Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 56 posts

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#31

Post by exprez135 »

new2628 wrote: post #15
b112 wrote: post #5

"It's shameful that we - as cartographers of the world - don't take enough interest to even know where they are. People are living and dying without appearing on any database." I know. Context. Context . There's nothing wrong with the above, with last sentence in context. But that last sentence makes me cringe, these days. The thought! The very thought that a human being may be anonymous, not counted, not known, not…

There are some nice essays on this concept called "legibility" -- where modern societies hate those systems that are "illegible" in the sense of not being fully mapped, characterized, understood. In most developed countries this is the attitude towards wildlife for example. Unless all migratory birds are counted, their nests photographed, their legs tagged, their beaks measured and catalogued, it is as if they wouldn…

This really interests me. Do you have any specific essays/references you could point me to? I've managed to find a couple things online, but I would appreciate any recommendations you have.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#32

Post by TheAdamAndChe »

punnerud wrote: post #8

Could come a long way with a https://www.kaggle.com challenge. Does OpenSteetmap have road quality? If yes, this could be used together with satellite photos for training

Yes, you can mark road quality, or more particularly, road material and number of lanes.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#33

Post by reaperducer »

b112 wrote: post #5

"It's shameful that we - as cartographers of the world - don't take enough interest to even know where they are. People are living and dying without appearing on any database." I know. Context. Context . There's nothing wrong with the above, with last sentence in context. But that last sentence makes me cringe, these days. The thought! The very thought that a human being may be anonymous, not counted, not known, not…

The younger people at work can't believe that I didn't have a Social Security number until I was 17. I only got one so I could get a passport.

I didn't even have a name until I was a year old. When I mentioned that to my astonished wife, I did some research, and found that it was common in that era, and even today in many communities, not to name a child for a year or two.

It used to be that you didn't have to be tabulated in anyone's database until your parents wanted to use you as a tax deduction. Mine never did.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#34

Post by reaperducer »

nelaboras wrote: post #10
b112 wrote: post #5

"It's shameful that we - as cartographers of the world - don't take enough interest to even know where they are. People are living and dying without appearing on any database." I know. Context. Context . There's nothing wrong with the above, with last sentence in context. But that last sentence makes me cringe, these days. The thought! The very thought that a human being may be anonymous, not counted, not known, not…

I think you're missing the point and purposefully misinterpreting this statement. Its not about tracking these people, its about allowing them to participate in today's world - from healthcare to mail.

My rights, citizenship, and entitlements are not determined by a number assigned to me. They were assigned by law at the time of my birth.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#35

Post by jimmaswell »

ethanwillis wrote: post #28
jimmaswell wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What big tech databases are you forced into just by living? Do you count banks and social security here?

Facebook tracking people who never sign up for an account with them. Don't be dense, big tech does make an effort to track people who don't want to be tracked. https://www.vox.com/2018/4/20/17254312/facebook-shadow-profi...

seems relatively insignificant to me.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#36

Post by IncRnd »

saalweachter wrote: post #16
sebmellen wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in context, the whole concept is a bit strange. If I read something like this, coming from just 40 years ago, it would seem absurd. I strongly dislike the urge of modern humans to categorize and analyze everything (very non-tech sounding, I know).

Eh, we have clay tablets thousands of years old that are just lists of things.

Here, in this conversaion, the discussion is about the visceral need that people have to categorize and place other people into databases. It's not about lists of things.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#37

Post by new2628 »

exprez135 wrote: post #31
new2628 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some nice essays on this concept called "legibility" -- where modern societies hate those systems that are "illegible" in the sense of not being fully mapped, characterized, understood. In most developed countries this is the attitude towards wildlife for example. Unless all migratory birds are counted, their nests photographed, their legs tagged, their beaks measured and catalogued, it is as if they wouldn…

This really interests me. Do you have any specific essays/references you could point me to? I've managed to find a couple things online, but I would appreciate any recommendations you have.

I think I read about it here first: https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/07/26/a-big-little-idea-call...

There are further links in the post.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#39

Post by sojournerc »

heisbsissi wrote: post #25
PuffinBlue wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There it is: the siren call of the proselytising do gooder. My advancements will succour thee and into the warm boosm of modernity embrace.

Another example of a virtue signaling disguised as criticism of virtue signaling.

It's a criticism of the colonialist attitude that we must save the "savage" from themselves. It's possible to honor other humans by leaving them alone.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#40

Post by cowboysauce »

new2628 wrote: post #15
b112 wrote: post #5

"It's shameful that we - as cartographers of the world - don't take enough interest to even know where they are. People are living and dying without appearing on any database." I know. Context. Context . There's nothing wrong with the above, with last sentence in context. But that last sentence makes me cringe, these days. The thought! The very thought that a human being may be anonymous, not counted, not known, not…

There are some nice essays on this concept called "legibility" -- where modern societies hate those systems that are "illegible" in the sense of not being fully mapped, characterized, understood. In most developed countries this is the attitude towards wildlife for example. Unless all migratory birds are counted, their nests photographed, their legs tagged, their beaks measured and catalogued, it is as if they wouldn…

All those things that you've mentioned provide data that is used to measure the health of bird populations and can serve as an early warning if those populations start to drop. Tagging also allows biologists to determine the routes taken by migratory birds. This in turn allows them to determine what areas serve as habitats for the birds and determine if their migratory paths are changing.

How do you propose monitoring the health of bird populations, making recommendations for areas that need to be protected, or a myriad of other things without having the relevant data?

It's easy to smugly talk about how developed nations are obsessed with numbers and figure when you ignore that those numbers and figures are used to form policies that have tangible effects.

Post reply on HN