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

281–290 of 351 posts

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#281

Post by adammarples »

awongh wrote: post #219
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 feel like you actually stated the problem but then glossed over it. Mercator is UX optimized for naval navigation . Besides street navigation (where projection is irrelevant) I would posit that most people use maps for human geography reasons- what countries are next to Senegal, what kind of border does Thailand have with Malaysia, etc. In the use case of understanding geopolitical borders Mercator isn’t optimized…

Well, what do you mean, the "accuracy" of political borders? Again, they're all inaccurate, just in different ways. Are you optimizing for length of border, or curvature, or orientation? Better nearer or further from the pole? Arguably there are far more borders nearer the equator than far from it, Africa has hundreds. And the Mercator projection does pretty much the best job at representing political borders length and orientation within Africa than any other.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#283

Post by thaumasiotes »

nilmask wrote: post #165
thrashh wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have a problem with this post and these kind of posts because they imply it was deliberately done for evil reasons. The point of any article isn't just its factual content; it's the hidden message from the way it's said. I don't know if you intended to say it the way you did when you started off with the comment about poverty in the first two sentences, but by doing so, you set the tone for the rest of your ar…

> People have a problem Why do you presuppose that others infer & arrive at the same interpretations you do? Isn't your own form of generalization from the subjective inferences made from your own individual mind, to the thoughts of others, presumptuous? I'm getting tired of the progressive tendency to read offence, bigotry, racism, sexism, transphobia, etc. into every little word & minutiae of nuance uttered by othe…

> Why do you presuppose that others infer & arrive at the same interpretations you do? Isn't your own form of generalization from the subjective inferences made from your own individual mind, to the thoughts of others, presumptuous?

No, you're just being stupid.

This isn't a new issue. There's an episode of The West Wing about the evils of the Mercator projection. It aired 22 years ago.

When you write an essay doing nothing more than repeating a several-decades-old cliche, people are going to assume you don't have anything to say other than the content of the cliche they heard decades ago. And they will be right.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#284

Post by bentley »

sicariusnoctis wrote: post #280
usrbinbash wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The trade-offs between different projections are rarely discussed And? The trade-offs between longpolling and websockets are rarely discussed outside of very small cohorts. The tradeoff between wankel-engines and piston-based motors are rarely discussed. The tradeoffs between oak and pearwood are rarely discussed. That's why our society has division of labor and people becoming experts in their topics. And I am pre…

The issue isn't possible bias on the part of educated cartographers and differential geometers. It's the bias of the majority, i.e. everyone else, that matters. A vast majority of people in the "Western world" perceive their countries as being bigger than they are. Thus from a primal, tribal perspective this further inflates their perception of "their peoples" being more important than the peoples of other areas.

> A vast majority of people in the "Western world" perceive their countries as being bigger than they are. Thus from a primal, tribal perspective this further inflates their perception of "their peoples" being more important than the peoples of other areas.

That’s a fun hypothesis, but is there actually data supporting (1) that “a vast majority” of westerners misperceive country size in this way, and (2) that specifically such a perception causes them to consider foreigners to be unimportant?

Although implicit bias exists, studies show its impact on the real world is much smaller than commonly believed.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#285

Post by nathan_compton »

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)…

"Because most maps people are exposed to are designed for navigation." Most maps people are exposed to aren't being used for navigation, but for education (at least where the question of the Mercator projection is concerned).

People are naturally hung up on it because why use a projection which is useful for navigation in a world history class or as a background image in a news cast or as a decoration on the wall?

"If size is your thing, use some other projection!" This is basically exactly what the people "hung up" on the Mercator projection are saying! We should be using other projections! It seems a totally reasonable thing to point out to me.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#286

Post by NoRelToEmber »

cpuguy83 wrote: post #220
NoRelToEmber wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unilaterally? If they want to use maps that center Asia in their education and work, who is stopping them? In fact I'd wager they start their education by learning about the geography of Asia first. I'm puzzled by this demonization of simply observing the world from the perspective of one's own culture. Blaming Europeans for putting Europe in the center of their maps is like blaming Italians for teaching Italian in s…

Saying there is a bias is not an accusation of wrong doing or "demonization".

Not necessarily, but usually. E.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36422476 linked a clip from the West Wing that blames biased Eurocentric maps for perpetuating colonialism.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#287

Post by bentley »

throwaway290 wrote: post #272
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)…

The worst argument. These days how many people navigate by compass headings vs how many people base personal and policy decisions due to distorted view of the planet which downsizes planet's oceans and puts the great pacific garbage patch at the far edge of the map, out of sight out of mind? Just use another projection? Mercator is everywhere, nothing else. And yes, size of countries is important too (eg. how people…

> Just use another projection? Mercator is everywhere, nothing else.

What an exaggeration. Mercator may be the most common, but Winkel and Alders are both commonly encountered in the United States.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#288

Post by mcv »

Great article, with one big problem: it's guilty of the exact issue it tries to address: assuming specific map projections as the default.

It starts:

> Maps twist our perception of the world.

> Countries closer to the equator—which happen to be poorer—seem smaller than they are.

This is obviously not true for all map projections. It is famously true for the Mercator projection, which we see a lot because it's the best projection for navigation, and that's the main thing we use maps for in our everyday lives. It's probably true for some other map projections, but definitely not for all.

The article doesn't even mention the name Mercator until its second half.

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#289

Post by bentley »

nathan_compton wrote: post #285
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)…

"Because most maps people are exposed to are designed for navigation." Most maps people are exposed to aren't being used for navigation, but for education (at least where the question of the Mercator projection is concerned). People are naturally hung up on it because why use a projection which is useful for navigation in a world history class or as a background image in a news cast or as a decoration on the wall? "I…

> People are naturally hung up on it because why use a projection which is useful for navigation in a world history class or as a background image in a news cast or as a decoration on the wall?

Are world history classes favoring Mercator? Are newscasts using Mercator in background images? Are wall maps using primarily Mercator? (These may have differing answers!)

As a kid I often encountered oval‐shaped world maps which obviously weren’t Mercator (most likely Robinson or Winkel tripel). And road maps of the United States had curved borders, not straight borders, so those obviously weren’t Mercator either (possibly Alders). And I had globes both at home and at school. So while Mercator is certainly common, and it’s worth explaining tradeoffs in map projection especially in an educational context, I question whether it’s actually as universal as people here are saying.

> We should be using other projections!

Are we not?

Re: Maps distort how we see the world

#290

Post by defrost »

mcv wrote: post #288

Great article, with one big problem: it's guilty of the exact issue it tries to address: assuming specific map projections as the default. It starts: > Maps twist our perception of the world. > Countries closer to the equator—which happen to be poorer—seem smaller than they are. This is obviously not true for all map projections. It is famously true for the Mercator projection, which we see a lot because it's the bes…

> It is famously true for the Mercator projection, which we see a lot because it's the best projection for navigation, and that's the main thing we use maps for in our everyday lives.

The Mercator family is "the best" map family for those who navigate by rhumb lines.

I strongly doubt a significant proportion of people on earth navigate by rhumb lines in this day and age, particularly given the vast numbers of GPS enabled devices.

I stressed family, of course, as there is a continuum of Mercator projection maps .. The (specific) Mercator Projection that wall hangs and everbody discusses whenever this comes up is just one of many and whose parameters were chosen to weight the Northern Hemisphere for the benefit of US-Euro traders.

Post reply on HN