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

This map is not upside down

maps.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 540 posts

Re: This map is not upside down

#21

Post by vman81 »

davidczech wrote: post #15
hyperhello wrote: post #2

> Psychologically, we tend to view things nearer the top as ‘good’ and those lower as ‘bad.’ This, of course, is the point of the article. It was so predictable that it made me wonder: who is telling me that top is good and lower is bad? The articles themselves.

I'd bet a lot of this behavior is heavily correlated with how we generally read top to bottom, which is in itself, probably an arbitrary decision made by ancient text writers.

Writing top to bottom, and even left to right has/had advantages for mostly right-handed writers to avoid moving your hand over and smudging previously written text.

Re: This map is not upside down

#23

Post by y-curious »

hyperhello wrote: post #2

> Psychologically, we tend to view things nearer the top as ‘good’ and those lower as ‘bad.’ This, of course, is the point of the article. It was so predictable that it made me wonder: who is telling me that top is good and lower is bad? The articles themselves.

They link this[1] article, which I don't plan to read. I, too, rolled my eyes.

1: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/194855061140104...

Re: This map is not upside down

#24

Post by sivers »

It's also a wonderful metaphor for how the opposite can also be true.

Japanese addresses that name the blocks, not the streets: https://sive.rs/jadr

West African music that uses the "1" as the end of the phrase instead of the start: https://sive.rs/fela

“Whatever you can rightly say about India, the opposite is also true”, Joan Robinson

https://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_weird_or_just_differe...

Re: This map is not upside down

#25

Post by alabhyajindal »

hidroto wrote: post #9
hyperhello wrote: post #2

> Psychologically, we tend to view things nearer the top as ‘good’ and those lower as ‘bad.’ This, of course, is the point of the article. It was so predictable that it made me wonder: who is telling me that top is good and lower is bad? The articles themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_North_and_Global_South

First time seeing this and it feels so offensive. I'm somewhat okay with the term developed and developing countries, though not too much [1]. But this just feels discriminatory.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factfulness

Re: This map is not upside down

#26

Post by ks2048 »

davidczech wrote: post #15
hyperhello wrote: post #2

> Psychologically, we tend to view things nearer the top as ‘good’ and those lower as ‘bad.’ This, of course, is the point of the article. It was so predictable that it made me wonder: who is telling me that top is good and lower is bad? The articles themselves.

I'd bet a lot of this behavior is heavily correlated with how we generally read top to bottom, which is in itself, probably an arbitrary decision made by ancient text writers.

I’m not sure it’s arbitrary.

For one, starting at the top and ending at the bottom is natural progress of things because of gravity.

I’m not sure if that means anything, but down-to-up seems very unnatural (of coure I can’t ignore my cultural biases). Is there any writing systems like that?

Re: This map is not upside down

#27

Post by alwa »

hyperhello wrote: post #2

> Psychologically, we tend to view things nearer the top as ‘good’ and those lower as ‘bad.’ This, of course, is the point of the article. It was so predictable that it made me wonder: who is telling me that top is good and lower is bad? The articles themselves.

I mean, and.. with the map South-up, all the stuff is crammed down at the bottom now, no?

Aren’t most of the people and land and things in the North part? A casual Google [0] suggests 88% of the humans, for example?

I don’t understand the “good” and “bad” thing, but it does make sense to me that you scan something “earlier” or “later” in casting your eye across a mass of stuff.

If we read from top to bottom… doesn't it make sense to put the part where the stuff is earlier in order than the part with mainly oceans?

It makes slightly more sense to me to argue about which continental masses should go on the left or the right of the map, e.g. [1]. Although compositionally, if you put the Eurasian continent on the left side (“first” for left-to-right readers), doesn’t the massive Pacific exaggerate the impression of a discontinuity or a vast gap between geographical clusters of humans?

[0] https://brilliantmaps.com/human-hemisphere/#:~:text=88%25%20...

[1] https://www.mapresources.com/products/world-digital-vector-r...

Re: This map is not upside down

#28

Post by pge »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #13

I know the planet has poles, but it surprises me somehow that basically every map I've ever seen respects the poles as top bottom. The earth is a sphere and we could just as well pick any pode/anti-pode we want when drawing.

For navigation, having the poles at top and bottom is really the only way to do it. Lining up positions of constant noon sun angle along a horizontal line (i.e. latitude line) makes the paper map correspond nicely to the navigational information available.

Re: This map is not upside down

#30

Post by QQQQQQQQQQQQQM »

uniposterz wrote: post #3

Is there a way to purchase this map for printing so Robert Simmon gets compensated?

Recently I had been looking for a specific map of a local trail system and found a map store near me that might have it, and had seen this exact map in the store. Crazy to see it here a couple days later!

I believe you should be able to get it shipped wherever. https://www.mapcenter.com/store/p/upside-down-world-by-rober...

Post reply on HN