | meters of your camp
               | 
               | This system has been used extensively in remote resource
               | extraction because humans in the pressure of an emergency
               | can recall words and phrases better than numbers
               | 
               | It works pretty well for this use case
        
           | NelsonMinar wrote:
           | W3W's use case is to trick governments into adopting their
           | service, then collect payments forever more on what should be
           | free, non-proprietary addressing infrastructure.
        
       | nateberkopec wrote:
       | I volunteered in SAR for five years, and the topic of W3W would
       | occasionally come up.
       | 
       | For me, it's just already damn hard to make sure you can hear
       | numbers correctly over the radio. In marginal conditions, it's a
       | hell of a lot easier to use numbers (and requires less time due
       | to not having to repeat or ask for clarification).
       | 
       | Do I really want to be trying to say "arrows.midst.senses" over a
       | handheld radio?
        
         | simonjgreen wrote:
         | Very similar experience, decade in volunteer SAR with a lot of
         | police and fire overlap.
         | 
         | I hold exactly the same opinion as you, however what is very
         | telling us that the police and fire services love it. I think
         | that's because of the accessibility of the system rather than
         | the underlying algorithm or communication.
         | 
         | I am also coming to see w3w locations written more and more as
         | a more accessible alternative to coordinates, especially in
         | land sales and forestry situations.
         | 
         | I do particularly hate that government services and agencies
         | are becoming reliant on a commercially licensed pattern. It
         | does not tick the sustainability tickbox for me.
         | 
         | I hate it as much as I love it.
        
         | pharmakom wrote:
         | Can you suggest an iOS app that can give geo coordinates
         | appropriate for S&R? Ideally whilst offline?
        
           | sakjur wrote:
           | The built-in Compass app shows your longitude, latitude, and
           | elevation in addition to providing heading.
        
         | switch007 wrote:
         | SAR = Search and Rescue
        
         | PeterisP wrote:
         | Especially since "arrows.midst.senses" and "arrow.midst.senses"
         | are two different locations, and if you mishear it as
         | "arrows.midst.sends", that's yet another different valid
         | location.
         | 
         | Really, there's all the research done (since the invention of
         | early radio?) on what makes a phonetic alphabet or phonetic
         | code usable in noisy conditions, and instead W3W effectively
         | plants a field of rakes in front of blindfolded people.
        
           | margalabargala wrote:
           | Or worse, "arrows.midst.senses" and "arrows.mist.senses"
        
             | gorlilla wrote:
             | Arrows.missed.census
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | charcircuit wrote:
         | Why are you not sending text messages to each other if it is so
         | hard to understand? You can have plenty of error correction to
         | make sure the message always is correctly received.
        
           | Mordisquitos wrote:
           | If they are in a situation in which they can send W3W
           | coordinates by text message, then they are in a situation in
           | which they can send ordinary numerical coordinates by text
           | message.
        
             | charcircuit wrote:
             | I don't care what they use. I am stating they are using the
             | wrong protocol if there is a chance to introduce errors
             | when sending a message.
        
         | permo-w wrote:
         | poor implementation aside, the format has its advantages over
         | numerical coordinates
         | 
         | besides the greater public awareness of w3w amongst certain
         | demographics compared to coordinates, they may be harder to
         | hear, but it's much easier to read out three words correctly
         | than it is 16-18 numbers
         | 
         | the thing with words is that they're easy to hear in context,
         | but take them out of context and they're often indecipherable
         | 
         | perhaps a system that gives each square a coherent-sounding
         | sentence could be tried, although I'm sure that would have its
         | difficulties too
        
           | CapitalistCartr wrote:
           | Yeah, to avoid that confusion, it won't be three words when
           | spoken.
           | 
           | "arrows.midst.senses"
           | 
           | Will become "Alpha, romeo, romeo, oscar, whiskey, sierra.
           | Mike, india, delta, sierra, tango. Sierra, echo, november,
           | sierra, echo, sierra".
        
           | inopinatus wrote:
           | Coherence is unfortunately a subjective matter, as in the
           | phrase "too.much.butter" which is syntactically valid but has
           | no comprehensible meaning.
        
           | thakoppno wrote:
           | The fifth decimal of a GPS coordinate resolves down to 1.1
           | meter.
           | 
           | Ten numbers doesn't sound much more difficult than three
           | words to me.
        
             | mlyle wrote:
             | 12.34567N 89.01234W is 14 digits, 2 points, and 2 signs or
             | letters.
             | 
             | Earth is about 2^49 square meters. If you want precision of
             | ~8 square meters, you're going to need to convey 46 bits of
             | information (or use an optimization that gives less
             | resolution over oceans, etc, but that's only going to be a
             | small win-- a bit or two).
             | 
             | 46/3.3 = 14 digits, but the latitude/longitude coding is a
             | little less efficient because it's not uniform. A plus code
             | does it in 11 characters (not including the plus) worth
             | each 4.32 bits =~ 47.5 bits.
        
             | blacksmith_tb wrote:
             | I'd say that's not so different from using IP addresses
             | instead of DNS - generally not too popular (and that's for
             | IPv4...)
        
       | Jabbles wrote:
       | https://w3w.me.ss/ collects examples of bad experiences with W3W.
       | It is linked in the paper.
        
         | IshKebab wrote:
         | It really makes no sense to use it for emergency calls. 999/911
         | can already access your location by GPS.
         | 
         | I think the issue is that other less emergency numbers can't
         | (like 101). That's why they tell you to hang up and call 999
         | rather than transferring you.
         | 
         | But I don't know why they just don't add more numbers to the
         | "allowed to geolocate you" list. Or even build in a "send my
         | location" button in phone calls. You wouldn't even need to
         | modify the phone system - it could send DTFM tones.
        
           | Haemm0r wrote:
           | Really GPS on the device or just tower trangulation data? Is
           | there information availae on how this works? In Austria
           | emergency services can not access GPS directly afaik.
        
             | mrcode007 wrote:
             | I spoke with someone supplying 911 dispatch systems and
             | they said the data is available instantly from
             | triangulation data and it is extremely accurate
        
             | IshKebab wrote:
             | Really GPS, but it may not be as universal as I thought.
             | This 2016 article says it is launching only on Android and
             | only in the UK and Estonia.
             | 
             | https://www.mirror.co.uk/tech/google-now-automatically-
             | provi...
        
           | matkoniecz wrote:
           | Note that GPS can be often unreliable or not precise enough.
           | For example, it would be pretty useful to specify correct
           | side of river/road/railway. Arriving at wrong side may result
           | in needing to do very long detour.
        
             | dspillett wrote:
             | _> Note that GPS can be often unreliable or not precise
             | enough._
             | 
             | But the W3W app identifies your position by GPS, meaning it
             | is subject to the same general reliability problem via
             | inheritance. Yes, it displays a map as well, so you can
             | identify that you need to quote a different square, but in
             | an emergency situation I'd posit that people are more
             | likely to just read off the words and not really take in
             | the displayed map. And the same solution works for GPS
             | alone anyway - if you are reading your position using a
             | phone app it is likely displaying an approximate map also.
        
       | fsh wrote:
       | This is such a pointless product anyway. Every smartphone on the
       | market can share its precise location in a machine-readable
       | format with any other smartphone on the market. They even do it
       | automatically when calling an emergency service. Why would you
       | ever want to transmit a location by reading a string to someone?
        
         | acc_297 wrote:
         | If you are out of cell service and talking to search and rescue
         | via a satellite phone
         | 
         | This is the use case I've seen 3words applied most often
        
         | 1970-01-01 wrote:
         | >in a machine-readable format
         | 
         | You're missing the point. The w3w coordinate system is designed
         | to be readable by humans. The massive increasing adoption of
         | this system should be a large hint that it is useful.
        
           | thelittlenag wrote:
           | Oddly enough W3W fails to go far enough in the direction of
           | being friendly to humans. Hence all the many criticisms of it
           | as a solution.
        
       | ofou wrote:
       | Plus Codes are way better because they are open source. S2 is
       | kind of analogous (also from Google), but 64-bit integers. I
       | wonder if someone will ever come up with an Emoji encoding for
       | GPS, regional flags might facilitate everything. It's just a
       | random idea.
        
       | throwaway2562 wrote:
       | I'm pretty certain W3W are not now profitable and never will be.
       | They've raised a ridiculous sum for a service which does not
       | appear to be much-in demand.
        
         | Nextgrid wrote:
         | The whole business was about trying to seek rent on the whole
         | concept of addresses. I'm glad to see it not working out,
         | though it would've been better if all the people involved had
         | enough morals not to pursue such an idea in the first place.
        
           | ricktdotorg wrote:
           | in a different world, they might pivot to a wikimedia-like
           | "open maps foundation", open-source everything while riding
           | the wave of a huge amount of [new-to-them] good will, fat
           | 501c3 donations and much smarter people than them helping fix
           | their algorithm.
        
       | Recursing wrote:
       | For more on this, and why I think we shouldn't advocate for W3W,
       | see: https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2019/03/why-bother-with-what-
       | three-... for theoretical reasons and https://w3w.me.ss/ for some
       | practical examples.
       | 
       | https://plus.codes seems much better, but sadly it uses random
       | characters instead of words, which is much harder for humans to
       | remember ( https://xkcd.com/936/ ), so I don't think it will ever
       | catch on.
       | 
       | That's pretty sad in my opinion, is the whole concept of using
       | words to encode a location now owned by w3w? The implementation
       | seems trivial
        
         | dspillett wrote:
         | _> is the whole concept of using words to encode a location now
         | owned by w3w?_
         | 
         | Essentially, yes. There are patents involved, and W3W are
         | rather litigious so if you have a competing idea/implementation
         | that doesn't infringe be prepared to expensively defend that
         | position.
         | 
         | That hasn't stopped some good parody versions existing though,
         | perhaps the best known being https://www.fourkingmaps.co.uk/
         | [reporting in from hoes.abortion.cumshot.dope!]
        
         | lifthrasiir wrote:
         | > sadly it uses random characters instead of words
         | 
         | It was explicitly designed in that way [1]. It does make harder
         | to remember, but I think the memorizability constrains other
         | goals too much.
         | 
         | [1] https://github.com/google/open-location-
         | code/wiki/Evaluation...
        
           | avidiax wrote:
           | This seems like a missing UX feature. Give the NATO (or
           | regional) phonetic alphabet for the code, have a synthetic
           | voice saying those characters, and maybe have an audio modem.
        
         | Condition1952 wrote:
         | What I dislike of plus.codes is that they have replaced GPS
         | coordinates on google maps. GPS coordinates are multiplatform
         | where only Google maps seems to be able to decode those fancy
         | codes
        
           | growse wrote:
           | I get both latlng and plus codes when selecting a location on
           | the android games client.
           | 
           | Plus codes are an open standard, osmand at least also
           | supports them.
        
             | Condition1952 wrote:
             | So the problem is not Google maps but the other proprietary
             | app. Thanks for the heads up
        
           | snthd wrote:
           | Pluscode is a trademark. The actual standard is called "open
           | location code" and is unrestricted -
           | https://github.com/google/open-location-code/
        
         | ComodoHacker wrote:
         | >it uses random characters instead of words, which is much
         | harder for humans to remember
         | 
         | Do we really need to remember them, instead of just writing
         | them down?
        
       | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-09-02 23:02 UTC)