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

451–460 of 540 posts

Re: This map is not upside down

#451

Post by tcgv »

Leszek wrote: post #389
blargey wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you feeling down, or are things looking up for you? Do you have people to look up to, or do you spend more time looking down on others? Are you on top of the world, or working your way up from the bottom? Etc, etc. It's suffused throughout our language, and not just this one language, either.

Are you down for looking for counterexamples? Do you want to get to the bottom of why people cherry pick examples for their argument? Is this what you want to base your argument on, or should it be grounded in a more complete linguistic analysis?

Leszek, I don’t think your reply invalidates what blargey said. Showing that "down" can also be neutral, impactful or enthusiastic (like "down for" or "get to the bottom of") is useful, but it adds nuance rather than disproving the broader pattern that up = good / down = bad runs deep across languages.

Re: This map is not upside down

#452

Post by LegionMammal978 »

tcgv wrote: post #451
Leszek wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you down for looking for counterexamples? Do you want to get to the bottom of why people cherry pick examples for their argument? Is this what you want to base your argument on, or should it be grounded in a more complete linguistic analysis?

Leszek, I don’t think your reply invalidates what blargey said. Showing that "down" can also be neutral, impactful or enthusiastic (like "down for" or "get to the bottom of") is useful, but it adds nuance rather than disproving the broader pattern that up = good / down = bad runs deep across languages.

It's all just anecdotes vs. anecdotes. The alleged "broader pattern" is not proven by one any more than it is disproven by the other. (For what it's worth, I do think there is a cultural pattern, especially in biblical metaphors, but in general use it's far weaker than what TFA is making it out to be.)

Re: This map is not upside down

#453

Post by detourdog »

IshKebab wrote: post #343
detourdog wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the convention was born by magnetic north. I suppose it might also point to non magnetic south. Maybe a combination of the explorers and compass convention.

How would magnetic north decide this? There's no asymmetry to magnetic north and south.

I'm not 100% sure what you are asking. If the established convention is that a compass points north. Orienting a map to that convention makes sense to me. I thought I provided for the possibility that a compass also points south.

The southern hemisphere historically navigated using wave patterns and stars with maps made of sticks and stones. So I expect they have different navigational conventions. I have heard of an southern hemisphere island that provided on their navigational orientation based on a mountain top.

The pole star could also be part of this convention. The pole star appearing in a consistent point may also contribute to this standard.

Re: This map is not upside down

#454

Post by Leszek »

tcgv wrote: post #451
Leszek wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you down for looking for counterexamples? Do you want to get to the bottom of why people cherry pick examples for their argument? Is this what you want to base your argument on, or should it be grounded in a more complete linguistic analysis?

Leszek, I don’t think your reply invalidates what blargey said. Showing that "down" can also be neutral, impactful or enthusiastic (like "down for" or "get to the bottom of") is useful, but it adds nuance rather than disproving the broader pattern that up = good / down = bad runs deep across languages.

It certainly disproves that it's a pattern without exceptions, and therefore invalidates or at least questions the idea that every instance of up and down (like which way up north is) has to be mapped to good and bad.

Re: This map is not upside down

#455

Post by marcosdumay »

kulahan wrote: post #264
marcosdumay wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That people will have fewer cases of lung cancer.

Plain chalk is carcinogenic??

You have a point. Now that I went looking, most of the literature focus on silicosis, and there aren't many long-term studies that can tell us if it's carcinogenic or not.

It's very likely carcinogenic too, but now I don't know what to expect on the correlation, because it's possible that people die from it before they get the chance of developing a tumor.

Re: This map is not upside down

#456

Post by 542354234235 »

jcattle wrote: post #391
vladms wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An "upside down" map is just as valid as a right side up map. Is it as useful and/or efficient though? I could write a phrase in English from right to left and if you really wanted you could read it, but it would be highly inefficient. An efficient society sometimes has to pick conventions (how to write text, how to print a map, what characters to use, etc) and I find not interesting to point that other conventions…

I mean, to me at least it is also interesting. Like Japanese writing or Arabic. It's interesting because it is different, there's a different predominant convention. You can also think further about how the writing convention might have had an impact on culture and the society itself. Also thinking of maps and Japan: where I am from (Germany) public overview maps of parks or street maps usually have north as up. In J…

In the writing example, something that seems inconsequential like right-to-left or left-to-right, does have real implications. Since most people are right-handed, writing right-to-left means they develop writing styles to keep from smearing the ink. In left-to-right writing, it is unnecessary. The consequence is that the minority left-handed people are just taught a mirror of right-handed writing, making left handedness much more of a burden in a left-to-right writing culture.

Re: This map is not upside down

#457

Post by taco_emoji »

patternMachine wrote: post #48

The moralizing that always accompanies (not) upside down maps is so tedious. It's a genuinely interesting example of how something can look so wrong and yet not be wrong at all. To try to extend that "wrong" feeling to some kind of moral failure on the viewers part is just silly. You (or society) are not a bad or prejudiced person for thinking this way, it's just that nearly all maps produced have chosen a different…

I mean I think we are all clearly prejudiced, given that our brains just immediately pre-judge such a map as upside-down. Nobody, or at least certainly not the OP, is calling us bad for doing so.

It's the same as logical fallacies: you're not a bad person for falling prey to them, but they ARE something you should be aware of if you're trying to make logical arguments.

Re: This map is not upside down

#458

Post by taco_emoji »

Attrecomet wrote: post #396
vincvinc wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh? I think the outrage over making the reader feel like "a bad or prejudiced person" that accompanies any invitation to challenge assumptions is so tedious. How come this culture war mindset infuses everything we do online now? Nowhere does this map or its description even imply you are a bad person. It's pure ... projection

"Deciding to put south, or north, at the top of maps is a decision of consequence. Psychologically, we tend to view things nearer the top as ‘good’ and those lower as ‘bad.’ This can influence our interpretation of maps at both global and local scales." There it is, the implication that "North is up" is morally bad. Since it's an implication, it does not need to be read that way, but it's clearly there.

No, the implication is that "North is up and up is good" is morally bad, and I find it really stupid to disagree with that.

Re: This map is not upside down

#459

Post by 542354234235 »

Levitz wrote: post #425
isqueiros wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a mug cannot function when upside down and yet when you change the arbitrary orientation of a map it can still function the same you literally missed the point of the _title_ of the article, quite impressive

The direction with which you perceive the mug is not any more arbitrary than that of the map, you are just prioritizing the direction gravity takes rather than its opposite, same as magnetism and the north. You can change your entire system of reference and the setup still makes sense. Same with the map.

A map is a flat, visual representation of an area, showing its features and locations using symbols and drawings. The system of reference can change, like magnetism and north, and the map still functions as a map.

A drinking mug is a large, cylindrical cup with a handle, typically made of earthenware, used to hold hot beverages like coffee or tea. The orientation relative to gravity is fundamental to the functioning of the mug. It is not arbitrary.

Re: This map is not upside down

#460

Post by hans_castorp »

patternMachine wrote: post #48

The moralizing that always accompanies (not) upside down maps is so tedious. It's a genuinely interesting example of how something can look so wrong and yet not be wrong at all. To try to extend that "wrong" feeling to some kind of moral failure on the viewers part is just silly. You (or society) are not a bad or prejudiced person for thinking this way, it's just that nearly all maps produced have chosen a different…

Maps where Europe and Asia are on the left and the Americas are on the right are also quite irritating - but not wrong either.
Post reply on HN