site banner
PaperclipPerfector  12hr ago (text post)   563 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for April 24, 2026

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Which variations of the cylindrical equal-area projection are your favorite?

None, all of them should be illegal and punishable by getting run over by a steamroller.

This comment is harming the cylinder(s’ feelings).

punishable by getting run over by a steamroller.

"Hey bro, I heard you like cylindrical projections...."

That's a rather harsh response. What are your preferred map projections, then? (They had better not be compromise projections.)

Maybe I’m a cartographic basic bitch, but I like that Robinson projection more than the cylindrical ones. It’s closer to my head canon of what the continents look like.

The cylindrical ones look goofy to me, kind of like the Mercator but in a different way.

Compromise projections are the best projections. The purpose of a world map is to see where things are at, not to make precise measurements, unless you're a sailor or something. I don't care if size or shape are distorted a little, as long as it doesn't look ridiculous, and compromise projections are the only ones that don't look ridiculous. If we're talking local maps then Transverse Mercator is the only way to go, since the meridian is chosen based on the local area you're mapping. If people are going to be so insistent about the metric system then I'm going to be insistent about UTM, which by all rights should replace latitude/longitude since a grid is inherently superior to an angular system. If someone decides to send me a pin for directions I'm going to insist that it's in UTM from now on, in case my phone dies and I have to navigate with map and compass.

The purpose of a world map is to see where things are at, not to make precise measurements, unless you're a sailor or something. I don't care if size or shape are distorted a little, as long as it doesn't look ridiculous, and Compromise projections are the only ones that don't look ridiculous

In the first place, I disagree with the idea that the cylindrical equal-area projection looks ridiculous. Use the Behrmann variant (standard parallels ±30 °) for global evenhandedness, or the Gall/Peters variant (±45 °) for a bit of Eurocentrism.

In the second place, you can just use the equirectangular projection instead of a wacky compromise projection. The Robinson projection's convolutions are totally unnecessary.

If people are going to be so insistent about the metric system then I'm going to be insistent about UTM, which by all rights should replace latitude/longitude since a grid is inherently superior to an angular system.

But latitude and longitude are a grid already.

No compromise, compromise projections only! Kavraysky VII one love.

None! None! Map projections are madness! Use satellite imagery, or globes, or just go outside and look at the world with your own eyes! Maps should not attempt to show two sides of a sphere at once! It's unnatural!

Maps should not attempt to show two sides of a sphere at once!

You gotta choose a projection long before you try to show both sides of the earth at once.

Use satellite imagery

Sure! I'll just display those images on my flat monitor by ... hmmm ...

No, you don't understand. Just look at the original image, not some strange collage glued together from several images.

Just look at the original image

Which follow-up joke would you say is even harder to miss: "Okay: 100100101011010101011...", or "I'd love to, but my spacesuit is still in the shop"?

Google Earth is a thing. Having a monitor/phone and other modern tech actually decreases the relative utility of a flat map projection, as opposed to the days of yesteryear where it would have been much more convenient to carry an easily storable map around instead of an unwieldy globe, and most people's practical use of maps would (usually) have been in local small-scale contexts where the distortion would have been negligible. Now, though? I wonder why there are any map apps that don't project their satellite imagery onto a sphere.

Google Earth is a thing.

It is! It uses a near-sided perspective projection.

You may have missed the joke.

The sphere of Google Earth is projected onto the rectangular plane of your phone screen.

How is transforming the 3D surface of the sphere that Google Earth internally manipulates into a 2D image that can be rendered on a planar phone screen not a map projection?

I'll pencil you down as "myriahedral projection" (gnomonic onto a zillion-faced polyhedron).

Yeah OK, I can live with that. Not actually make meaningful use of it, but at least it doesn't require the malfeasant who drew the map to be struck by lightning.

Still, I'd prefer just taking that projection and wrap it back around a sphere. Pardon, around a polyhedron.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats