[HN Gopher] The world map that reboots your brain ___________________________________________________________________ The world map that reboots your brain Author : mariuz Score : 152 points Date : 2022-08-20 14:28 UTC (8 hours ago) (HTM) web link (axbom.com) (TXT) w3m dump (axbom.com) | booleandilemma wrote: | Hmm... uptime 20:49:05 up 15340 days, 32 | min, 1 user, load average: 0.22, 0.41, 0.32 | | Guess not. | wikitopian wrote: | At no point in the past thirty years has the Mercator Projection | been discussed without a disclaimer that it's very distorted. | pnathan wrote: | Back when I was working for a company that was heavily into GIS, | I wandered one day into map rendering code, trying to render | _something or other_, and man, it was an ed-u-cation. Not in | "yeah Mercator is not literally true" (this I thought was common | knowledge) but also there there are a ton of different | projections and ways to deal with said projections. | | It's a fascinating niche of computer graphics. | amelius wrote: | I don't know about others, but when I saw a 3d globe model as a | child with all the countries in their proper relative sizes, my | brain didn't reboot. | glitchc wrote: | ghostpepper wrote: | A flat sheet of paper can't wrap a globe seamlessly - that's | why projections are created in the first place. | | An actual globe doesn't have that problem. | glitchc wrote: | see posted video. An actual globe is created from flat | sheets of paper cut into strips and stuck on. Printing a | curved surface on a flat plane is by definition a | projection. | Tagbert wrote: | yes, it is and that is why they use small flat sections | of paper to compose a globe. By doing that they minimize | the distortions of flat maps to be point of being too | small to matter. | | Your "gotcha" about how globes are made is much ado about | nothing. | TheCoelacanth wrote: | Yes, but they don't just print out a Mercator map and | glue that to the surface. They use a projection that is | going to produce the final appearance that they're aiming | for. | marginalia_nu wrote: | If only there was a way to apply paint directly to a curved | surface. | kspacewalk2 wrote: | Or to cut paper in something other than straight lines | zaik wrote: | No: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RWcWSN4HhI | glitchc wrote: | Double_a_92 wrote: | MULTIPLE thin strips of paper. Any distortion will be | minimal, compared to a big flat piece of paper. | [deleted] | kryptiskt wrote: | I had a globe as a kid, it had a topographical map when unlit and | a political one when lit (with borders and country names). I have | to say that it was a far superior teaching aid compared to any 2D | map projection. For example, with a physical globe it's | immediately apparent what's the deal with great circle routes. | ReactiveJelly wrote: | It's this: | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AuthaGraph_projection | rayiner wrote: | > Given that the people who claim ownership and ensure | distribution of this map have historically been white and rich | representatives of the countries in the northern hemisphere | | This sounds like post hoc race baiting. The Mercator projection | was devised in 1569, when Mediterranean countries like Spain, | Portugal, and Italy were immensely powerful and pioneers in | exploration. Many of the explorers who drew the first world maps | came from those countries. If they cared about the relative size | of the countries, why would they adopt a projection that makes | Scandinavia look so much larger than Spain and Portugal and their | holdings in Latin America? | | In an effort to find a race angle, the article overlooks | important history. The Mercator projection was adopted because it | preserved bearing lines for marine navigation: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_world_maps. World maps were | developed primarily by seafaring explorers, so this became the | dominant projection, not just in Northern European countries, but | pretty much everywhere. | MichaelCollins wrote: | > _The Mercator projection was adopted because it preserved | bearing lines for marine navigation_ | | Specifically, Mercator preserves angles, making it possible to | plot courses on the map using a protractor. Attempting this on | a map with a non-conformal projection would be a nightmare. | wolverine876 wrote: | Yes, though only a tiny percentage of people who use Mercator | have ever plotted a course using a protractor. | whoisburbansky wrote: | It's called path dependence; same reason that the Space | Shuttle boosters' width is constrained by the width of two | horses' rear ends put side by side. | scoot wrote: | I agree on your first point, but not your second. In the fourth | paragraph it says: | | _" Its purpose was to be used for maritime navigation and it | served this purpose well since throughout the projection North | is up and South is down, while local shapes and directions are | maintained. So when using this projection on a map scaled for | navigational use it's easier to find your way."_ | | The "solution" presented in the article looks an absolute mess | to me though. Surely the better answer is a globe (real or | virtual)? Those have existed in schools and homes for almost as | long as maps. My children grew up with a LeapFrog globe, and at | a young age gould find every country on the planet, by country | or capital name. Great fun and highly recommended. | rayiner wrote: | The article notes the fact that Mercator is better for ocean | navigation, but fails to understand how that's connected to | its prevalence: the mapmakers were seafaring explorers. | | Classrooms have globes. Insofar as the Mercator projection is | widespread, however, a responsible teacher should explain the | historical connection between ocean navigation and mapmaking. | Not recount a totally manufactured example of racism. | wolverine876 wrote: | > Classrooms have globes. | | Do they? Not many IME, and not really used. | | > a responsible teacher should explain the historical | connection between ocean navigation and mapmaking | | Says who? Is that in the cirriculum? | | > a totally manufactured example of racism. | | That it's totally totally manufactured is itself totally | manufactured. | rootsudo wrote: | They used too, my classes did. I can see not anymore with | cost cutting and relying on Google Maps. | | But, there was a time where Google didn't exist, and a | globe would be in the corner of the classroom w/ Maps | that can be pulled down on the whiteboard/chalkboard (boy | was that an exciting change!) that showed different maps, | from Mercator maps to political USA maps and geographic | USA maps. | | Shocking, I know. | xyzzyz wrote: | Globes of size useful for navigation are too big to be | convenient when actually navigating. You cannot flat pack | globes. They're just impractical for this purpose. | scoot wrote: | You're conflating two different topics. The article asserts | (correctly) that the Mercator projection, while useful for | navigation, distorts the globe at a macro scale when used | for educational purposes. A globe solves that problem. | toast0 wrote: | It's hard to look at a whole globe at once. It's also | hard to have enough globes to see how political | boundaries have changed over time. Flat projections are | needed for educational purposes too. | xyzzyz wrote: | Ah, yes, sorry, I got confused by this thread. Yes, | globes are great educational tool. I think it's actually | valuable to show all of globes, Mercator, and the weird | equal area projections, just to teach about trade offs. | thrown_22 wrote: | >A globe solves that problem. | | Great. Now try and draw a journey on a globe. | wolverine876 wrote: | With loaded issues like racism, more baseless claims just make | the problem worse. What we need is evidence, and unfortunately | there is almost none in this HN discussion. I've learned | nothing about the issue. | | More broadly, systems can be discriminatory: Using the maps as | an example, imagine if a projection made the US look tiny; I | don't imagine it would sell well. But if one makes Africa | appear tiny, the map may persist for a long time. That's how | systems can be discriminatory and how we can decieve ourselves, | without conscious intent. Also, there are plenty of people, | especially in the past and also in the last few years, who have | openly and aggressively expressed intent to discriminate based | on race and similar factors, and we can add to that the more | subtle expressions. We have plenty of evidence of widespread | motive and we should expect many outcomes to match their stated | intent. | | Many people in minority groups have told me, for years, that a | large number of people in the US will _always_ deny racism, in | every instance. They might say something acknowledging racism | generally, but in _every_ specific instance they actively | reject it has happened and oppose any action. An argument can | always be found (for anything, of course). It 's politicized - | it's not related to the facts or reason, every claim becomes a | political battle that must be won. I didn't believe it at | first, but it certainly has been born out, from my perspective. | It's a situation that obstructs knowledge, bringing people | together, and solutions, and not entirely incidentally: | Politicizing any issue is an obvious way to make it similarly | intractable (e.g., climate change). EDIT: Maybe it's like any | innovation, such as in tech - people react with outrage to any | change, as we know well on HN. | | Which brings us back to facts: People can come up with a | plausible argument for anything; hard facts are the scythe that | cuts away the 99.9% that is nonsense; that's why science and | courtrooms rely on them. | notahacker wrote: | The idea that retaining a map which distorting the sizes of | countries is a Eurocentric conspiracy against equatorial | countries was originally made by Peters when pushing his equal | area projection in the 1970s and 80s | | It's a pretty tendentious argument though, since in addition to | it obviously not being the original intent, people _don 't_ | draw the conclusion that Greenland is a mighty state, the US is | subordinate to Canada and the Middle East is a small and | inconsequential backwater from map projections, and if people | did gauge power and wealth from map projections, the Mercator | projection would actually _understate_ the actual relative | power and influence of Western Europe anyway (and Peters | massively overstates arid underpopulated regions and is barely | any better at putting India 's sixth of the world population in | context). | | Plus of course, the Mercator projection is _still_ better for | local navigation anyway. | [deleted] | noasaservice wrote: | For any 2d representation of a sphere, you must give up at least | 1 accurate dimension. Sometimes more. | | So that means no matter what 2d map used, will have a geo- | mathematic shortcoming. | feldrim wrote: | Every once in a while, I see some posts based on maps and | projections. And I cannot get it when adults still discuss these | stuff. I had my first atlas when I was a 4th grader and the | projections were depicted in detail in the first 15-20 pages. It | is easy and foundational that I assumed everybody was aware of | this information. Instead people rediscovered the Earth on each | blog post mentioning the exact same thing. Amazing. | dividefuel wrote: | The article seems to imply that people are primarily exposed to | Mercator in school without discussing its shortcomings. However | in my experience growing up in the 90s/00s, we discussed lots of | different projections and their respective tradeoffs. It was | drilled in pretty deep that the Mercator reflected shapes | accurately, but not relative sizes. I also remember seeing | Robinson projection far more than Mercator, though again we were | reminded that it's not perfect either, and that any 2D projection | will have its pros/cons. | Tagbert wrote: | I was in public education in the US in the 60's and we often | had lessons on different map projections when studying | geography. | rob_c wrote: | Trust me, in bad public education in the UK the map is simply | presented. You cover the concept of how to draw the map but if | the teacher used the word "protection" it causes eyes to gloss | over... | | Sounds like you had a good education my lucky friend and I hope | it serves you well. I think the closest I saw was historical | map putting Britain at the center of a big red empire before | skipping several hundred years to cover Vietnam because the | syllabus said we had to. | dvfjsdhgfv wrote: | But didn't you guys have globes back then? It was the main | object in our geography classroom. | ThePadawan wrote: | German here - It's my understanding that in the US, classes | rotate through rooms assigned to subjects (e.g. you go to | your next class to the geography room). In Germany, | subjects rotate through classes (e.g. 9th grade would have | an assigned room, and the geography teacher would show up | for the next lesson). | | So personally, I don't think I ever saw a geography teacher | carry around a globe, nor talk about projections. I feel | like I learned about it reading XKCD 10 years later. | thayne wrote: | Elementary school (usually up through 5th grade) in the | US usually has one classroom and one teacher for most | subjects. All of my elementary school classrooms had at | least one globe. | MichaelCollins wrote: | > _It 's my understanding that in the US, classes rotate | through rooms assigned to subjects (e.g. you go to your | next class to the geography room)._ | | This is true after 4th grade, but 1st through 4th | _usually_ have kids learning every regular subject from a | single teacher in a single classroom. Of course there are | many states and even more school districts, and it 's | very possible that some of them do it differently. | michaelgrafl wrote: | Austrian here. We too have a single teacher from first to | forth class, with the exception of religion and sometimes | PE. | | But I don't think that's the age to learn about map | projections. My oldest child just finished first grade | though, so I'll keep an eye open. | bombcar wrote: | Grade school didn't rotate for me, high school the kids | moved classes. | | Somewhere in there we learned about projections (many | were the "split globe" ones). | gsich wrote: | Also globes exist, which make those differences visible | immediately. | dharmab wrote: | We used Google Earth in geography lessons in the 2000 which | shows nearly true scale | gedy wrote: | Yeah this is some old baby boomer trope about how bad the | Mercator projection is, but it's been decades since I saw this | hung up in classroom. Globes are a thing and the internet makes | much of this discussion moot. | MichaelCollins wrote: | > _it 's been decades since I saw this hung up in classroom_ | | Try to buy a world map for a classroom. Search things like | "world map for classroom", "large world map", "world map | poster" in Amazon. Probably 95% of the maps returned for | these search terms are Mercator, but there are a few that | aren't. American elementary school teachers are generalists, | they teach geography without having specialized knowledge of | geography, much less map projections. If such a teacher is | buying a world map for their classroom, they're very likely | to pick a Mercator map simply because that's what most | classroom sized maps use. | | (Despite this, American children are not raised to think that | Canada is powerful...) | [deleted] | rob_c wrote: | Until the "joke" of the flat earth got way out of hand and | you realise that the internet is great at everything aside | from context and this is something that isn't taught. | Although I remember a professor screwing with us and changing | a proof on Wikipedia to catch people out one term... | epgui wrote: | That's a shameful act of vandalism on the part of the | professor... :( | epgui wrote: | I went to public school in Canada (NB) in the 1990s and 2000s | and we also covered the topic quite well. Not only that, but we | also had ready access to spinning globes we could look at and | compare to projections. | solarkraft wrote: | I don't remember being told about map projections at school. | casefields wrote: | Same here. I do remember the famous scene from West Wing | which lead me to research the topic. Scene here: | https://youtu.be/eLqC3FNNOaI | triyambakam wrote: | As another piece of data, I grew up in New York and had never | heard about the Mercator projection until an adult. | RosanaAnaDana wrote: | You still grew up seeing it constantly, even if you didn't | know what it was. | skocznymroczny wrote: | Growing up in Poland, I don't think we encountered Mercator | until much later when actually learning about various map | projections. I think Mollweide projection is more widespread | here for full Earth maps, and it reduces the stretching near | poles effect. | bipson wrote: | Can confirm, I'm pretty sure I was exposed to almost | exclusively Mollweide maps as a teenager (Austria). | mc32 wrote: | The best projection is a globe. A nice medium sized globe | that's portable is great for teaching relationships between | land and water as well as geography. | teddyh wrote: | Yes, I would assume that Poland would prefer to avoid | stretching near poles. | arbirk wrote: | + turn it upside down | labrador wrote: | Buckminster Fuller invented the Dymaxion map, which is pretty | good and similar to this post | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_map | | My brain wasn't rebooted by a map until I saw an "upside down" | map with the North pole and South pole vertically flipped. People | from the Southern hemisphere seem to think it puts them in a | better perspective | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South-up_map_orientation | [deleted] | Tagbert wrote: | I remember our 4th grade class (US 1960's) doing a project | where we too a printout of that Dymaxion map and constructed a | "globe" with it. It was part of a series of geography lessons | on different map projections. I guess my brain rebooted a lot | then. | undersuit wrote: | I've wanted to get a mercator map with a 90 degree rotation | instead. An "equator-up" orientation? | [deleted] | emptyparadise wrote: | I wonder if the Dymaxion map bits can be rearranged to create a | more familiar map shape with the distortions mostly getting | confined to oceans and unpopulated areas? | Rediscover wrote: | Yes, that was one of the concepts of it. The two most used | arrangements are one interconnected body of water at the | center, and the other one land mass at the center. | | https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dymaxion_map_ocean. | .. | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_map#/media/File%3AD. | .. | yboris wrote: | Must watch: _Why are we changing maps?_ from The West Wing | | https://youtu.be/eLqC3FNNOaI?t=44 | devnull255 wrote: | I really loved this episode. Especially when someone pointed | out the fallacy of believing north = up and south = down, which | is that way only because we live in a world where most map | projections on a wall show north as up and south as down. It | doesn't look like that at all from outer space. | jeroenhd wrote: | North being up hasn't always been the case; for quite some | time, east was commonly up and west down; it's where the | "orient" in "orientation" comes from. | | Which side is up really depends on how you imagine the earth | going around the sun. If you look at the earth from its side | as it revolves around the sun and you choose to depict the | earth moving counter clockwise, the north is up. If you | consider the earth revolving around the sun clockwise, south | is up. The earth is at an angle, of course, but that angle | isn't enough to really change the definitions of up and down. | | North being up makes logical sense when you consider that | around 87% of humanity lives in the northern hemisphere. We | generally read top to bottom and the populated parts of the | earth are often what we're really interested in. | | There's also the choice of "north" that matters. There are | many definitions for what constitutes as the north since the | magnetic poles don't stay in a single place on the surface | and the top/bottom of the spinning planet isn't anywhere near | the magnetic poles. Then there's the north star moving as we | move through the galaxy, making any north determined by | celestial navigation questionable over time; currently | Polaris is commonly used as the pole star, but on humanity's | time scale that's a relatively recent (+-1300 years) | development. | andix wrote: | When I was a kid, globes were still a thing. The represent the | world very exactly. | | And for the digital kids nowadays, there are apps which show a 3d | globe. Google Maps can do that too. | _ph_ wrote: | I still have my globe on my desk :) No better physical tool to | really represent the earth. I love that google maps added the | globe view, this is much better than just showing a mercator | map. Also always loved xplanet. | dimensionc132 wrote: | http://wsn.spaceflight.esa.int/iss/index_portal.php | | If Mercator is good enough for NASA, it's good enough for me | ipnon wrote: | Can the stickiness of the Mercator projection in the West be | attributed to the fact that most of the West is in the regions of | the projection that are most distorted, which allows Westerners | to examine their own geography in more detail? A projection that | made America and Europe comparatively hard to read would seem to | have little staying power on school walls there. | ZeroGravitas wrote: | I believe this is what people actually mean when they talk | about this. | | Most of the other replies seem to be massively overreacting to | a percieved overeaction, as if the message was "Gerardus | Mercator was a Nazi!". | | People distort maps all the time, often for good reasons. | People notice when maps distort something they care about (like | maps without New Zealand to people in New Zealand, or the BBC | weather map enlarging London at the expense of the North of | England and Scotland). | | It's similar to early cameras not reproducing dark skin tones | well until chocolate manufacturers complained about the way it | made their product look, or the recent drama about automatic | image cropping preferring the lighter skinned person in the | photo. | | No, the camera/computer is not a racist. No, the programmer is | not a racist. But, it still reflects a society where a large | fraction of the human beings on earth aren't given as much | consideration as others. And that's racist. | labster wrote: | No. The stickiness of the Mercator projection is due to | navigational charts wanting to preserve true bearings. | JackFr wrote: | And while a globe is obviously better, the orthogonal | representation of North-South and East-West also allow for | some easier instruction of some earth science topics - | basically that the Earth rotates along the horizontal axis. | thrown_22 wrote: | One can't roll up a globe and put it away. | bl0rg wrote: | Unless you live in four dimensions, of course. Not that I | do, I'm definitely a creature of three, and only three, | spatial dimensions. | mrweasel wrote: | When ever I feel the need to know the "actual" size of a country, | I turn to https://www.thetruesize.com which allows you to move | countries around to better compare them. For instance, I have a | pretty good idea of how big Sweden is, so moving Sweden around | helps me visualize the size of something like Japan. | hnuser847 wrote: | This reminds of the dumb conspiracy stuff I used to see in my | Facebook feed. Any 2D projection of a 3D surface is going to be | distorted - there's no way around it. If you want to see an | accurate representation of the Earth, look at a globe. | antiquark wrote: | Critical Map Theory. | swayvil wrote: | Clickbait much? It's a realistic portrayal of scales in | geography, not psilocybin mushrooms | belinder wrote: | I'm a big fan of maps and have seen a lot of different | projections but this is my first time seeing authagraph. I think | not only does it do a good job of showing relative size, it also | looks good - but I'm used to looking at 'unconventional' | projections. The only issue with it is that it's a bit hard to | gauge what is 'up' and what is 'down'. If you were showing me | this projection for Mars then I would probably get lost. | | I'm having trouble finding a nice large resolution image. Anyone | found one? | flohofwoe wrote: | I never understood the obsession with Mercator projection in blog | posts and the media. Is the US school system actually using world | maps with Mercator projection, or what else is the reason that | this topic is popping up again and again? The world maps I had | been 'exposed to' during school (in the 80s!) used a projection | which narrows towards the poles and looks a lot more 'realistic': | | Basically like this: | | https://www.mapsofindia.com/world-map/world-political-map-20... | | ...still a lot of distortion of course, but much better than | traditional Mercator (which is 500 years old, so give the guy | some slack). | guskel wrote: | It's just another example of modern virtue signaling. YT male | evil. Got it. We know. | rayiner wrote: | > I never understood the obsession with Mercator projection in | blog posts and the media. | | It's because American universities and media in recent years | strongly incentivize finding racial angles to every story or | topic. "How we draw maps is racist" is low hanging fruit. | Growing up in racist Virginia in the 1990s, we had globes and | the flat wall maps--which still showed the Soviet Union--used | an oval projection: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ortelius_oval_projection | thatjoeoverthr wrote: | Growing up in American schools, I saw this as well. I remember | even asking the teacher why the map had multiple cutaways, and | her explaining the distortion. I could be convinced that | Mercator prevalence is a thing, if someone dug into map sales. | campbel wrote: | Yep, this looks super familiar to me. We also just had globes | in our classrooms. Today's students probably use Google maps | (or equivalent) which wouldn't have this problem anyways. | paleotrope wrote: | Have you ever zoomed all the way out on Google map | tephra wrote: | I would have thought national geographic maps are common in U.S | classrooms? And I don't think they've ever used the Mercator. | teddyh wrote: | I think nobody needs a word map projected to a plane anymore. | Local maps do not suffer noticably from distortion, and a world | map can be represented as an interactive globe. | chmod600 wrote: | This will all be resolved when smartphones have holographic | screens, and just present the actual curvature at whatever zoom | level you are at. | pessimizer wrote: | For me, it only breaks Brazil, Europe and India. Brazil starts to | seem _underpopulated_ for its size, and Europe and India look | very small. | steanne wrote: | there's also a nice subset of maps that have south at the top. | | http://gisweb.massey.ac.nz/topic/webreferencesites/TheUpside... | JeremyNT wrote: | I understand the intention here but really, do people not see | globes any more? All projections suffer from issues of some sort, | and the globe is by far the best way to understand that. We were | taught about this in grade school. | | Even on a computer display, you can use Google Earth to replicate | the effect. | bambam24 wrote: | devnull255 wrote: | The Mercator projection map was the map I was most exposed to in | school and was on my bedroom wall at home when I was going to | Elementary school. Later on when I went to college, I saw the | Peters Projection map (and had that on the wall above my desk in | my apartment. This map rebooted my brain in that it showed a more | truthful representation of how large an area was in relation to | other areas. | | I do happen to think that the prevalence and persistence of the | Mercator projection's use with its grossly distorted | representations of northern hemisphere land regions encouraged | distorted thinking about geopolitics. That the since the northern | continents and their countries appear larger than southern | countries, this also encouraged the mistaken belief that the | north was more important than the south. | ddhhyy wrote: | Two of my favorite sources for thinking about map projections | come from (where else?) the USGS: | | Map Projections: https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/70047422/report.pdf | | and the more comprehensive Map Projections: A Working Manual: | https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/pp1395 | Tomte wrote: | https://xkcd.com/977/ | | Peirce quincuncial looks cool. | sbaiddn wrote: | Another "Europeana are racist ergo Mercator". | | The Mercator projection is popular for one very important reason: | ease of navigation [1]. If you know nothing but your location on | Earth you can sail, walk, fly, paddle wherever you want with a | Mercator map and a compass. | | Thats it. | | Before fancy navigation aids this was huge. Sure, trade winds and | great circles were important consideration. But, at the end of | the day, if poop hit the fan (think Shackleton expedition) and | all you had was a row boat, a compass and a sextant with 800 mi | of South Atlantic to cross, you could still make it home. | | But no, the purpose of a chart is not as a practical aid to | getting around. The purpose of a chart is for insecure white men | to feel better about themselves. Here I agree, as the author is | clearly projecting his white savior complex | | [1] the author doesn't even get right the reason why the Mercator | excels for navigation: constant rhumb lines. You set your course | and you'll get to your destination without needing to correct (a | great circle requires constant correction). "Small features are | preserved" what croc! | wolverine876 wrote: | Perhaps we could approach the issue with intellectual | curiosity, as HN asks us, instead of dismissing it (complete | with a psychoanalysis of the author). | dgfitz wrote: | > The purpose of a chart is for insecure white men to feel | better about themselves. | | I'd like to see the Venn diagram of insecure white men and | insecure white men who feel better about themselves because of | the Mercator project. | | What a strange flex. | rayiner wrote: | > Here I agree, as the author is clearly projecting his white | savior complex | | I'm convinced this "we are good white people, not like those | are bad white people" stuff has a more sinister purpose: | control. You think they are going to engage in this large scale | endeavor of rewriting historical narratives and not use the | opportunity to get more power for themselves? | wolverine876 wrote: | Isn't that a bit paranoid? Do you have evidence for it? Such | attacks are a great - and common - way of changing the topic | from the merits of the issue. | rayiner wrote: | I mean, the white people who colonized everyone often do | themselves as benefactors. I don't think it's paranoid to | ask what contemporary benefactors are getting out of it for | themselves. | | I think there is evidence to justify skepticism. I'm from | Bangladesh and my dad has a lot of beefs with the British, | but I can't say Mercator projection has ever come up as one | of them. I heard it for the first time from white people. | Who came up with the idea that the Mercator projection is | racist? Who popularized it? Who gains power if minority | kids learn that in schools and come to believe it's true? | walnutclosefarm wrote: | THe whole argument about the negative affects of widespread use | of Mercator projection for world maps has always struck me as way | overblown. It's true, to be sure, that most Americans (which I | use as an example. because I know them), have a distorted notion | of the size of Africa, and to a lesser extent, South America, but | in my experience, they equally underestimate the size of Russian | and China. I think it has more to do with their certainty that | the US is "really big and important" as countries go, than with | mental burn-in of a warped geography from grade-school maps. | verisimi wrote: | I like the map, and article. It does challenge you to look at the | world differently and realise how little you actually know. | | > The longer we use a tool without questioning it, the more of a | truth it becomes no matter how wrong it is. | | Comments like this do irk me though. Truth is not subjective, you | cannot have more or less of it, and whether you use a tool has | nothing to do with the underlying reality. Using a tool, in this | case a map of the terrain, does not make it more or less | truthful. A map can be more accurate, a better representation, a | genuine attempt, but it cannot contain more truth. The truth is | the terrain itself. | causality0 wrote: | The authagraph seems like a pretty garbage projection compared | with something like the dymaxion. | robertlagrant wrote: | I thought Mercator was instituted and maintained by the mighty | Antarctica. Look how much bigger and better it is than every | other landmass! | thayne wrote: | > We are not taught to question it, even by our teachers | | Was I just unusually lucky? In grade school my teacher spent | several weeks teaching us about different map projections, and | how there are pros and cons, and none are perfect because the | earth is round but maps are flat. And we even talked about how | having north at the top is rather arbitrary, and having south at | the top would work just as well. | ajsnigrutin wrote: | We didn't learn about projections per-se, but more than one | teacher brought a globe to class, just to show how arctic and | antarctic areas are spread out on 2d maps, and to show the | distorsion when trying to draw stuff on a sphere onto a 2d | paper. | bombcar wrote: | Ours went into detail about how even a globe is inaccurate | because the oblate spheroid. | cplusplusfellow wrote: | The entire purpose of the article is race baiting against so- | called "insecure white men", so substantiated claims aren't | needed. | UweSchmidt wrote: | Having grown up with a world map over my bed, I'd say the overall | benefit from seeing all those political borders was generally | low. I stared at Antarctica a lot and was able to name most | African countries; without further context however their names | remained rather abstract. | | More interesting concepts would be to emphasize population | density, or other meaningful cultural and economic measurables | that, short of a "brain reboot", would increase understanding of | the world. | | https://www.visualcapitalist.com/3d-mapping-the-worlds-large... | hypertexthero wrote: | See also the Waterman butterfly projection: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterman_butterfly_projection | Yizahi wrote: | Here is another thought that may reboot OPs brain - not all | schools in the world use Mercator projection for teaching. In my | country we have used Robinson's projections if I remember | correctly. Also students usually have no need for navigation | precise projections, instead they need something that can be | reasonably used for all countries of the globe and for the globe | itself. | zw123456 wrote: | Is it just me or does it seem like this is a problem that is | disappearing with the prevalence of computers? I mean, the only | time I can remember seeing a Mercator projection is in yet | another HN "here is how bad Mercator is" articles. | joshe wrote: | Equal earth (https://equal-earth.com/) is a good well designed | map. I printed the pacific ocean centered version and have it on | my wall. | | There is a lot of conspiratorial woo about this topic, but it is | genuinely useful to get a sizes right at a starting point for | thinking clearly about the world. | | For example (orthogonal to the usual conspiracy talk), it's | commonly thought that Russia is super important and unbelievably | vast. But a good equal area map shows it's only a 1/3 bigger than | Canada + Alaska (and considerably poorer). | | Likewise we are much more likely to travel at the world scale by | plane with great circle routes. The mercator map is actually a | less accurate guide to that type of navigation. | | That said it is still useful to have north be directly up and | south, east and west be straight lines too. Hence google maps | using an mercator-ish projection, to make the zoom from local | navigation to the world size continue to preserve straight lines | and angles. Mercator is overused but is useful. | JasonCEC wrote: | Shades of Snowcrash in the title, needed to read the comments to | make sure it was safe before clicking. | soared wrote: | It has always seemed more valid me to distort water rather than | land. | zimpenfish wrote: | Probably makes sense these days but back in the 1500s when they | were doing all the sailing, distorting the water might well | have caused problems of a terminal nature, I think. | mistrial9 wrote: | looking at a globe, the size of the "Pacific Ocean" is what | changes my brain | michalc wrote: | I've posted this on HN before, but my own "brain reboot" came | from making | | http://projections.charemza.name/ | | that allows you to rotate the world before applying the Mercator | projection. The "crazy looking" distortions make me realise just | how distorted the usual projection itself is | wodenokoto wrote: | It would be nice if there was a globe, with the center of the | projection facing the user. Once you start rotating the map, it | is really difficult to make sense of what is going on. | | Other than that, it is really cool, and quite trippy to play | with. | michalc wrote: | Ah for me the lack of sense of what's going on is sort of the | point of it. The rotated projections are just as right as the | regular Mercator projection in an objective way, but it | really doesn't feel that way. | kortilla wrote: | > Mercator projection in an objective way | | Only if you drop the objective reason (navigation) that the | Mercator projection was made. | zwkrt wrote: | That was exactly what I thought too. I kept trying to make | the map seem "normal" but no matter when I tried some thing | was always blown so far out of perspective it was | unrecognizable. Every projection is so far off that it just | becomes comical. At that point it clicked that the Mercator | projection is just as bad, I've just seen it before. | ThrustVectoring wrote: | https://ibb.co/BVfgYj2 | | This is the best I could do, and it's pretty much just | putting the vast empty expanses of the Pacific and | Atlantic oceans in the higher-distortion areas near the | top and bottom. | ptato wrote: | it's a very neat map | JackFr wrote: | > Every projection is so far off that it just becomes | comical. | | Except Lambert and Albers. | | They become conical. | IshKebab wrote: | That's very cool. I don't know if it is quite fair to the | Mercator projection though because it mostly distorts the north | and south poles which are conveniently not very populated. | | You should add other projections for comparison! | micheljansen wrote: | Very smooth, well done! | robertlagrant wrote: | Also, for an article that claims to change the world and reboot | your brain, it should probably pick a topic that was covered in | 2001 by The West Wing (which proposed a better alternative | projection). | smiddereens wrote: | yummypaint wrote: | Given that almost all maps are now viewed on electronic devices, | why bother using any projection? We can now show the entire earth | with no distortion by letting users rotate a virtual globe. | Zooming in and out has already solved the core problem of globes | being bulky and undetailed relative to maps. I would argue that | for laypeople use of projections is still largely a historical | artifact that we haven't aged out of yet. There are only a | relative handful of people who might actually navigate using the | old ways, but in practice thats's just a failsafe for computer | assisted planning which considers the true shape of the earth | already. | fabrika wrote: | What if you want to see Australia and Greenland at the same | time? Globes have their limitations. | jameshart wrote: | As long as the screen you're viewing it on is flat you're going | to need some kind of projection. If it's a perspective or | orthographic view of a centered sphere it will be some sort of | polar projection. | ajsnigrutin wrote: | You cannot visualize a router between two countries on the | opposite sides, without manually rotating the 3d globe | (projected on a 2d screen). ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-08-20 23:00 UTC)