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

Maps distort how we see the world

unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 351 posts

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#51

Post by trhfhxggf »

bluepod4 wrote: post #44
jgeada wrote: post #24

Every flat map projection distorts something, so every projection has to optimize some parameter and trade off other utility. I'm constantly amazed at how hung up people are on apparent size of countries. If size is your thing, use some other projection! Mercator is and remains popular because it preserves local angles and shapes, which makes it simple use this projection to navigate by rhumb lines (compass headings)…

> I'm constantly amazed at how hung up people are on apparent size of countries. If size is your thing, use some other projection! Hmm. That’s not usually how the discourse goes. It’s never “wow, Country X is actually smaller than Country Y. That’s terrible.” It usually goes something like “wow, Country X is actually smaller than Country Y. This distorts our worldview and makes us think things we shouldn’t have thoug…

> It usually goes something like “wow, Country X is actually smaller than Country Y. This distorts our worldview and makes us think things we shouldn’t have thought. That’s terrible.”

That's not less stupid than the other statement. It's like looking at your shadow at sunset and thinking, "Wow, I never realized I was 20 feet tall."

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#52

Post by eddythompson80 »

jgeada wrote: post #24

Every flat map projection distorts something, so every projection has to optimize some parameter and trade off other utility. I'm constantly amazed at how hung up people are on apparent size of countries. If size is your thing, use some other projection! Mercator is and remains popular because it preserves local angles and shapes, which makes it simple use this projection to navigate by rhumb lines (compass headings)…

> Every flat map projection distorts something, so every projection has to optimize some parameter and trade off other utility. I'm constantly amazed at how hung up people are on apparent size of countries. If size is your thing, use some other projection!

That's the point of the post. The trade-offs between different projections are rarely discussed, considered or even mentioned outside very small cohorts because there is a specific shape of the world map that most people who are not map-heads or spherical projection experts take for guaranteed. Get a non-Mercator projection map and put it in your dinner room, and then see how many of your guests will comment about "so.. why is this map weird? It doesn't look right?" then tell them "every flat map projection distorts [...]"

> Mercator is and remains popular because it preserves local angles and shapes, which makes it simple use this projection to navigate by rhumb lines (compass headings). Because most maps people are exposed to are designed for navigation, it is the most commonly seen projection. And yes, it distorts size and is largely unusable past about ± 70º latitude. Every map is a compromise.

Out of the millions of decorative world maps on walls, kids with maps to learn the world, world maps on the news, maps used in data visualization charts etc., non of those are using the map for "navigation" yet they still use Mercator projection simply because "that's the right shape of the world" regardless of what "right" means. Not because they evaluated the compromises of the different projections and figures "oh maybe someone will be lost at sea and only have access to our GDP per capita world map visualization, better use Mercator projection to preserve local angles and line up with compass headings"

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#53

Post by jlawson »

r3trohack3r wrote: post #12

One of my favorite talks by Carl Sagan talks about the geocentric conceit, and how one manifestation of that is how most civilizations tend to put themselves at the center of the map. There are certainly some good reasons to put yourself there. Most planning for your civilization that calls for a map is going to use “home” as a starting point and you’ll go “out” from there. But it’s still a fun observation. I liked t…

The 'geocentric conceit' thing is just a moralized overinterpretation of people trying to be practical.

Obviously if you're traveling out from and back to one place over and over, the most sensible thing to do is to put that place near map center. It makes it easy to see all the other places in relation to your home, because how they relate to your home is what's relevant to you. Those are the distances and routes you want to be the most clear. When taking a sphere and mapping it to a rectangle there is no way to not do this - somewhere has to be the middle so you might as well choose somewhere practical.

Sagan like many others often sells morality porn - the feeling of "I know better than those ignorant less moral ones". A lot of entertainment is like this these days.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#54

Post by trhfhxggf »

randcraw wrote: post #10

There was a memorable scene from "The West Wing" on the biases imposed by most map projections, in particular, how Mercator makes North America look huge: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLqC3FNNOaI

It makes things further from the equator appear huge. There's no conspiracy or biases involved, unless of course you're proposing that the Mercator projection was developed to give Antarctica a false sense of superiority.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#55

Post by poulpy123 »

jgeada wrote: post #24

Every flat map projection distorts something, so every projection has to optimize some parameter and trade off other utility. I'm constantly amazed at how hung up people are on apparent size of countries. If size is your thing, use some other projection! Mercator is and remains popular because it preserves local angles and shapes, which makes it simple use this projection to navigate by rhumb lines (compass headings)…

And also Mercator remains popular because everyone is used to it and nobody actually cares that Greenland isn't really half the size of africa

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#56

Post by thriftwy »

Fun thing is that USSR (and Russia as its descendant) was actually never using Mercator anywhere near education, since the distortion was too great in places where it was important. You would imagine it would be good for ego, but pragmatic reasons prevailed.

Indeed, Russian textbooks would rather use Gauss-Krueger with its backgammon board appearance than Mercator. I believe that variations of Kavrayskiy VII projection were very common.

On the other hand they used projections which skip displaying Pacific ocean entirely, because who needs that?

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#57

Post by AlecSchueler »

I remember one particular trip I had on LSD. I spent some of the time inspecting my childhood neighbourhood in Belfast on Google Maps with the 3D view, and looking at it from angles other than North -> Top.

It completely changed not only how I viewed the geography of the city but also the socio-political history of it. I would definitely recommend anyone to do the same, or with other areas they're familiar with, with LSD or not. It's fascincating to realise how much the map has shaped your view of the places you know.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#58

Post by AlecSchueler »

trhfhxggf wrote: post #51
bluepod4 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm constantly amazed at how hung up people are on apparent size of countries. If size is your thing, use some other projection! Hmm. That’s not usually how the discourse goes. It’s never “wow, Country X is actually smaller than Country Y. That’s terrible.” It usually goes something like “wow, Country X is actually smaller than Country Y. This distorts our worldview and makes us think things we shouldn’t have thoug…

> It usually goes something like “wow, Country X is actually smaller than Country Y. This distorts our worldview and makes us think things we shouldn’t have thought. That’s terrible.” That's not less stupid than the other statement. It's like looking at your shadow at sunset and thinking, "Wow, I never realized I was 20 feet tall."

> It's like looking at your shadow at sunset and thinking, "Wow, I never realized I was 20 feet tall."

Quite the opposite, no? It's like spending your whole life looking at only your evening shadow (Hello, Plato) and then seeing yourself in a good mirror and realising your actual height relative to the world around you for the first time.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#59

Post by jefftk »

interroboink wrote: post #32
Animats wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They all do.[1] [1] https://earth.google.com/

Aside from the humor of that page failing to load for me (Firefox), I also smirk at the fact that it would still be projecting the globe onto a _flat_ screen to view it (: Something different about having an actual ball in your hands.

> that page failing to load for me (Firefox)

Weird; testing on a Mac with Firefox it loads fine.

Anything interesting in the console?

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#60

Post by Kye »

jlawson wrote: post #53
r3trohack3r wrote: post #12

One of my favorite talks by Carl Sagan talks about the geocentric conceit, and how one manifestation of that is how most civilizations tend to put themselves at the center of the map. There are certainly some good reasons to put yourself there. Most planning for your civilization that calls for a map is going to use “home” as a starting point and you’ll go “out” from there. But it’s still a fun observation. I liked t…

The 'geocentric conceit' thing is just a moralized overinterpretation of people trying to be practical. Obviously if you're traveling out from and back to one place over and over, the most sensible thing to do is to put that place near map center. It makes it easy to see all the other places in relation to your home, because how they relate to your home is what's relevant to you. Those are the distances and routes yo…

He doesn't often do anything. He died in 1996. I've read a few of his books and I don't get this impression at all.
Post reply on HN