5 ms·

> For example Los Angeles County, twice as large as Finland. Uhh. You're off by two orders of magnitude. Los Angeles county is 4751 sq mi [1]. Finland is 130,6

> For example Los Angeles County, twice as large as Finland. Uhh. You're off by two orders of magnitude. Los Angeles county is 4751 sq mi [1]. Finland is 130,666 sq mi [2]. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_County,_California https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_County,_Californ... 2: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finland https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finland

et2o 8y ago
He or she meant by population I would assume. Approximately 5 vs. 10 million.
- bbeonx 8y ago
  Right. If one interpretation is wildly wrong and there is another blindingly obvious interpretation that is correct and relevant... Why would we ever give someone the benefit of the doubt?
  - TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
    Or refer to the community guideline: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. Which can be found here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- slededit 8y ago
  Population isn't very relevant when we're speaking specifically of things that relate to land area like topological maps.
  - objectivetruth 8y ago
    But we are talking about building footprints which DO directly correlate to population, not overall area of an entity. So it's the most relevant factor.
    - walterstucco 8y ago
      Not really Arizona and Croatia have the same population, but look at the aerial maps...
  - phamilton 8y ago
    But we aren't speaking of land area, we're speaking of buildings, which relate to population. I'd wager that LA County has more buildings than Finland.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- adventist 8y ago
  Exactly. I would assume that the higher the population, the more buildings present. Just because you have a lot of land doesn't mean you have a lot of buildings.
  - walterstucco 8y ago
    Most of the building are not residential

et2o 8y ago

He or she meant by population I would assume. Approximately 5 vs. 10 million.

bbeonx 8y ago
Right. If one interpretation is wildly wrong and there is another blindingly obvious interpretation that is correct and relevant... Why would we ever give someone the benefit of the doubt?
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
  Or refer to the community guideline: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. Which can be found here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
slededit 8y ago
Population isn't very relevant when we're speaking specifically of things that relate to land area like topological maps.
- objectivetruth 8y ago
  But we are talking about building footprints which DO directly correlate to population, not overall area of an entity. So it's the most relevant factor.
  - walterstucco 8y ago
    Not really Arizona and Croatia have the same population, but look at the aerial maps...
- phamilton 8y ago
  But we aren't speaking of land area, we're speaking of buildings, which relate to population. I'd wager that LA County has more buildings than Finland.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
adventist 8y ago
Exactly. I would assume that the higher the population, the more buildings present. Just because you have a lot of land doesn't mean you have a lot of buildings.
- walterstucco 8y ago
  Most of the building are not residential