This paragraph:<p><i>It is hard to envisage Google Maps' particularity because there are no real alternatives. But imagine if all of Google's data and programming ability was suddenly in the hands of a Namibian agriculturalist, a Sahelian nomad or a Senegalese fisherwoman – the maps they would conjure up would be completely different. They might well prioritise soil types over Starbucks, wells over Walmarts and the state of land degradation over panoramic street views of American towns. But we can only imagine. As was the case a century ago, it is still just a small group of western individuals with specific views of the world who have the resources to map it.</i><p>is sort of strange. It misses the fact that various countries in Africa have active digital mapping projects. Here's Namibia more or less doing what he suggests:<p><a href="http://www.nsa.org.na/33/10/Mapping/" rel="nofollow">http://www.nsa.org.na/33/10/Mapping/</a><p>Of course it isn't at the same scale as Google Maps, but then, it doesn't need to be.
Wow, Google Maps compared to iconography, that's new. It made me start thinking on how the information that we get online shapes our outlook. Yeah, we don't really search for wells or natural water reservoirs (what if some disaster happens), but mainly for Malls, Starbucks and ATMs, lol. Some countries have to rewrite books on History to let their people see the world as they want them to see, and Google Maps make so for the whole world and we take it for granted. Can Google cartographers pay some attention to water and mineral supplies for example? So we can select which type of online map to see.