Why must Chinese maps be obfuscated? Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? ...
Why do games have consumables?
Will I lose my paid in full property
"My boss was furious with me and I have been fired" vs. "My boss was furious with me and I was fired"
Does Mathematica have an implementation of the Poisson binomial distribution?
Why did C use the -> operator instead of reusing the . operator?
Has a Nobel Peace laureate ever been accused of war crimes?
Married in secret, can marital status in passport be changed at a later date?
What's the difference between using dependency injection with a container and using a service locator?
A strange hotel
How would I use different systems of magic when they are capable of the same effects?
How do I check if a string is entirely made of the same substring?
"Whatever a Russian does, they end up making the Kalashnikov gun"? Are there any similar proverbs in English?
What ability score does a Hexblade's Pact Weapon use for attack and damage when wielded by another character?
All ASCII characters with a given bit count
Retract an already submitted recommendation letter (written for an undergrad student)
What was Apollo 13's "Little Jolt" after MECO?
How much of a wave function must reside inside event horizon for it to be consumed by the black hole?
Scheduling based problem
Can we hide a text first in a picture and then hide that image again in one more image?
Is accepting an invalid credit card number a security issue?
Did the Roman Empire have penal colonies?
Does Feeblemind produce an ongoing magical effect that can be dispelled?
What’s with the clanks at the end of the credits in Avengers: Endgame?
Map material from china not allowed to leave the country
Why must Chinese maps be obfuscated?
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraIs the ruling Chinese party seen more favorably than it was 25 years ago?Is the Chinese Communist Party really an autocracy?Chinese contingency plans due to N. Korea collapsingWhy don't Western countries penalize Chinese companies in the same way that China restricts Western companies working on its territory?Why won't the Western countries block Chinese websites in retaliation for China blocking American and European online services?Would a Social Credit System like the one contemplated in China be Constitutional In The U.SWhat is the fundamental difference between post WW2 German and post Cold War Chinese model of industrialization?Why doesn't the Chinese foreign minister speak English?Chinese government internet censorship - statistics on evasion?Why doesn't the Chinese Communist Party induct everyone into the party?
According to this answer on Travel.SE, the Chinese National Bureau of Surveying and Mapping requires that published maps of China must include a certain deviation between the map and the real world.
In the comments, the answerer says that although the statute doesn't provide a reason, it is commonly believed to be for national security.
Have any Chinese officials or official documents provided a reason why maps must include this deviation?
china
add a comment |
According to this answer on Travel.SE, the Chinese National Bureau of Surveying and Mapping requires that published maps of China must include a certain deviation between the map and the real world.
In the comments, the answerer says that although the statute doesn't provide a reason, it is commonly believed to be for national security.
Have any Chinese officials or official documents provided a reason why maps must include this deviation?
china
add a comment |
According to this answer on Travel.SE, the Chinese National Bureau of Surveying and Mapping requires that published maps of China must include a certain deviation between the map and the real world.
In the comments, the answerer says that although the statute doesn't provide a reason, it is commonly believed to be for national security.
Have any Chinese officials or official documents provided a reason why maps must include this deviation?
china
According to this answer on Travel.SE, the Chinese National Bureau of Surveying and Mapping requires that published maps of China must include a certain deviation between the map and the real world.
In the comments, the answerer says that although the statute doesn't provide a reason, it is commonly believed to be for national security.
Have any Chinese officials or official documents provided a reason why maps must include this deviation?
china
china
asked 15 hours ago
indigochildindigochild
19.5k258141
19.5k258141
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
What the Law Says
After reading that statute, it turns out that it does not explicitly require that maps be obfuscated.
However, the law does require the usage of a certain datum. A datum is basically the mathematical model which describes the shape of the earth (see this question on GIS.SE for more detail). According to wikipedia, the agency responsible for implementing this model has created the GCJ-02 datum, which has a random disturbance - effectively slightly randomizing the location of objects on the map.
U.S. - Selective Availability
There are many unsourced claims online which say that this random disturbance is for security reasons. Although I couldn't locate an original source making this claim, there is precedent for it.
Prior to 2000, the United States Department of Defense required the usage of 'Selective Availability' (SA). SA was a technology built into the GPS system which introduced random errors. GPS.gov, the official U.S. source of information about GPS, describes it as:
Selective Availability (SA) is the deliberate introduction of error to the precise timekeeping of the GPS satellites, thereby reducing both positioning and timing accuracy for civilian users. It was designed to provide U.S. and Allied military forces with a navigational advantage in times of crisis or conflict.
(source: GPS.gov)
Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.
– indigochild
8 hours ago
1
Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.
– Fizz
58 mins ago
@Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.
– pipe
41 mins ago
add a comment |
Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the SA case where bits were unavailable unless you knew the key. The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites (duh) setting these coordinates. What this GCJ-02 business is is a non-disclosed, but not-so-hard-to-reverse engineer conversion algorithm from other coordinates. The big picture looks like this:

That's the reverse-engineered conversion from the "bog standard" WGS-84, displayed as a vector field. As the blog from which I too that image says, the offsets are basically constant locally, but they vary across China.
It's speculated that abides by this globally in order to please Beijing (and abide by their Chinese license that allows them to take street pictures there). Other maps providers (that don't operate locally in China) aren't so bothered.
On Google something funny happens even when you’re viewing in the US: the Chinese border crossing plaza (on the north side) doesn’t line up with the Macau crossing (on the south side). This is due to a law where companies are forbidden to map China accurately, OpenStreetMap’s ability to avoid that law, and the independence of Macau and also Hong Kong (which has the same discrepancy).
As for the reason, according to one Chinese developer:
Before the WGS-84 <--> GCJ-02 transform algorithm leaked and made available everywhere on the Internet (eg. this repo), some people tried to get a lot of samples of WGS-GCJ point pairs and sold the dataset to people in need. But this kind of dataset is no longer useful because we now have the algorithm itself.
Are all these in the Chinese law?
No. They are mostly in some vague administrative orders or industry regulations made by the government. There is a Code of Geological Survey (http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2005-08/05/content_20947.htm, Chinese), though. But it only says data obtained through survey is classified by default (Article 29) and companies without a permission cannot do survey (Chapter 5). Nothing about GCJ-02 is made officially public.
Why does the Chinese government do this?
National security, they say. But people developing LBS apps tends to believe that it is because of money. The government charges Chinese companies for the "shift correction" feature. We need to make a reservation with the government and take the source code of our app to the bureau to get the feature compiled with our code.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "475"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f40991%2fwhy-must-chinese-maps-be-obfuscated%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
What the Law Says
After reading that statute, it turns out that it does not explicitly require that maps be obfuscated.
However, the law does require the usage of a certain datum. A datum is basically the mathematical model which describes the shape of the earth (see this question on GIS.SE for more detail). According to wikipedia, the agency responsible for implementing this model has created the GCJ-02 datum, which has a random disturbance - effectively slightly randomizing the location of objects on the map.
U.S. - Selective Availability
There are many unsourced claims online which say that this random disturbance is for security reasons. Although I couldn't locate an original source making this claim, there is precedent for it.
Prior to 2000, the United States Department of Defense required the usage of 'Selective Availability' (SA). SA was a technology built into the GPS system which introduced random errors. GPS.gov, the official U.S. source of information about GPS, describes it as:
Selective Availability (SA) is the deliberate introduction of error to the precise timekeeping of the GPS satellites, thereby reducing both positioning and timing accuracy for civilian users. It was designed to provide U.S. and Allied military forces with a navigational advantage in times of crisis or conflict.
(source: GPS.gov)
Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.
– indigochild
8 hours ago
1
Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.
– Fizz
58 mins ago
@Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.
– pipe
41 mins ago
add a comment |
What the Law Says
After reading that statute, it turns out that it does not explicitly require that maps be obfuscated.
However, the law does require the usage of a certain datum. A datum is basically the mathematical model which describes the shape of the earth (see this question on GIS.SE for more detail). According to wikipedia, the agency responsible for implementing this model has created the GCJ-02 datum, which has a random disturbance - effectively slightly randomizing the location of objects on the map.
U.S. - Selective Availability
There are many unsourced claims online which say that this random disturbance is for security reasons. Although I couldn't locate an original source making this claim, there is precedent for it.
Prior to 2000, the United States Department of Defense required the usage of 'Selective Availability' (SA). SA was a technology built into the GPS system which introduced random errors. GPS.gov, the official U.S. source of information about GPS, describes it as:
Selective Availability (SA) is the deliberate introduction of error to the precise timekeeping of the GPS satellites, thereby reducing both positioning and timing accuracy for civilian users. It was designed to provide U.S. and Allied military forces with a navigational advantage in times of crisis or conflict.
(source: GPS.gov)
Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.
– indigochild
8 hours ago
1
Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.
– Fizz
58 mins ago
@Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.
– pipe
41 mins ago
add a comment |
What the Law Says
After reading that statute, it turns out that it does not explicitly require that maps be obfuscated.
However, the law does require the usage of a certain datum. A datum is basically the mathematical model which describes the shape of the earth (see this question on GIS.SE for more detail). According to wikipedia, the agency responsible for implementing this model has created the GCJ-02 datum, which has a random disturbance - effectively slightly randomizing the location of objects on the map.
U.S. - Selective Availability
There are many unsourced claims online which say that this random disturbance is for security reasons. Although I couldn't locate an original source making this claim, there is precedent for it.
Prior to 2000, the United States Department of Defense required the usage of 'Selective Availability' (SA). SA was a technology built into the GPS system which introduced random errors. GPS.gov, the official U.S. source of information about GPS, describes it as:
Selective Availability (SA) is the deliberate introduction of error to the precise timekeeping of the GPS satellites, thereby reducing both positioning and timing accuracy for civilian users. It was designed to provide U.S. and Allied military forces with a navigational advantage in times of crisis or conflict.
(source: GPS.gov)
What the Law Says
After reading that statute, it turns out that it does not explicitly require that maps be obfuscated.
However, the law does require the usage of a certain datum. A datum is basically the mathematical model which describes the shape of the earth (see this question on GIS.SE for more detail). According to wikipedia, the agency responsible for implementing this model has created the GCJ-02 datum, which has a random disturbance - effectively slightly randomizing the location of objects on the map.
U.S. - Selective Availability
There are many unsourced claims online which say that this random disturbance is for security reasons. Although I couldn't locate an original source making this claim, there is precedent for it.
Prior to 2000, the United States Department of Defense required the usage of 'Selective Availability' (SA). SA was a technology built into the GPS system which introduced random errors. GPS.gov, the official U.S. source of information about GPS, describes it as:
Selective Availability (SA) is the deliberate introduction of error to the precise timekeeping of the GPS satellites, thereby reducing both positioning and timing accuracy for civilian users. It was designed to provide U.S. and Allied military forces with a navigational advantage in times of crisis or conflict.
(source: GPS.gov)
edited 8 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
indigochildindigochild
19.5k258141
19.5k258141
Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.
– indigochild
8 hours ago
1
Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.
– Fizz
58 mins ago
@Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.
– pipe
41 mins ago
add a comment |
Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.
– indigochild
8 hours ago
1
Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.
– Fizz
58 mins ago
@Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.
– pipe
41 mins ago
Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.
– indigochild
8 hours ago
Not done yet, but this is what I have so far.
– indigochild
8 hours ago
1
1
Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.
– Fizz
58 mins ago
Upvote, but the "error" in GCJ-02 datum does not seem to be random, i.e. it's security by obscurity (of the [conversion] algorithm). Quite a different thing.
– Fizz
58 mins ago
@Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.
– pipe
41 mins ago
@Fizz "Random" has many meanings. An algorithm generating a predictable stream of numbers is still called a "random number generator". The output of an encryption algorithm is supposed to look random to the observer, etc.
– pipe
41 mins ago
add a comment |
Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the SA case where bits were unavailable unless you knew the key. The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites (duh) setting these coordinates. What this GCJ-02 business is is a non-disclosed, but not-so-hard-to-reverse engineer conversion algorithm from other coordinates. The big picture looks like this:

That's the reverse-engineered conversion from the "bog standard" WGS-84, displayed as a vector field. As the blog from which I too that image says, the offsets are basically constant locally, but they vary across China.
It's speculated that abides by this globally in order to please Beijing (and abide by their Chinese license that allows them to take street pictures there). Other maps providers (that don't operate locally in China) aren't so bothered.
On Google something funny happens even when you’re viewing in the US: the Chinese border crossing plaza (on the north side) doesn’t line up with the Macau crossing (on the south side). This is due to a law where companies are forbidden to map China accurately, OpenStreetMap’s ability to avoid that law, and the independence of Macau and also Hong Kong (which has the same discrepancy).
As for the reason, according to one Chinese developer:
Before the WGS-84 <--> GCJ-02 transform algorithm leaked and made available everywhere on the Internet (eg. this repo), some people tried to get a lot of samples of WGS-GCJ point pairs and sold the dataset to people in need. But this kind of dataset is no longer useful because we now have the algorithm itself.
Are all these in the Chinese law?
No. They are mostly in some vague administrative orders or industry regulations made by the government. There is a Code of Geological Survey (http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2005-08/05/content_20947.htm, Chinese), though. But it only says data obtained through survey is classified by default (Article 29) and companies without a permission cannot do survey (Chapter 5). Nothing about GCJ-02 is made officially public.
Why does the Chinese government do this?
National security, they say. But people developing LBS apps tends to believe that it is because of money. The government charges Chinese companies for the "shift correction" feature. We need to make a reservation with the government and take the source code of our app to the bureau to get the feature compiled with our code.
add a comment |
Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the SA case where bits were unavailable unless you knew the key. The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites (duh) setting these coordinates. What this GCJ-02 business is is a non-disclosed, but not-so-hard-to-reverse engineer conversion algorithm from other coordinates. The big picture looks like this:

That's the reverse-engineered conversion from the "bog standard" WGS-84, displayed as a vector field. As the blog from which I too that image says, the offsets are basically constant locally, but they vary across China.
It's speculated that abides by this globally in order to please Beijing (and abide by their Chinese license that allows them to take street pictures there). Other maps providers (that don't operate locally in China) aren't so bothered.
On Google something funny happens even when you’re viewing in the US: the Chinese border crossing plaza (on the north side) doesn’t line up with the Macau crossing (on the south side). This is due to a law where companies are forbidden to map China accurately, OpenStreetMap’s ability to avoid that law, and the independence of Macau and also Hong Kong (which has the same discrepancy).
As for the reason, according to one Chinese developer:
Before the WGS-84 <--> GCJ-02 transform algorithm leaked and made available everywhere on the Internet (eg. this repo), some people tried to get a lot of samples of WGS-GCJ point pairs and sold the dataset to people in need. But this kind of dataset is no longer useful because we now have the algorithm itself.
Are all these in the Chinese law?
No. They are mostly in some vague administrative orders or industry regulations made by the government. There is a Code of Geological Survey (http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2005-08/05/content_20947.htm, Chinese), though. But it only says data obtained through survey is classified by default (Article 29) and companies without a permission cannot do survey (Chapter 5). Nothing about GCJ-02 is made officially public.
Why does the Chinese government do this?
National security, they say. But people developing LBS apps tends to believe that it is because of money. The government charges Chinese companies for the "shift correction" feature. We need to make a reservation with the government and take the source code of our app to the bureau to get the feature compiled with our code.
add a comment |
Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the SA case where bits were unavailable unless you knew the key. The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites (duh) setting these coordinates. What this GCJ-02 business is is a non-disclosed, but not-so-hard-to-reverse engineer conversion algorithm from other coordinates. The big picture looks like this:

That's the reverse-engineered conversion from the "bog standard" WGS-84, displayed as a vector field. As the blog from which I too that image says, the offsets are basically constant locally, but they vary across China.
It's speculated that abides by this globally in order to please Beijing (and abide by their Chinese license that allows them to take street pictures there). Other maps providers (that don't operate locally in China) aren't so bothered.
On Google something funny happens even when you’re viewing in the US: the Chinese border crossing plaza (on the north side) doesn’t line up with the Macau crossing (on the south side). This is due to a law where companies are forbidden to map China accurately, OpenStreetMap’s ability to avoid that law, and the independence of Macau and also Hong Kong (which has the same discrepancy).
As for the reason, according to one Chinese developer:
Before the WGS-84 <--> GCJ-02 transform algorithm leaked and made available everywhere on the Internet (eg. this repo), some people tried to get a lot of samples of WGS-GCJ point pairs and sold the dataset to people in need. But this kind of dataset is no longer useful because we now have the algorithm itself.
Are all these in the Chinese law?
No. They are mostly in some vague administrative orders or industry regulations made by the government. There is a Code of Geological Survey (http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2005-08/05/content_20947.htm, Chinese), though. But it only says data obtained through survey is classified by default (Article 29) and companies without a permission cannot do survey (Chapter 5). Nothing about GCJ-02 is made officially public.
Why does the Chinese government do this?
National security, they say. But people developing LBS apps tends to believe that it is because of money. The government charges Chinese companies for the "shift correction" feature. We need to make a reservation with the government and take the source code of our app to the bureau to get the feature compiled with our code.
Just to clarify, this isn't at all like the SA case where bits were unavailable unless you knew the key. The Chinese don't have their own GPS satellites (duh) setting these coordinates. What this GCJ-02 business is is a non-disclosed, but not-so-hard-to-reverse engineer conversion algorithm from other coordinates. The big picture looks like this:

That's the reverse-engineered conversion from the "bog standard" WGS-84, displayed as a vector field. As the blog from which I too that image says, the offsets are basically constant locally, but they vary across China.
It's speculated that abides by this globally in order to please Beijing (and abide by their Chinese license that allows them to take street pictures there). Other maps providers (that don't operate locally in China) aren't so bothered.
On Google something funny happens even when you’re viewing in the US: the Chinese border crossing plaza (on the north side) doesn’t line up with the Macau crossing (on the south side). This is due to a law where companies are forbidden to map China accurately, OpenStreetMap’s ability to avoid that law, and the independence of Macau and also Hong Kong (which has the same discrepancy).
As for the reason, according to one Chinese developer:
Before the WGS-84 <--> GCJ-02 transform algorithm leaked and made available everywhere on the Internet (eg. this repo), some people tried to get a lot of samples of WGS-GCJ point pairs and sold the dataset to people in need. But this kind of dataset is no longer useful because we now have the algorithm itself.
Are all these in the Chinese law?
No. They are mostly in some vague administrative orders or industry regulations made by the government. There is a Code of Geological Survey (http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2005-08/05/content_20947.htm, Chinese), though. But it only says data obtained through survey is classified by default (Article 29) and companies without a permission cannot do survey (Chapter 5). Nothing about GCJ-02 is made officially public.
Why does the Chinese government do this?
National security, they say. But people developing LBS apps tends to believe that it is because of money. The government charges Chinese companies for the "shift correction" feature. We need to make a reservation with the government and take the source code of our app to the bureau to get the feature compiled with our code.
edited 10 mins ago
answered 41 mins ago
FizzFizz
16.9k242108
16.9k242108
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f40991%2fwhy-must-chinese-maps-be-obfuscated%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
