• veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    This is like that one American Dallas county commissioner, William Price, getting offended it’s called Black Hole.

    The notion that projections perpetuate some racial agenda is exactly the pseudo-intellectual victimhood that takes away oxygen in the room for actual issues to be addressed.

  • ysjet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I’m going to be honest, this just looks utterly useless for any country that isn’t south africa, and ESPECIALLY useless for any country in the northern hemisphere.

    Like, yes, sure, you’ve made all the country’s areas roughly equal, but also every single country that isn’t south africa is a distorted, warped mess that looks nothing like its actual shape.

    Look at parts of europe- every country is a COMPLETELY USELESS shape. Three quarters of them have been turned into diagonal lines. How the fuck is that useful? Europe is the worst area in that regard, but by no means the only one.

    It makes it literally useless as a map.

    • Dearth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 days ago

      Every country looks distorted and warped based on your lifetime of experience looking at mercator projection. Every country looks warped and distorted when compared to globes. We learn geography on a flat surface which is inherently distorted because we live on a round surface

      • ysjet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 days ago

        Actually, fun fact, the entire point of the Mercator projection is that it DOES maintain shapes/angles, just not scale. It’s a nautical map, it’s for sailing. That’s why when you look at a mercator map and a globe, the countries look about the same, just potentially different sizes- because that’s literally the point of it.

        • Hugin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Not exactly it distorts shapes a lot. However if you pick point A on a coast and point B on a different coast the angle of the line is the heading you should sail to go from point A to point B.

          So yeah very useful as a nautical map if you want to navigate from place to place. Not accurate in shape though.

    • devnev@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Who actually uses it as a map though? It’s usually only seen briefly in apps, or in various symbols, or on a classroom wall. As a symbol, having the rights sizes would be a significant improvement. In an app, people will zoom in anyway, so at least they’d passively see the correct proportions when zooming out, instead of getting a false impression. In a classroom, it would seem all that more importantly to not give false impressions to kids.

      • ysjet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        The problem with that is that it gives a completely incorrect idea of what an individual country looks like, in a way that gives a false impression to kids about what the countries even look like. Suddenly they have to look at one map, and recognize a country, and then look at a zoomed in, more accurate map, and recognize it in a completely different shape. To be frank, most people’s geography knowledge is already bad enough- doubling the amount of shapes they need to learn is basically a non-starter.

        For classroom instruction, a globe should be being used anyway- that’s the gold standard. Why go through all the work and effort of introducing a worse solution, that doubles the amount of studying, and is made completely useless when it can be replaced by a $10 globe?

        • devnev@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Is learning the shapes of countries really all that important? I would have thought by the time the shape matters, you’re looking at/learning the details of the country, at which point you’re not looking at a map of the entire world anymore anyway.

          • ysjet@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yes? The shapes of countries- and their relation to other countries around them- is literally the most important part of learning geography in some respects, because of how much that shape is influenced by- and has been influenced by- the surroundings, the socioeconomic and sociopolitical history, etc etc.

  • Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    We should encourage the use of more globes to represent world maps.

    Like, seriously. Almost all maps are viewed on a computer screen, all computers easily have the ability to display a sphere and rotate it

  • kopasz7@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    84
    ·
    3 days ago

    “It’s [the Mercator projection] the world’s longest misinformation and disinformation campaign, and it just simply has to stop.”

    No matter how we cut it though, all 2D projections will have some kind of distortion. They opted to preserve area, while the Mercator preserves angles. Arguably it is less important today to preserve angles, as we have automatic navigation systems. There are some alternatives that also preserve the area: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/The-Equal-Earth-compared-to-similar-equal-area-pseudocylindrical-projections.png

    • Skua@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      They did. They are specifically advocating for the Equal Earth projection.

      • Scott_of_the_Arctic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        I mean everything is approximately to scale i guess, but the further east or west you get from Europe/Africa the more bent things get. Including the area that 75% of the worlds population live.

        • Skua@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 days ago

          Well yeah, every map projection has to mis-represent something. In this case they’re arguing that presenting area is more important than presenting angles. Outside of long-distance travel on ships and planes, which are not using general-purpose world maps, nobody is navigating with a world map, so I think that they’re probably right here. It seems more important to me to understand the relative size of Africa to other landmasses than it is to know that the Korean peninsula is actually a few degrees off of being straight north of Borneo

    • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      It was very much a real discussion back then as well. The writers didn’t invent this argument.

      People have been complaining about maps in general since we first started making them. The Gall-Peters projection that they mentioned traces its origins back to 1855 when James Gall first introduced the concept.

      In the 1970’s, Arno Peters made this projection well known. He specifically argued the point the show makes: other maps distort our perception of the world and it fosters problems with how we treat some countries.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gall–Peters_projection

        • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          22 hours ago

          You’re welcome, enjoy your odd new fact :D

          Stuff like this is why I really enjoy The West Wing. It often has interesting real world arguments that it plays out smartly. A bit too optimistic in our current political climate, but still fun to watch.

    • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      Such a beautiful scene.

      “But you can’t do that!”

      “Why not?”

      “Because you’re freaking me out!”

  • Dantheta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Reminds me of the West Wing episode with the Petersen (?) projection map. Although I seem to remember that map format was under copyright and would have required a fee for every use. An intended consequence?

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 days ago

    Like completely, or just as a default?

    It’s uniquely the best option if you like using compass bearings.

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Which, at a global scale, is important in your life when exactly? The only time I move at a global scale I’m flying, and then the projection makes it look like my pilot doesn’t know how to fly in a straight line.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Since the advent of widespread GPS, a lot less. It’s historically interesting, and is still used as a backup by some ships, but it’s not really necessary the way it was in the age of sail when it became the projection.

        Again, if they just want to switch to something more balanced as a default when you just want to point at things on a map, that’s entirely reasonable.

    • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Or just want a map that you can cut a small piece (up to a square 10° of longitude) from and have it just work (no skewing or non-proportional scaling required) although non-interactive world maps should use Robinson, Winkel-Tripel or something.

      Of course, “a square 10° of latitude”, while the same size on the full map, will cover different areas. The side length is approximately:

      • 1110 km near the equator (0°)
      • 960 km in North/South Africa or Florida (30°)
      • 790 km in NYC, Venice or south NZ (45°)
      • 558 km in Oslo, Anchorage or northernmost Antarctic islands (60°)
      • 289 km in central Greenland, northernmost peninsula of Russia or Canada or southernmost sea (75°)
      • at higher latitudes, approx. 𝑥 km when 6𝑥 km from the pole

      If you’re at the Amundsen-Scott research station, a square 10° of latitude won’t do, as it covers just about your bed.

  • Dragomus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    16th century? Huh I would have expected a far more accurate version would have been made and accepted long ago.

    Especially since during all the centuries since then accurate navigation was needed, even around Afrika, and not make journeys last far longer by keeping an incorrect map.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      3 days ago

      Nautical navigation is where the Mercator map is actually the most useful. Any straight line drawn in it stays true and any angles are preserved. That’s why every nautical chart is done using a Mercator projection. It’s just not so great when blown up to the size of the world, but that was never really it’s intention.

      • 7upCoconut@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        It was intentional as propaganda. During the Cold War, it made the U.S.S.R. look bigger and more of an imposing threat to the west.

        • btaf45@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          3 days ago

          It was intentional as propaganda. During the Cold War,

          Nope. It is hundreds of years older that that.

          • 7upCoconut@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yes it is older than that.

            That doesn’t discount the fact that it was selected for that purpose.

            • btaf45@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              That doesn’t discount the fact that it was selected for that purpose.

              WTF of course it discounts the fact that it was “selected for that purpose”.

    • Laser@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 days ago

      I would have expected a far more accurate version would have been made and accepted long ago.

      The earth is a three-dimensional globe, all two-dimensional projections will be incorrect, you can only choose which aspects (e.g. distances, areas or whatever) you want to keep correct.