h a l f b a k e r yThis is what happens when one confuses "random" with "profound."
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
There is probably a mathematical method to do that with. |
|
| |
Yup. I'm guessing you could weight all the good things into one map, and see who's doing the best. So, area of a particular portion would be increased for good stuff per person (GDP, years of education, etc.) and decreased for bad stuff (carbon emmissions, crime, etc.). The final areas might be an accurate visualization of overall welfare, as it's not an easily quantifiable aspect of living. |
|
| |
And yes, the UN would get to decide whats good and bad, so it's not to be wholly trusted. |
|
| |
If it were based on temperatures in cities and areas, it could be updated in real time. That would be interesting for a few minutes. |
|
| |
Some positives:
Average number of people under one roof
Leisure time per head of population
Average years an infant spends under fulltime care of his mother
Percentage of population able to afford all healthcare they require |
|
| |
My favourite cartogram is one in which the
land areas of the various countries are
represented proportionately by their area
on the cartogram. It's really weird: it
makes China look bigger than Japan,
whilst New Zealand appears much smaller
than Australia. |
|
| |
[Max] interesting concept. Is there a use? |
|
| |
//[Max] interesting concept. Is there a
use?// No, but it's amusing. There are
other distortions associated with this kind
of representation also. For example, it
makes it look as if the UK is not at the
centre of the world, for some reason. |
|
| |