[HN Gopher] What3Words - The Algorithm
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What3Words - The Algorithm
        
       Author : ykat7
       Score  : 213 points
       Date   : 2021-05-02 13:19 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (cybergibbons.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (cybergibbons.com)
        
       | Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
       | I used to think that w3w is kinda neat and really liked them, but
       | then I've learned that they basically stole the idea from some
       | guy from India, and their predatory copyrastic practices.
        
       | jonnycomputer wrote:
       | I think I'm missing something. The algorithm shuffles to prevent
       | words in adjacent squares from being the same? Why not just draw
       | from the set of 3-permutations and if satisfies that adjacency
       | constraint, remove from the pool of available permutations
       | (conditional draw without replacement). A solution would only
       | have to be found once anyway, right?
        
         | jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
         | Their business model is to own access to the dataset. They
         | don't want hierarchy as they want people to be required to use
         | their software every time they interact with these addresses.
         | They're just scummy. There's no reason to use this scheme vs a
         | hierarchical decomposition using something like S2.
        
         | ZiiS wrote:
         | Storing a full lookup database on every device is not pratical.
        
           | qsort wrote:
           | With ~3 million squares it would fit in a couple hundred
           | megabytes at the very most, even without any compression. It
           | may not be optimal, but it's certainly not unrealistic
           | either.
        
             | bspammer wrote:
             | The squares are 9m^2, surface area of the earth is 510
             | trillion m^2, so there's about 50 trillion squares. You're
             | not fitting that in an app
        
               | jonnycomputer wrote:
               | I think the surface area of the earth is 196,936,994 m^2
               | That's 21,881,888 3x3 squares. The surface area of
               | Jupiter is 23 trillion m^2.
        
               | cybergibbons wrote:
               | Your surface area is totally incorrect.
        
               | noir_lord wrote:
               | It is 510.1 trillion m2 (google result).
               | 
               | 3x3 is 510.1/9 - 56 trillion (and change).
               | 
               | > 196,936,994 m^2
               | 
               | Is equivalent to a perfect square with sides 14km
               | long...they say it's a small world..but not that small.
        
           | jonnycomputer wrote:
           | Again, I think I'm missing something. Apps don't maintain a
           | complete local database or resource records for the domain
           | name system either. We access name-servers for that
           | information. So I think I'm missing the use case for this
           | system.
        
             | cybergibbons wrote:
             | A design requirement of the app is it works offline.
        
       | simonw wrote:
       | What an extraordinary piece of analysis. Really thorough,
       | detailed and well-explained work.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | kybernetikos wrote:
       | I did a words lat/long system as a couple day project at
       | Christmas. https://wherewords.id/
       | 
       | I used the google S2 mapping, and spent quite a bit of time on my
       | own wordlist. I like the S2 mapping - it lets you use fewer words
       | to refer to a bigger area. I write a little bit about it here:
       | https://wherewords.id/+about
       | 
       | I would have really liked to have found some good research on
       | 'words that are hard to mistake when spoken aloud across various
       | accents', but in the end I just spent ages going through my word
       | list with various libraries and manually. And having friends
       | point me to locations that had incredibly rude or offensive
       | wherewords!
       | 
       | Really there should be a free, open source word<->location system
       | that we all just standardise on and build into GPS systems and
       | maps, because a common, free system would be genuinely useful.
        
         | rozab wrote:
         | How many times has the wheel been reinvented with these
         | phonetic word list schemes? Loads of crypto apps use them, e.g.
         | for bitcoin wallet recovery. Do they all roll their own scheme?
         | Someone should attempt to make a standard if none exists.
         | 
         | Interoperability isn't even that important, I just want to pull
         | something into my project.
        
           | kybernetikos wrote:
           | I originally planned to use the crypto bip39 wordlist but
           | ultimately it proved not to be suitable. I talk a little
           | about it https://wherewords.id/+about
        
             | rozab wrote:
             | Great summary, thanks
        
           | snypher wrote:
           | Crypto wallets may use BIP39 protocol, it might be close to a
           | 'standard'?
           | 
           | https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawi.
           | ..
           | 
           | Edit: 2048 English wordlist is here https://github.com/bitcoi
           | n/bips/blob/master/bip-0039/english...
        
           | ryebit wrote:
           | In addition to BIP39 cited below, the EFF also published some
           | useful wordlists a few years ago...
           | https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/07/new-wordlists-
           | random-p...
           | 
           | One has the nice property that all words have unique 3 letter
           | prefix. But not as many in prefix list (1296) as their "long"
           | list (7776).
           | 
           | That said I'm kinda partial to BIP39... first four letters
           | are unique, and words are more uniform than EFF prefix list.
           | 
           | But it looks like GPS addressing schemes like w3w need a MUCH
           | larger list by an order of magnitude.
        
             | kybernetikos wrote:
             | > But it looks like GPS addressing schemes like w3w need a
             | MUCH larger list by an order of magnitude.
             | 
             | If you're trying to get down to 3 words yes, but if you're
             | happy with 4 words (and I am), then the long list would be
             | more than enough. One problem I found was that I think
             | people don't want strongly negative phrases being used to
             | describe where they live. The BIP39 wordlist can create
             | word groups that are very offensive, or that would feel
             | rascist if applied to particular parts of the world. It
             | also has words that are easily confused for other words
             | like alter, aisle.
             | 
             | I did use words from BIP39, but had to remove quite a few
             | in the end for my wordlist (e.g. blast, load, black,
             | finger, female etc.) because of the unfortunate clusters it
             | could create.
             | 
             | Ultimately, I think coming up with a good wordlist is still
             | a bit of an unsolved problem. The ideal wordlist for
             | something like this
             | 
             | 1. can't form obviously rascist or overtly sexual word
             | clusters
             | 
             | 2. can be easily distinguished in spoken communication
             | 
             | 3. can be easily distinguished in written communication
             | 
             | 4. doesn't have words that sound similar to other words in
             | any of the most common accents
             | 
             | 5. doesn't have geographic words (it'd be confusing)
             | 
             | 6. is mainly positive or neutral words
             | 
             | 7. consists of words that are easy to spell, avoiding words
             | that are commonly misspelled and where there are not
             | different standard ways of spelling the words depending on
             | region
             | 
             | 8. has words that are not too long
             | 
             | 9. doesn't contain words that are concatenations of other
             | words in the wordlist
             | 
             | Obviously not easy if you need a significant number of
             | them.
        
       | micheljansen wrote:
       | I learned about pluscodes because of this and they seem quite
       | elegant: https://maps.google.com/pluscodes/
        
         | ehsankia wrote:
         | The algorithm is also extremely simple, I've seen code golf
         | with less than 100 char in most languages, and realistically
         | just a couple lines of code.
         | 
         | I like that you can recursively add more precision after the
         | plus, as well as truncate some of the start if you provide
         | context like the country or city. For example all of Montreal
         | lives within the "87Q8" block, so I can just truncate that away
         | if I specify that I'm in Montreal.
        
           | wyager wrote:
           | Doesn't the plus code algorithm rely on tiling the globe with
           | a space filling curve? I'd be surprised if that could be done
           | simply.
        
         | CA0DA wrote:
         | pluscodes are also known as "Open Location Code" and the github
         | repo is: https://github.com/google/open-location-code
        
       | rdpintqogeogsaa wrote:
       | Going by other people's experience with them[0], I wonder how
       | long this post will stay up.
       | 
       | [0] https://twitter.com/AaronToponce/status/1387933438305394690
        
         | boramalper wrote:
         | For future reference,
         | https://web.archive.org/web/20210502132217/https://cybergibb...
        
         | detaro wrote:
         | Given that cybergibbons has spent the past weeks looking into
         | this very loudly and publicly, don't expect him to back down.
        
         | ykat7 wrote:
         | Aaron posted an update. As of an hour ago they "consider the
         | matter closed":
         | https://twitter.com/AaronToponce/status/1388828107407245312
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | dmitrykoval wrote:
         | Story by TC - https://techcrunch.com/2021/04/30/what3words-
         | legal-threat-wh...
        
         | maxerickson wrote:
         | The cat may be far enough out of the bag at this point.
        
         | pmoriarty wrote:
         | Here [1] is the same thread on nitter (a twitter alternative
         | that does not require Javascript to read). Other nitter
         | instances can be seen here: [2]
         | 
         | The twitter thread also contained a reference to this
         | interesting article on "Why bother with What Three Words?"[3],
         | which itself links to other interesting articles:
         | [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]
         | 
         | W3W is a neat core idea poorly thought through. Hopefully one
         | day there'll be a truly open alternative that solves the many
         | issues W3W itself has.
         | 
         | [1] - https://nitter.cc/AaronToponce/status/1387933438305394690
         | 
         | [2] - https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/wiki/Instances
         | 
         | [3] - https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2019/03/why-bother-with-what-
         | three-...
         | 
         | [4] - https://blog.ldodds.com/2016/06/14/what-3-words-jog-on-
         | mate/
         | 
         | [5] - https://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/location-grid-not-
         | an-...
         | 
         | [6] - https://medium.com/@piesse/open-location-code-
         | what3words-74a...
         | 
         | [7] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18646650
         | 
         | [8] - https://www.quora.com/What-is-your-review-of-what3words
         | 
         | [9] - https://stiobhart.net/2016-01-15-stupidest-idea-ever/
         | 
         | [10] - http://blog.telemapics.com/?p=589
         | 
         | [11] -
         | https://www.grcdi.nl/Address_encoding_versus_traditional_add...
         | 
         | [12] - https://www.grcdi.nl/linkspas.htm
        
           | CA0DA wrote:
           | check out Open Location Code (https://github.com/google/open-
           | location-code) (aka PlusCodes)
        
       | jedimastert wrote:
       | I'm baffled they used any plurals at all. I feel like "only one
       | form of a word" should have been near top priority for generating
       | the dictionary. No plurals, no conjugations (even better would be
       | to pick one conjugation, say, infinitive) maybe even no
       | adjective/adverb forms of verb.
       | 
       | I wonder how many words in the english language would be left? I
       | know the english language is massive
        
         | cybergibbons wrote:
         | The word list already is 40k long. That's beyond most people's
         | vocab and includes really awkward to spell words.
         | 
         | IMO, if the solution is to use words, then What4Words would
         | have had a word list of less than 3000, resulting in a word
         | list with less confusable words and more accessible to children
         | and people who struggle to read or write.
        
           | pmoriarty wrote:
           | Spelling is the Achilles' heel of all word-based systems.
           | 
           | People who have trouble with spelling (such as non-native
           | speakers of whatever language the words come from or
           | children) may not be able to rely on word-based systems.
           | Word-based systems are also going to be hampered by speakers
           | of different accents.
           | 
           | Letter- and number-based systems are probably always going to
           | be much more robust, especially when used with a standard
           | phonetic alphabet[1]. There could even be a checksum
           | letter/number to make the system even more robust.
           | Unfortunately, such systems will never be as memorable or as
           | easy to say as a few words (spelling issues aside).
           | 
           | [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_phonetic_alphabet
        
             | flir wrote:
             | > Spelling is the Achilles' heel of all word-based systems.
             | 
             | Stick with nouns? Then you can use icons as supplements.
             | Ball, Pen, Light bulb, Burger, Guitar.
             | 
             | Possibly easier to translate between languages, too.
        
               | pmoriarty wrote:
               | How do you spell "guitar"?
               | 
               | It's not spelled like it sounds, and not every English
               | speaker (never mind people who can't speak English) is
               | going to know how to spell it. Some may try to spell it
               | "gitar", "geetar" or even "getar", for example. While
               | these maybe be "obviously" wrong spelling for skilled
               | spellers, they're not so for everyone.
               | 
               | Even with a simple word like "ball", it's not obvious
               | that it should have two l's at the end. Someone might
               | spell it "bal" when they hear it.
               | 
               | Spelling reform[1] movements have pointed out these and
               | many other issues with English spelling, but
               | unfortunately the alternatives they've come up with are
               | just not widely known, and at least some of them still
               | have their own problems (such as lack of standardization
               | due to different phonemic spellings for words spoken by
               | people with different accents).
               | 
               | Even were there some magical alternate spelling system
               | for English that was widely known among English speakers,
               | it would still be a stumbling block for people who don't
               | know English, as would the words of any other language..
               | as long as there are people who don't speak that
               | language.
               | 
               | So any word-based system is going to be problematic and
               | error-prone for some people.
               | 
               | [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spelling_reform
        
               | cortesoft wrote:
               | We should clearly use Esperanto words.
        
               | jameshart wrote:
               | Ah yes, simple phonetic words like 'light' and
               | 'guitar'...
        
             | jeroenhd wrote:
             | Spelling is very much an underappreciated problem. Written
             | English is particularly bad, sometimes requiring
             | memorization that's not much unlike Chinese characters,
             | because of the written language not adapting to the vowel
             | shifts and changes in pronunciation, as well as the mess of
             | a history the language has gone through as it developed in
             | the UK.
             | 
             | Children, dyslexics, non-native speakers, all will have a
             | hard time writing down many words even if they're part of
             | the top 1000 list.
             | 
             | With the right word set (avoiding homophones) and the
             | presence of autocorrect (or an input only allowing the
             | limited word list), you could probably create a pretty
             | resilient system if you only take the most common words
             | (top 1k would likely be sufficient). You'll need a longer
             | address, but remembering six words is a lot easier than
             | remembering six letters.
             | 
             | Sadly, the entire concept is flawed and doomed for as long
             | as the goons of What Three Words operate their business
             | like a failed media company, sending out threats,
             | falsifying legal documents to enforce takedown requests,
             | and lawyering up to anyone who even considers applying
             | "their" algorithm on their own. "Their" idea may be
             | patentable in the US, but in areas of the world where there
             | is no such patent, these goons cannot take down the
             | competition without lying and dishonesty and they've shown
             | to do anything to prevent any competitor from entering the
             | market.
        
               | pmoriarty wrote:
               | Using spelling correction on a limited word set that
               | avoids ambiguities is a brilliant idea. It wouldn't solve
               | every issue with word-based systems (for instance, people
               | who don't speak the language will still have problems,
               | and it obviously wouldn't be as reliable without a
               | computer) but it's much better than W3W, and I hope
               | whoever implements an open W3W alternative implements it.
        
           | kybernetikos wrote:
           | I did one of these for fun at the beginning of the year, and
           | ended up needing to spend way more time on the wordlist than
           | I'd expected. In the end I felt that a list of 4096 words was
           | a decent compromise between accuracy and is still fairly
           | managable for trying to remove words that are too easy to
           | mistake for each other. It lets you do everywhere on earth to
           | slightly more accuracy than what3words in 4 words.
           | 
           | Something that what3words does is not have an obvious
           | hierarchy of words (e.g. where the first one covers a larger
           | area, and subsequent words home in). I didn't like that, but
           | I understand why they do it - if a single word is going to
           | cover a large area, you have to be extra careful that you
           | don't choose something offensive for a particular region. By
           | having no obvious structure, they get away with being less
           | careful on the wordlist.
        
             | eterm wrote:
             | The issue of hierarchy is that it's orthogonal to having
             | very different results for nearby areas.
             | 
             | With a hierarchy you immediately run into, "Am I in
             | gibbons.apple.banana or was it gibbons.apple.bandana" which
             | is just down the road.
             | 
             | Without hierarchy it jumps out that one of those results is
             | improbable if tallied with any knowledge of roughly where
             | the person is.
        
               | kybernetikos wrote:
               | As you say, the issues are orthogonal. I randomise my
               | wordlist so places next to each other don't have words
               | necessarily close to each other in the alphabet. But
               | because it's hierarchical e.g. most places in the uk
               | start 'bishop'. I think this is good because you learn to
               | recognise places,but imagine if loads of places in India
               | started with the word 'colony'... it's a problem you
               | don't have to worry about if you don't use a hierarchical
               | scheme.
               | 
               | https://wherewords.id/
        
           | noir_lord wrote:
           | Funnily enough I did that math the other day when this kicked
           | off.
           | 
           | It comes out to 4th root of ((510.1 trillion)/9) which is
           | ~2743.8
           | 
           | Where it gets interesting is that it's only ~4752 for 1mx1m
           | cells :)
           | 
           | Another use for `Correct Horse Battery Staple` I guess.
        
           | ehsankia wrote:
           | > The word list already is 40k long
           | 
           | To be fair, if the lookup table is created properly, the
           | majority of habited locations should be within the first two
           | bands, which means you're really only using 2500, or 5000 of
           | those words. That was the whole point of the banding system,
           | I assume.
        
             | cybergibbons wrote:
             | It's promoted for use in search and rescue, so other bands
             | are in use.
        
               | mike_d wrote:
               | I used to do SAR. Lost persons do a terrible job of
               | communicating because they are afraid and often
               | emotionally and physically drained. But if you have them
               | on a radio or a cell phone, you can generally locate them
               | without the persons direct assistance.
               | 
               | One of the many things that really annoys me about W3W is
               | that it sucks for actual navigation. If I am at
               | waffle.tire.sigh is that north or south of keys.sad.tree?
               | Am I heading in the right direction?
        
               | cybergibbons wrote:
               | Yeah, multiple MRT members have contacted me to say this
               | is a real struggle. If someone is on the move, it's
               | virtually impossible to work out what direction they are
               | going.
        
       | mnw21cam wrote:
       | And there was I thinking that the main problem with What3Words
       | was a total lack of error detection/correction.
        
       | thinkingemote wrote:
       | Is this algorithm based on the "clean room" reverse engineering
       | effort?
        
         | cybergibbons wrote:
         | No, I went from the patent and using the API instead:
         | 
         | https://twitter.com/cybergibbons/status/1386344576856825858
         | 
         | https://twitter.com/cybergibbons/status/1386393951276609539
         | 
         | https://twitter.com/cybergibbons/status/1386867562554793984
         | 
         | https://twitter.com/cybergibbons/status/1387164507705860097
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | eruci wrote:
       | I built a latlon<->word system using geonames as the source of
       | the words. https://3geonames.org 146000 global place names in
       | total.
       | 
       | The first word is the name of the most important geographical
       | location in the given area while the other 2 words are quasi
       | random. https://3geonames.org/LONDON-MOSCOW-PARIS is next to
       | https://3geonames.org/LONDON-MOSCOW-GASSIN . (places that are
       | about 160 metres apart will share both the first and the second
       | word)
       | 
       | Lately I've been thinking of modifying the system to only use
       | place names from the country where the point falls in, so you
       | will only get British place names for locations that fall inside
       | Great Britain. You could also modify the code (it is open source)
       | to whatever you like.
       | 
       | There is an infinite number of ways to skin this cat, but I doubt
       | we will ever all agree on just one.
        
         | rgovostes wrote:
         | Seems confusing to me to describe a location using the names of
         | unrelated other places. It would be even more confusing to
         | limit the word set in the way you describe. "Where do you
         | live?" "London-Oxford-Leeds." "Where is that?" "Outside
         | Brighton."
        
           | eruci wrote:
           | https://3geonames.org/London-Oxford-Leeds can also be
           | described as https://3geonames.org/LONDON-UAS
        
       | mattowen_uk wrote:
       | Everyone knows numbers. Just use semi accurate GPS co-ordinates.
       | Been around for decades, and already built into that phone you
       | are holding.
        
         | userbinator wrote:
         | Coordinates are also ordered and predictable, given your
         | current position you can intuitively determine in what
         | direction (and approximately how far) where other positions
         | are.
        
       | maxehmookau wrote:
       | As an idea, what3words appears to exist only to make money for
       | its owners.
       | 
       | The UK already has an open, easy to use, well documented and
       | battle-tested way of defining any point in the country. Grid
       | references.
       | 
       | What3Words doesn't actually solve a problem that isn't already
       | solved.
        
       | teachingassist wrote:
       | What3Words accounts at Companies House in the UK are extremely
       | interesting.
       | 
       | They burned through just over PS15,000,000 in 2019, for a _total
       | revenue_ just under PS400,000 from 100+ employees.
        
         | mavhc wrote:
         | Costs a lot to get all the free publicity from journalists, got
         | to avoid them pointing out it's a private company trying to
         | control access to a coordinate system, or mentioning any
         | alternatives.
        
         | ealexhudson wrote:
         | I thought you were kidding, but apparently not. Even worse :
         | PS320k of that revenue was from sales to Daimler AG (a
         | shareholder) and is described as "services". I would love to
         | understand the business model here, they've maintained PS23M
         | ish cash at hand since end 2017 but I'm not clear what the play
         | here is...
        
           | trollied wrote:
           | I think that PS23m is just capital from issued shares.
           | Anyway, it's certainly not viable. I guess it remains to be
           | seen how long investors will keep on chucking money at it to
           | keep it afloat.
           | 
           | Filing history, if anyone else is interested: https://find-
           | and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/c...
        
             | ealexhudson wrote:
             | No, it's definitely cash and equivalents. The shareholder
             | account is virtually PS50m at this point, and they had
             | nothing like that cash until the raises in 2017.
        
         | jack_riminton wrote:
         | I always wondered if they were actually used by anyone then I
         | saw their recent advertising and it seems to focus on emergency
         | services and finding places in large fields
         | 
         | I created a project using an alternative method using gifs for
         | directions: http://gif.direct which I personally think is more
         | useful (if less refined!)
        
           | kawsper wrote:
           | They are dangerous for emergency services, here is a case
           | where W3W showed a location many miles away:
           | https://twitter.com/isleofmandan/status/1386455377949122561
           | 
           | Someone have also compiled a list of pairs that only differs
           | by one letter, like these two:
           | 
           | instants.lightening.precedents
           | 
           | instants.lightning.precedents
           | 
           | You can see the whole map here:
           | https://twitter.com/cybergibbons/status/1385891425108250626
           | 
           | I wish they would just use "pluscodes" instead, the algorithm
           | is opensource and doesn't depend on a specific dictionary:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Location_Code
        
             | saalweachter wrote:
             | You also need to distinguish between the contexts where you
             | need addresses versus coordinates.
             | 
             | Lat-longs, plus codes, and word-encoding schemes are all
             | coordinates -- they identify a point or area on the globe.
             | 
             | Addresses are last-mile navigational instructions. "Apt D,
             | 123 Main St" allows anyone with local knowledge to navigate
             | efficiently to the location indicated: first they drive to
             | Main Street, then they proceed along the ~monotonically
             | numbered parcels to 123, then continue to the apartment
             | labeled "D".
             | 
             | The advantage of coordinates is that they don't require
             | local knowledge and can identify arbitrary points; the
             | advantage of addresses is that they encode instructions for
             | land navigation that takes into account which parts of the
             | land are passable.
        
           | andi999 wrote:
           | What is wrong with classical coordinates for emergencies?
           | Like 42 degrees north, 13 minutes and 4.5 seconds?
        
             | blackboxlogic wrote:
             | I know of one rescue that didn't go smoothly because there
             | was confusion between degrees, minutes, seconds and decimal
             | degrees.
        
         | Doctor_Fegg wrote:
         | They've raised over PS80m. Astonishing.
         | 
         | https://tech.eu/brief/london-based-location-tech-what3words-...
        
         | tgv wrote:
         | You mean people thought they were going to make a load of money
         | with this? And that they spend 5 times more money on this
         | simplistic google maps ripoff than the 40 employee company I
         | work for, which runs a PS250k profit? I am baffled.
        
       | NelsonMinar wrote:
       | A bunch of replies to this are "I implemented my own version of
       | What3Words". That sport has been around for a few years now.
       | https://what3emojis.com/ is probably the most long-lived; I'm
       | writing from telephone bus eggplant. (Hacker News' lack of emoji
       | support makes interop here a little difficult.)
       | 
       | Unfortunately http://www.what3fucks.com/ seems to have ended
       | their incredible journey.
       | 
       | It's a really stupid idea for addressing, triply so when you
       | consider the pathetic little proprietary word database that's
       | What3Words tool for extracting rents. Geohash is the oldest
       | system that solves the problem of "give me a short textual name
       | for a place" and has a nice ability to get more precise.
        
         | daleharvey wrote:
         | A location near me
         | 
         | geohash: gcuvz30z w3w: drift.march.donor
         | 
         | I had to switch tabs 3 times to copy across the geohash since
         | the page I found it on wouldnt let me copy and paste, I
         | remembered the w3w immediately.
         | 
         | I am 100% against something like a global addressing standard
         | being owned by a single company, however the amount of people
         | ignoring w3w's extremely obvious utility and pointing to
         | pluscodes, geohashing, grid references, geocoords etc is pretty
         | tiring.
         | 
         | We have a standards body for emojis, cant we just agree on an
         | open w3w implementation.
        
           | jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
           | Nelson is right. A bunch of us have played around with
           | designing our own human friendly geohash scheme.
           | 
           | If you divide earth up into 4m x 4m cells using something
           | like the S2 projection, you can uniquely address these using
           | phrases of 3 words drawn from a database just under 32,000
           | words. The S2 projection ensures that the words in the higher
           | levels of the hierarchy will change quite slowly. In most
           | local contexts there will be only a single commonly repeated
           | word. In a small number of more exceptional points there'd be
           | just 2 or 3 unique values in use. So in practice you could
           | use longer addresses and a smaller dictionary if you liked.
           | This is probably a good idea for ergonomic reasons, as we can
           | pick a set of words that are readily translated between
           | languages, weed out any that are overly similar, etc.
           | 
           | I never uploaded the code anywhere, and it's on a laptop that
           | died, but I busted out a toy version of the above in an
           | afternoon a couple years ago just for fun. I used 4 word
           | addresses and a database of about 2,500 of the most common
           | english words.
           | 
           | W3W's entire value proposition is that they should earn a
           | global rent off the use of addresses vs the above. It's
           | absurd. And they intentionally avoid hierarchical
           | organization of the addresses specifically to make it
           | necessary to use their app/service to look crap up, which
           | makes their service hilariously worse than the scheme
           | described above.
           | 
           | With an S2 style hierarchy people will intuitively begin to
           | recognize the common words in their living area at each
           | level, and can use them in conversation without even
           | consulting software. This is completely impossible with W3W's
           | scheme.
           | 
           | The problem isn't figuring out a good scheme. Most of the
           | people on this forum can manage that in a couple hours. The
           | problem is the same with all other standardization efforts:
           | getting a critical mass of people who give enough of a crap
           | to use the standard.
           | 
           | This is an area where Google could ship something in maps and
           | it'd have a decent chance of adoption outside of it. If you
           | work on maps consider pitching a more ergonomic version of
           | plus codes.
        
           | real-dino wrote:
           | > cant we just agree on an open w3w implementation.
           | 
           | They don't want that to happen, at least not an open source
           | implementation. They want to be in the position of Pantone
           | and colour.
        
           | tobr wrote:
           | > I remembered the w3w immediately.
           | 
           | But in what situation is this useful? How is it more
           | convenient or useful than a regular address? Even if you're
           | somewhere where there are no addresses, and you need to
           | describe a location that has no other descriptive
           | characteristics, isn't it a lot easier to just drop a
           | pin/bookmark on the map in your smartphone? Especially
           | considering you can't reasonably run the algorithm without a
           | digital device of some kind.
        
             | physicsguy wrote:
             | It makes sense more in some countries than others.
             | 
             | In Japan, for e.g. there are no street numbers.
             | 
             | In the U.K. we have postal codes that _generally_ refer to
             | a street. But they sometimes can be only a portion of a
             | street, sometimes they're a building, sometimes they're a
             | large business who might be across multiple sites. At other
             | times (usually rural) they're very very long roads, so
             | sticking the address into a Sat Nav takes you to that road
             | but not the point on the road that you want to travel to.
             | Because the system is so mixed, 99 /100 nthe address is
             | absolutely fine, but occasionally it isn't. I agree
             | dropping a pin is more useful though.
             | 
             | Ireland had no postal codes at all until recently.
        
             | daleharvey wrote:
             | Transferring the location from one place to another
             | 
             | So aside from the fact that my address has around a 50/50
             | success rate with people trying to find it (My address is a
             | building + street name that has a mirror building + street
             | name across the other side of a motorway)
             | 
             | Transferring the address, the obvious example people give
             | is emergency services but this applies to so many
             | situations, I volunteer with a litter picking group and
             | they have found w3w extremely useful to communicate
             | locations, you "can" transfer a pin but you need those
             | devices set up to do a transfer already, with w3w I can
             | check the website for the location on my way out the door
             | and enter it to my map on the way, people who arent setup
             | as contacts can transfer it without having to trade phone
             | numbers etc.
             | 
             | Its hard to understand how someone could not find a way to
             | easily memorize and communicate a specific location a very
             | useful thing?
        
               | timita wrote:
               | Which is absolutely fine in a non-critical scenario such
               | as picking litter, or finding your mates at a festival.
               | But, as the article demonstrates in detail, there are too
               | many possibilities for error, which in a life or death
               | scenario we cannot afford. Emergency services often deal
               | with exactly that kind of scenario.
        
             | kitd wrote:
             | _But in what situation is this useful?_
             | 
             | On the phone? There's a bit I don't like about W3W, but
             | efficiency of communication is their killer feature.
        
             | avianlyric wrote:
             | Classic example is emergency services.
             | 
             | Having the ability to turn your location into three words
             | that will easily survive communication over a phone with
             | dodge signal is very useful.
             | 
             | You could argue that that lat/lon or a street address
             | should be fine. But memorising a two sequences of numbers,
             | then repeating them accurately over a poor phone line is
             | hard.
             | 
             | Street addresses are also hard, there's frequently not a
             | nearby road sign, or worse, the road name is ambiguous
             | (your city may have multiple streets with the same name).
             | Hell there's no guarantee that the emergency services even
             | have your street name in their database if it's a new
             | street, or it's name was changed recently.
             | 
             | So basically any scenario where you need to transmit a
             | location accurately between two parties who are operating
             | two different mapping systems, and communicating over an
             | unreliable comms link (phone, radio etc), is a good use
             | case for W3W. W3W is like the phonetic alphabet for
             | locations.
             | 
             | Personally I hate the fact the W3W are extracting rents
             | from this services. But I can't deny the utility of their
             | service.
        
               | tobr wrote:
               | That's honestly incredibly far-fetched. I need to have a
               | GPS and a device that is able to do the conversion from
               | lat/long to words. Given that prerequisite there are
               | about a dozen better ways to solve the issue. Both me and
               | the emergency services in the area need to know what
               | these word codes are, or we're spending time explaining
               | that in an emergency situation. The ability to use it
               | offline is nice but assumes that I prepared for that
               | ahead of time.
               | 
               | Not to mention that a 40000 word word list has a lot more
               | room for misremembering and mishearing than spelling out
               | a sequence of digits. If it had used a word list that was
               | designed to be easily recognized by sound, had no plurals
               | etc, that would have been a different thing.
               | 
               | Also, emergency services are local, but this system
               | wastes bandwidth on being able to describe any location
               | in the world.
        
           | cybergibbons wrote:
           | Why 3 words? Why not 4?
        
             | aembleton wrote:
             | Because it is enough to provide sufficient accuracy.
        
               | detaro wrote:
               | Why not 4 words and a smaller, less error-prone word
               | list?
        
               | cybergibbons wrote:
               | Only with a ridiculously long word list containing
               | plurals and words people can't spell.
        
         | jhgb wrote:
         | > https://what3emojis.com/ is probably the most long-lived
         | 
         | What's the spatial resolution of that? Seems to be dozens of
         | meters at best.
        
           | SahAssar wrote:
           | The about page says 4m, but I could drag their example map
           | over multiple blocks in my city without the emojis changing.
        
             | jhgb wrote:
             | That's exactly the thing I noticed, too.
        
         | Twisell wrote:
         | The fundamental flaw for me goes deeper.
         | 
         | Both services mimic the principle of URL shortener applied to
         | geographic location. (Even if, as you point out, one is public
         | domain machine readable and the other is proprietary human
         | readable one).
         | 
         | But why are url shortener so popular in the first place? Why
         | are they perfectly usable even if competing services exits?
         | (and I'd bet most popular are self-generated like
         | youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ).
         | 
         | I think they are popular mainly because they rely on the
         | ubiquitous HTTP protocol to be fully interoperable with almost
         | any HTTP client.
         | 
         | There is no such universal protocol or library to manage
         | geospatial data provided in "custom hashed format". But all of
         | the various tools available will gladly accept a
         | latitude/longitude XY coordinate pair because they are
         | perfectly machine readable and while not human friendly they
         | actually mean something so that professionals can make sense of
         | the numbers if needed. Also as far as variable precision is
         | needed, let's throw a round(,) function and be set with it.
         | 
         | So as of now both solution are essentially some kind of private
         | API with no widely available and stadardised support to revert
         | to a usable latitude/longitude. So I would guess many GIS power
         | users look at this suspiciously secretly hoping that no one
         | will ever share such obfuscated data format to them for any
         | critical use.
         | 
         | NB : For more complex data representations there is a whole
         | standard defining organisation https://www.ogc.org that define
         | horribly complex (yet useful) data structures and gladly make
         | the standard freely and publicly available. Maybe they could
         | enforce a flavor of geohash into a FOSS standard so that
         | tooling could refer to it, but I'm not sure it's on their
         | roadmap.
        
         | jokoon wrote:
         | Yes, geohash makes more sense, letter numbers are better, since
         | people would still have to memorize words, which is a little
         | similar with letters. They would still write it down or copy
         | paste it.
         | 
         | Another solution would be a smaller set of easier words, on
         | subgrids like geohash, because gradual precision is really
         | better.
        
         | lbbb wrote:
         | Other similar implementations were either DMCA'd off of various
         | platforms or had their domains seized by lawyers, their legal
         | actions go back a few years already
         | 
         | I suppose the emoji version survives because it doesn't
         | infringe on their word list or patent, which specifically is
         | for "words"
        
         | rburhum wrote:
         | Hi Nelson, maybe you can explain this to me: why so much hate
         | towards what3words? Chris once came to our office to see if
         | there was a fit for us to use their invention. We did not find
         | that it solved a pain point for us, so nothing came out of
         | it... but the amount of rage that I see that they have been
         | accumulating towards the years. Is there a story behind it
         | beyond "I want to do something similar and can implement it,
         | but <patent>?" Thanks in advance
        
           | myself248 wrote:
           | Furthermore, there's a payola scheme behind the scenes, to
           | make sure automakers implement it in their infotainment
           | systems and stuff, which they hope will force others to
           | license it.
           | 
           | It's a great idea, a mediocre implementation, and a set of
           | business practices that make the antichrist jealous.
           | 
           | On top of that, their bloodthirsty pursuit of any criticism
           | means that legitimate discussions of the system's flaws can't
           | happen in the open. The lack of that criticism may have
           | encouraged some services to adopt W3W without realizing its
           | flaws, and there's already some hinting that such a flaw may
           | have already interfered with actual rescue operations:
           | 
           | https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56901363
           | 
           | Thankfully the rescue was able to proceed once they switched
           | to another coordinate system, and that case didn't result in
           | a fatality. How many other such cases are there? We might
           | never know. The company may have literal blood on its hands
           | at this point, but fixing the flaws would require discussing
           | them first, which we can't do as long as they're empowered to
           | shut down discourse.
        
           | wwalexander wrote:
           | A standard for global addressing should not rely on a
           | proprietary algorithm or wordlist, as it means that there is
           | no legal method for using the standard besides using (paying
           | for) What3Words' API. This fits the common definition of
           | rent-seeking behavior.
           | 
           | This couples with the technological issues outlined in the
           | article above. I believe the vitriol against W3W is fueled by
           | the combination of rent-seeking behavior on a standard of
           | poor technical quality.
           | 
           | I'm also bothered that one of the main use cases W3W's
           | marketing highlights is for specifying locations in
           | emergencies, a totally non-commercial/public-good
           | application. W3W presents itself convincingly to laymen as
           | this sort of public-good open standard, but they're just
           | another startup with a proprietary product they're hoping to
           | monopolize.
        
           | jedberg wrote:
           | The hate is _because_ they patented it. It is a useful idea,
           | but it would be far more useful if the algorithm and wordlist
           | were public domain and didn 't require a license to use it.
        
           | DyslexicAtheist wrote:
           | W3W has sent a legal threat to a security researcher[1][2]
           | for tweeting about and sharing the open-source software
           | alternative WhatFreeWords. Great way to make friends!
           | 
           | and here[3] is a long article of why w3w isn't safe for the
           | use-cases they're peddling.
           | 
           | tl;dr: they're a garbage company, with a garbage product, run
           | by ghouls.
           | 
           | [1] https://techcrunch.com/2021/04/30/what3words-legal-
           | threat-wh...
           | 
           | [2]
           | https://twitter.com/AaronToponce/status/1387933438305394690
           | 
           | [3] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what3words-confusion-
           | suitable...
        
           | NelsonMinar wrote:
           | Hi Ragi! My complaint with What3Words is 85% their
           | proprietary business model. They are literally trying to
           | convince less developed countries to adopt their system in
           | lieu of developing their own addressing systems. So that
           | What3Words can forever force that country and anyone sending
           | mail to it to pay them fees. It is evil.
           | 
           | This is not theoretical; back in 2017 they were bragging at
           | how they'd convinced the nations of Kiribati, Mongolia, Sint-
           | Maarten, Cote d'Ivoire, Djibouti, Tonga, Nigeria and the
           | Solomon Islands to use them as a national standard. I'm
           | certain that the actual usage is exaggerated on their part
           | but imagine if it were really true. Addressing is far too
           | important to be held by a proprietary company. Addressing is
           | a national service that countries should provide as part of
           | being a nation, and there's a long history of countries
           | developing addressing systems that does not rely on some
           | predatory intellectual property system.
           | 
           | 5% of my annoyance is What3Words pretends like they invented
           | some brilliant new idea that's unique and should be IP
           | protected. No, the idea is older than them. And the
           | implementation is obvious to anyone with ordinary skill in
           | the art of addressing. Anyone competent with GIS concepts can
           | design a similar system in a few days' work. And there are
           | many better alternatives.
           | 
           | The other 10% of my complaint is their static addressing
           | model. It's not good that two houses nearby have completely
           | different addresses; real addressing always has hierarchical
           | names and there's a reason for that. There's also a problem
           | using words in that they are localized to the country's
           | language. That's better than forcing English everywhere but
           | makes interoperability way more confusing. Finally there's
           | all the problems people keep finding with their word lists;
           | that's covered well by other writers so I won't go into it.
           | 
           | PS: I misspoke when I said Geohash is the oldest similar
           | system. MGRS dates to the 1940s. There may be older ones,
           | too.
        
       | pbronez wrote:
       | Skip What3Words, use Placekey: https://www.placekey.io/
       | 
       | It's a better identifier and a much friendlier organization.
       | Technical details here:
       | https://docs.placekey.io/Placekey_Technical_White_Paper.pdf
        
         | Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
         | Placekey identifier is hard to remember and read.
        
         | TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
         | Is that another proprietary algorithm?
        
         | rocky1138 wrote:
         | Slick site, but I'm not able to use it as I'm not in the USA.
        
         | JimDabell wrote:
         | Placekey seems neat, but it only fully supports the USA and
         | partially supports the Netherlands.
        
           | ape4 wrote:
           | lol it says "universal"
        
       | hyko wrote:
       | A proprietary geocode solution remains a _terrible_ idea in
       | general, and especially in this case.
       | 
       | The government should buy them, close them, and invest in
       | replacing the system with an open and international standard.
        
       | contravariant wrote:
       | Can't say I'm fond of their '///word1.word2.word3' notation. Why
       | couldn't they just use a URI scheme?
        
         | datfrojo wrote:
         | To me that's clear. Firstly most of their target audience has
         | no knowledge of what a URI scheme is and only care about the
         | three words. Secondly would be the branding ///x.y.z is
         | subjectively better branding then w3w://x.y.z
        
           | contravariant wrote:
           | I must admit that I don't really care much for how marketable
           | their notation is.
        
             | Nextgrid wrote:
             | Their whole "business model" (in quotes because thankfully
             | it doesn't seem to be anywhere near profitable) is to
             | convince naive people that they're the good guys helping
             | emergency services locate people, that their system is
             | flawless and that they're the first to solve this "problem"
             | so they can then rent-seek from GPS/mapping developers once
             | enough idiots swear by this system and start demanding it
             | as a feature.
        
       | naambread wrote:
       | I remember this guy way back from alt.ph.uk, he was always doing
       | quality posts back then. A brilliant fellow. Great to see another
       | excellent write-up from him.
        
         | cybergibbons wrote:
         | Old skool! Those were the days :)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | sneak wrote:
       | Note that this company believes this algorithm to be proprietary,
       | and seem to have threatened people publishing information about
       | it.
       | 
       | I avoid using or publicizing it for that reason.
        
       | PartiallyTyped wrote:
       | Geohash can give an accuracy of 0.019 KM at 8 characters, with
       | each additional character reducing error by nearly 1 or half an
       | order of magnitude and uses just 32 characters.
       | 
       | Why not just map geohash to words? 32^9 << 40000^3, or if you
       | want higher accuracy, 32^12 << 40000^4.
       | 
       | The mapping is very simple, 32^3 < 40000, map 32^3 to words and
       | back, then split geohash to 3 character long chunks, look them up
       | and combine them. Going back is equally trivial.
        
         | maxerickson wrote:
         | The "words for location" thing is kind of a non goal anyway.
         | They aren't good addresses, which benefit from following
         | patterns and being predictable, so the use case is for
         | communicating a location.
         | 
         | It really only makes sense if you have an electronic device
         | that implements the algorithm and a communications channel that
         | only works for voice. Otherwise a beacon sent as data makes
         | more sense, and that can be the coordinates directly.
        
           | carstenhag wrote:
           | In some places (even in "first-world" countries like Spain,
           | my own experience) postal services, the police and visitors
           | don't have a clue where your house is located at.
           | 
           | I'd pay 0,50EUR per delivery if amazon.es would allow me to
           | specify a what3word-address and have UPS/DHL/etc use it. For
           | years the drivers have been calling us, asking where the
           | address ist at...
           | 
           | Also really fun when there were burglars in your house and
           | the police doesn't know where to drive to.
        
             | detaro wrote:
             | But as parent says, for that use case, the word-ness isn't
             | relevant - picking coordinates of a map or any of the other
             | position encodings would work just as well. And not require
             | paying W3W license fees for no good reason.
        
             | maxerickson wrote:
             | In the US we bit the bullet and regularized addresses (to
             | the county level, which is typically the biggest entity
             | providing urgent emergency services).
             | 
             | A rural place I used to live formerly had a named road,
             | that got switched to a number that roughly locates it east
             | to west in the county, and then the house number was set to
             | roughly give the distance north from the nearest crossroad
             | to the south. So anyone that understands the addressing
             | system in the county can basically drive directly to any
             | address without any further information (with perhaps a few
             | short detours where roads don't continue or the like).
             | 
             | Of course this works much better in a place that has
             | relatively new properly lines that were drawn based on a
             | regular survey, but I'd think there would be some momentum
             | to at least make things simpler over time.
        
       | iudqnolq wrote:
       | If you abandon the requirement to completely replace the existing
       | systems you can have a much smaller wordlist. For example, if we
       | trust people to know what county they are in we could have
       | duplicate triples in each country. Arguably we could go even
       | smaller, to the national subdivision (eg state) level
        
         | ehsankia wrote:
         | Isn't that what... zip codes/postal codes are? The whole point
         | of systems like this is to be able to point to any place on
         | earth.
        
           | iudqnolq wrote:
           | The point is to easily uniquely identify a point. I'm arguing
           | the tuple (California, some, simple, words) solves for that
           | use case better than (cromulently, extraneous, uniquely).
           | We're (I hope) not doing this just to be different but
           | because it has useful new properties. For example, street
           | address + zip isn't ideal when you're talking to Search and
           | Rescue.
           | 
           | Edit: You can think of this like 9 square meter resolution
           | zip codes with a human friendly representation, yes.
        
             | ehsankia wrote:
             | Fair enough. That being said, I think PlusCodes are
             | basically the better worldwide "zipcodes", and while they
             | don't have the "three simple words" property, they do have
             | the property you speak of.
             | 
             | You can basically truncate the first 4 character of the 8
             | character chunk if you specify a city/country that's within
             | one block. You can also add arbitrary precision after the +
             | sign by adding more sub-blocks.
        
               | iudqnolq wrote:
               | That does sound great. I'll look into it.
        
       | qsort wrote:
       | Is there any reason why they didn't use a simple hashing
       | algorithm? At first sight it seems to me like they are just
       | trying to invent one, but without actually knowing how.
        
         | cybergibbons wrote:
         | Two reasons: 1. It needs to be reversible so you can go from
         | words to lat/lon. 2. They wanted to use shorter words in
         | cities, so the distribution of low n didn't want to cover the
         | full range of m. (this could probably be solved by some sort of
         | banding though).
        
         | michaelt wrote:
         | They have to do that if they want to ensure locations near one
         | another never share two of the three words, due to the birthday
         | paradox.
         | 
         | Given their 9-square-meter locations and their urban area word
         | list of 2500 words, if you assigned the mapping randomly then
         | within London you'd expect there to be about 70,000 locations
         | with another location sharing two words within 50m.
         | 
         | To put it another way, there would be a 13% chance of a soccer
         | pitch containing two locations that shared two words.
        
         | maxerickson wrote:
         | They wanted it to be proprietary.
        
       | yawnxyz wrote:
       | is the problem just that they treat plural and singular words
       | differently? Wouldn't just removing plurals, homophones, and
       | difficult to spell words get rid of most of these problems?
        
         | input_sh wrote:
         | Yes, mostly if you try to use voice recognition though.
         | Example: arrows vs arose, picture vs pitcher etc.
         | https://mobile.twitter.com/cybergibbons/status/1388416763549...
        
         | cybergibbons wrote:
         | You would still get high densities of cells which share two
         | words being present close together, leading to any issue with
         | the third word causing a confusing location.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-02 23:00 UTC)