• Logi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    17 days ago

    Faithfully projecting a globe onto a flat surface is impossible and all projections have to balance a number of compromises. Mercator retains compass directions and the shapes of land masses but entirely sacrifices relative scale between equatorial regions and polar regions. This makes it great for navigating a 17th century vessel. Other projections strike a different balance, like this one, and sacrifice compass direction and land mass shapes in order to perfectly retain scale. On this map, my little Arctic island looks like someone stepped on it.

    IMO a balanced projection will compromise on all the nice properties a projection can have, and if that isn’t acceptable, then get a globe.

  • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    By signing the petition you take a stand against a false narrative that downplays Africa’s vast size and diversity as the second-largest continent, reducing its perceived importance in global politics and economics. You can correct the narrative.

    I’ll be real here, I have no idea what these people are talking about. The way Africa looked on maps has never had any bearing on my or probably anyone’s thinking of how important the continent is in global politics or economics. If someone thinks “country/continent looks small so they must be unimportant,” they are either a child or a fool. Or both.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      I somewhat agree, Africa never looked small imo. However Russia, Greenland, Canada etc are so comically oversized that it absolutely makes a difference imo.

      • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        17 days ago

        Its a distorted representation of what the Earth looks like, and regardless of the way the sphere of our Earth is displayed on a 2D plane, it will always be distorted.

        I don’t see any tangible benefit from changing what has already worked and is globally accepted for many decades. It seems kinda nitpicky, or like these people are clout chasing or something.

    • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      The way Africa looked on maps has never had any bearing on my or probably anyone’s thinking of how important the country is in global politics or economics.

      Africa isn’t a country though, it’s a continent with dozens of independent, distinct and diverse countries in it.

      And one possible impact of the continent being represented much smaller than it really is, is people thinking of Africa as a single country.

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      The fact that you say Africa is a country kind of speaks against your argument here, wouldn’t you say?

  • theherk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    16 days ago

    This is such a garbage take. There is no way to “show our world as it truly is” in two dimensions. I’m all about showing other projects and orientations. Classrooms should have “upside down” maps and Albert maps for example. But we should also teach that each projection has benefits and drawbacks. I was taught that decades ago. Have we stopped?

    • BehavioralClam@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      15 days ago

      Its the same take that’s applied to any party seen as a “status quo”. Your boss, the CEO, police, the state, movies, everything is “projected” to show something that it isn’t to subtly manipulate the basis of your decisions.

      • theherk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        What? Map projections are not projected to manipulate you psychologically. They are projected to manipulate a three dimensional object onto a two dimensional surface.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      16 days ago

      99% of people dont know that there other projections. I dare you to ask people which map projection is their favorite.

      Ideally yes we should stick to standard and make sure everyone knows thay there are many variants and none of them perfectly represent the sphere were on but thats not happening.

      • theherk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        16 days ago

        I don’t believe that 99% figure for a second. Unless geography is removed from all curricula worldwide. Even still, that ignorance would not signify what this movement implies. It is a useful map; end of story. If the movement were, “We should increase public knowledge of geography and how projections work,” fine. But it isn’t.

  • nymnympseudonym@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    DYMAXION MAP OR GTFO

    EDIT: details


    It has less distortion of relative size of areas, most notably when compared to the Mercator projection; and less distortion of shapes of areas, notably when compared to the Gall–Peters projection. Other compromise projections attempt a similar trade-off.

    More unusually, the Dymaxion map does not have any “right way up”. Fuller argued that in the universe there is no “up” and “down”, or “north” and “south”: only “in” and “out”.[9] Gravitational forces of the stars and planets created “in”, meaning “towards the gravitational center”, and “out”, meaning “away from the gravitational center”. He attributed the north-up-superior/south-down-inferior presentation of most other world maps to cultural bias.

    • stickly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      This looks like when you see a weird, unflattering picture of a celebrity. Earth just woke up and hasn’t put its makeup on and you put it on blast like this

  • Nalivai@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    16 days ago

    It’s a bit hard to find out where it actually originated from and who’s behind it. Judjing by their social media handlers, it’s a marketing agency Hello Makeda. Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t trust marketing agencies to be good judges on geographical projects.

    • BehavioralClam@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      15 days ago

      They are only using the cause to promote their brand social responsibility probably. In any case, the issue with the distorted view of the map that ideologically and politically benefited one side has been known for decades, and most of the countries that were colonies now use the correct one.

  • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    17 days ago

    i think the best solution (besides globes which are impractical on screens/posters) is having no standard, expose kids in school to 3 or 4 different projections so they learn there’s no standard and all protections are as valid and all with drawbacks and advantages.

    • DampCanary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      I don’t get it,
      from my memory of geography class in 5th to 8th grade, in elementary, we extensively learned about all kinds of maps, and projections, so teaching kids 3-4 is huge downgrade.

      • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 days ago

        didn’t mean only teach 3-4, just to not regularly use one projection. use a handful so no one instinctively learns to accept one.

        even though you learned a lot of maps, it’s likely most maps you used when not learning about different projections were the same.

        • DampCanary@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          Most likely, because I would guess that >90% of my up to date (after middle school) use of maps was highly localised to plaxe of interest.
          Which doesn’t really show projection type (or brings relevance of it to surface).

  • Ganbat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    17 days ago

    Okay… but doesn’t this just introduce the issue of flat maps distorting anything to the east or west of center in a different way?

  • Rooty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    16 days ago

    Mercator distorts landmass to fit the grid, so it is good for navigation, simply draw a straight line between two points and follow it. Also, the plea on that site is just…weird. Africa is not taken seriously because it is displayed too small on maps - what? It is a large, chunky continent that can be compressed without too much detail loss - Europe, not so much.

    • BehavioralClam@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      15 days ago

      Yes, but thats only for navigation. The map was chosen to be used as the standard in colonial time, because it brainwashed the colonies to believe that the people subjugating them were from great and big countries on the other side of the world. There would be a lot more revolts if people actually knew that they were being held captives by weak dudes from some small european piece of land that was only a fraction of the size of their country.

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

      Search the comments before promoting this one. Glad I’m not alone.

      I especially like how it centers over the Pacific, the largest geographical feature.

      Other maps make the Pacific look similar in size to the Atlantic when in reality the Pacific ocean is three times the size of the Eurasia landmass.

  • Sarcasmo220@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    15 days ago

    Whatever map that uses Eurasia rather than pretend Europe is it’s own continent is fine by me