this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2025
71 points (88.2% liked)

Map Enthusiasts

4806 readers
137 users here now

For the map enthused!

Rules:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] merde@sh.itjust.works 41 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

where is California in all this?

~~why exclude Paris too?~~

seems too arbitrary… what are the criteria?

[–] The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world 27 points 2 weeks ago

I assume they intentionally left out some to round out the numbers a bit and hit 50% in a more interesting way without over half of it being the US.

[–] huppakee 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Paris is included, but not the regions south of it:

Regions of France Map

[–] merde@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Nantes is wheat fields 🤔 all of Normandy and Brittany too

my bad, for paris i had to zoom a little bit more

It includes paris. and the rest is like mostly wheats fields so that’s why it didn’t get included

[–] grahamja@reddthat.com 1 points 2 weeks ago

The other 50%, it is on the west side of the United States.

[–] voxthefox@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 2 weeks ago

This could probably get a lot smaller if they went by city statistics instead of state, 80% of Texas is essentially rural land/desert very little people live in.

[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Doesn't include the world's fourth-largest economy ... so what's the criteria here?

[–] blarghly@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The criteria is they add up to 50%

[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Which 50%? Not the top x economies it takes to add-up to at least 50%, so, random countries/states/provinces that happen to add up to 50% ... ?

[–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

yep, that would pass the criteria

Plausibly it's trying to minimise land area with some degree of contiguity so it's not just picking random cities though. India's economy isn't much bigger than the 5th or 6th economy while having substantially more territory and population.

[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 weeks ago

I think you've hit the nail on the head with "contiguity", and that alone makes this look so wrong to me. I mean, including Mississippi, Louisiana and West Virginia? China's Entire Coast, but NOT Taiwan?

[–] blarghly@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Yes. That way they could make a map and get updoots

[–] oktoberpaard 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I think they factored in GDP per square mile, plus a constraint that it should be a contiguous area per region and probably another constraint that they wanted to highlight an area in North America, Europe and Asia.

[–] spamspeicher@feddit.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] spamspeicher@feddit.org 3 points 2 weeks ago

Ah, OK. I thought you meant on a country scale. I don't think there are any rules, just an interesting looking map.

India should be included too, its 5th on the list. Instead there are these small European countries.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I highly doubt west Virginia and Alabama are pulling their weights here

[–] The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Out of curiosity, I just looked up Alabama's GDP, and it's similar to the country of Portugal.

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It should come to no suprise, alabama's economy is proped up by the fed. The biggest employers is Redstone arsenal and Anniston Army Depot and all the support industries around them.

[–] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago

Why are only part of the named countries colored?

[–] BorisBoreUs@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So it correlates to the major urban population centers of the 1st world...? Makes sense.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Most of them, it excludes the American west coast while including the poorest regions in the country (Appalachia and the deep south, neither of which can really be considered developed)