
Map of America's Racial Segregation - Aqua_Geek
http://www.wired.com/design/2013/08/how-segregated-is-your-city-this-eye-opening-map-shows-you
======
WA
I watched once a lecture on Coursera about Schelling's model of segregation,
which I found extremely insightful.

If you see maps like that with strong segregation, one of the first attempts
to explain it is "racism". However, if you divide your neighborhood in 9
blocks such that you are in the center, you have 8 neighbors.

Schelling's model now shows that even in cities where most people say:"I'd
like to live next to only 35-40% of people who are similar to me (whatever
that means exactly, could be ethnical background, skin color, income, ...) and
I'd accept 60% of neighbors who are different from me", you would still get a
segregation of 80-90% in the city.

So, the reason for strong segregation is not necessarily that people are
racists. People can be very tolerant, but if you try to fulfill the minimum
requirement (40% like me), you end up with strong segregation patterns just
because there's no other way to fulfill the minimum requirement for most
people.

Note: Numbers aren't exact, but pretty close.

Edit: Link to lecture:
[https://class.coursera.org/modelthinking-003/lecture/16](https://class.coursera.org/modelthinking-003/lecture/16)

~~~
SiVal
Yes, this is a "map of America's racial _distribution_ ". Calling it a "map of
America's racial _segregation_ " means someone is pushing a political agenda.
Calling it a map of racial integration would be just as accurate but probably
didn't support the right narrative.

As a map of _distribution_ , you would expect significant clustering from
randomness alone. We've all seen the "which of these dot patterns is actually
the random one?" tests, where few people guess the correct answer: the one
with all the clusters.

If you take that clustered map as a seed, then add _any_ affinities, you get
positive feedback, increasing the clustering. Those affinities don't have to
be racial selection but can just be in the general form of, "I make decisions
based on what I hear, and I hear more from people I know than from people I
don't know."

So, you hear from your cousin that there is a new apartment building opening
across the street from him. You hear from several members of your church that
X is the best school district. A factory in your town closes and the laid off
employees discuss their options and decide to go check out a company in the
next town that is hiring (with lots of reasonably-priced apartments nearby).

Just getting more information from people you know than people you don't know
could be sufficient for Schelling's model, but add to that the tendency to get
more information from people from your background (whether you actually know
them or not), because it's likely to be more relevant to you, and you magnify
the effect significantly. An urban liberal and his soccer-loving Mexican
gardener don't have to dislike each other for the former to read more NY Times
and the latter to watch more Univision, and the information about where the
opportunities are as presented in those two media outlets are not the same.

This doesn't mean that there is no race-based component in deciding where to
live. It just means that, as the Schelling model demonstrates, you can't tell
how much there is by looking at how much clustering there is on a map.

~~~
VladRussian2
>Yes, this is a "map of America's racial distribution". Calling it a "map of
America's racial segregation" means someone is pushing a political agenda.

isn't racial segregation is a very significantly skewed racial distribution?

>This doesn't mean that there is no race-based component in deciding where to
live. It just means that, as the Schelling model demonstrates, you can't tell
how much there is by looking at how much clustering there is on a map.

you very well described why race may be not a direct (or a reliably traceable
at all) cause of observed segregation. And i'd agree that claiming strong
causation here would require more strong arguments than just a map which to me
clearly shows correlation.

~~~
ajross
The English language _word_ "segregation" means something like "a multi-modal
spacial distribution".

But the most common (and very well understood by anyone educated here) _use_
of that word is to describe the regime of laws in the US south designed to
prevent racial interraction and preserve white priviledge.

Basically: it means something very similar to "apartheid", which is another
word that probably had a neutral meaning once but now can only mean one thing.

~~~
VladRussian2
yes, segregation-by-law doesn't exist anymore in the USA (personal preferences
of police officers in LA aside), yet there is a phenomenon of poor black and
hispanic kids in Oakland going to school which is predominantly attended only
by other poor black and hispanic kids. Segregation-by-de-facto-conditions-of-
life?

~~~
jlgreco
Segregation in common English, at least to my ears, implies some degree of
malicious intent. We don't have _laws_ that do this anymore, but there are
other possibilities such as racist real estate agents, or the 'strategic'
placement of highways between neighborhoods (see Chicago, from what I
understand).

Your usage is technically correct, but I think it carries an implication that
is not necessarily supported.

~~~
bostonpete
I dunno -- there's a lot of talk of self-segregation in the last decade or
two. I think that gets lumped in with general segregation in this day and age
(certainly it didn't 50 years ago), and I don't think that form of segregation
implies any malicious intent.

------
spodek
Here is the actual map, which you can zoom into, scroll, pan, explore your
neighborhood, etc. --
[http://demographics.coopercenter.org/DotMap/index.html](http://demographics.coopercenter.org/DotMap/index.html)

EDIT: Exploring, I see the island I live on -- Manhattan -- has the four main
dot colors well represented, though mainly in blocks. The main mixing is
between whites and Asians and between blacks and Hispanics. Notably parts of
the Upper West Side, East Village/Lower East Side, and Midtown west show
significantly more mixing, at least by eye -- it would be interesting to
quantify the data.

Some parts of Queens and Brooklyn show mixing of all four dot colors within
the same city block.

Still, on the whole most dot colors remain in blocks with less mixing on the
edges. Some dot colors rarely mix with other dot colors.

EDIT TWO: How they made the map is here --
[http://www.coopercenter.org/demographics/Racial-Dot-
Map](http://www.coopercenter.org/demographics/Racial-Dot-Map) \-- which
describes the data sources and links to the code on Github.

~~~
ebspelman
The actual map is an amazing piece of work, but let's give credit where credit
is due!

Bill Rankin posted maps in this exact visual style back in 2009. You can see
them (and many other amazing maps he's done) at his blog --
[http://www.radicalcartography.net/index.html?chicagodots](http://www.radicalcartography.net/index.html?chicagodots)

Eric Fischer picked up Bill's project and ran with it, composing maps for most
of the major US cities with census 2010 data. You can see them all on his
Flickr page --
[http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/sets/7215762481267496...](http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/sets/7215762481267496..).

I love great maps, but it's a little disheartening that these precursor
projects aren't mentioned anywhere in the article/comments.

~~~
mkopinsky
Thank you. I saw this article and had a feeling of "Hmm, where have I seen
this before? The URL says 2013, but this is definitely old..." I think it must
have Eric's flickr.

(Link somehow got truncated; it should be
[http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/sets/7215762481267496...](http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/sets/72157624812674967/)
)

------
hedgew
Is segregation really the appropriate word here? Separation of the races is
coded into our genes and happens naturally without any malicious intent too.
It's not much different from the fact that all of us prefer to surround
ourselves with people who are similar to ourselves, usually in terms of
thinking, hobbies, and interests. Physical attributes influence us as well,
whether it's bikers and leather jackets or punks and black spiked clothes. In
evolutionary biology this is referred to as "kinship".

Not to say that racism isn't worth fighting against, but the more free our
societies become the more people on average will follow their natural
instincts. A non-racial example of this is Norway, which is likely the most
gender equal country in the world, but has also extremely skewed gender
distributions in professions such as engineering and nursing; with almost only
men in engineering, and women in nursing, despite massive attempts to balance
the situation. This could be easily misinterpreted and claimed as evidence
that Norway does not respect gender equality, but in fact it's more likely
evidence of the opposite! People in Norway are more free to pursue what makes
_them_ happy.

When we use terms like "segregation" for cases where it might actually be just
"separation", we risk causing unnecessary hatred and overblown illusions of
racism - misleading us from what actually matters: freedom and equality.

~~~
sophacles
Can you point to sources that answer any of these questions:

* What mechanism does this racial separation take?

* What sort of evidence shows that skin color or other ethnic identifiers in genetics are the thing that causes tribal separation vs them just serving as a simple proxy to more complicated factors?

* What explanations of exigent factors are there... for example why are there black and hispanic republicans, or white members of traditionally "black gangs". How do these less common (but not rare) group membership issues override the claimed genetic selection?

* What genetic factors explain the fracturing of groups within groups of seemingly genetically similar (at least on a racial/ethinc level) people?

The claim made here doesn't actually answer any of those questions - I'm not
sure the validity of "separation of races is coded in our genes" makes sense
given the scenarios highlighted in my questions.

~~~
pessimizer
Why bother with research when everything can be explained by the natural
tendencies of the blood? Research just perpetuates racism by allowing for the
possibility that it may exist.

~~~
sophacles
I don't understand your comment, can you expand?

------
k2enemy
Thomas Schelling [0] has shown that even if your most preferred neighborhood
is a perfect mix of races, it is a dynamically unstable equilibrium (assuming
that if the balance tips one way or the other, you prefer it to tip towards
your own race). That is, segregated neighborhoods are not necessarily a sign
that people prefer segregation -- it is also a natural outcome when people
want to live in a mixed neighborhood. There are many interesting simulations
of the phenomenon. [1]

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Schelling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Schelling)
[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_XtboyO8jc&noredirect=1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_XtboyO8jc&noredirect=1)

~~~
revelation
Do people pick their dwelling by racial mix? I would expect this to be much
more of a function of income and means.

~~~
auctiontheory
Apparently you have never tried to "rent while black."

~~~
bostonvaulter2
Can you expound upon that? What exactly happens?

~~~
prutschman
Here is an article on the subject:
[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/business/economy/discrimin...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/business/economy/discrimination-
in-housing-against-nonwhites-persists-quietly-us-study-finds.html?_r=0)

> In one test, a white customer looking for a two-bedroom apartment was shown
> a two-bedroom and a one-bedroom and given applications for both, while a
> Hispanic customer who arrived two hours later was told that nothing was
> available. In another, a real estate agent refused to meet with a black
> tester who was not prequalified for a loan, while a white tester was given
> an appointment without being asked if she had prequalified.

------
simias
I feel like you would get a similar result if you did a map of Paris or other
big european cities, I'm not sure it's an american thing. I think over here we
just don't like/can't compile that kind of racial data.

I would be more interested in counter-examples: cities were the melting pot is
the rule.

~~~
icecreampain
Making race maps in Europe would get you shot, your family hanged and all your
friends deemed social outcasts forever.

For example: the Swedish crime prevention board (BRÅ) no longer publish crime
statistics containing ethnic background information. They stopped a few years
ago (2006) when the PC media found out that africans and arabs were way, way
over-represented in all crime categories.

This is due to political correctness - something that the US seems to have
been spared from. So far.

~~~
noir_lord
You can go too far from reality with political correctness but you can go just
as far in the other direction with the "lack" of political correctness.

The US has a much higher tolerance for what in Europe would be considered
pretty blatant racism.

I think that Political Correctness for the most part says we should treat
everyone equally whether we like them or not which is the rational approach as
I'm sure there are groups that don't like me (I'm a white middle class hard-
line atheist so that probably gets me on a few lists right there).

I'd sooner live in a country with "political correctness gone mad" (a
frequently cry of the right wing press here) than one where it hasn't.

We have politicians here condemning the Human Rights act because it makes them
guarantee the rights for everyone even people "the majority don't like" which
is _exactly as it should be_ since the people "the majority don't like" can
change so rapidly.

Of course in America you have been spared the political correctness gone mad
but you are still executing mentally retarded people in some states so maybe
you could do with the political correctness going a bit "mad".

“You can judge a society by how well it treats its prisoners”. - Dostoevsky

~~~
JPKab
Perhaps you and I have a different idea on what "Political Correctness"
actually is.

My view is that many mistake Scientifically Correct from Politically Correct.
It is Scientifically Correct to say that there is very little difference,
genetically, between Europeans, Asians, Africans, Latin Americans, etc. It
also happens to be Politically Correct. However, it is also Scientifically
Correct to say that there are huge disparities in victim reported violent
crime rates between Europeans, Asians, Africans, and Latin Americans. However,
this is not Politically Correct. This is an example of where a problem is
identified, but unable to be discussed in the public sphere. If a problem
can't be discussed, it can't be solved.

An African-American male is over 7 times more likely to murder a person than a
Hispanic or European-American male. He is also over 6 times more likely to be
the victim of a murder. This is elementary statistics based on data collected
by the FBI. If this problem (which in my opinion is cultural rather than this
phony construct called "racial") can't be discussed in an honest fashion due
to political organizations which will threaten politicians with
boycotts/villification/etc due to their refusal to acknowledge inconvenient
truths, then the problem will simply continue. Not talking about it makes the
problem become uglier, because non-Black Americans in general have
internalized the fact that poor Black neighborhoods are vastly more violent
and dangerous. Any realtor can tell you this. They deal with people's ACTUAL
prejudices every day, rather than the Politically Correct, aspirational
notions of the desire to live in a diverse neighborhood.

I say this as a white guy who grew up in various poor parts of the south, and
spent large parts of my childhood with mostly black friends in mostly black
neighborhoods. Political Correctness prevents us from collectively helping the
predominantly black victims of a large sub-culture of black America that
celebrates crime, dehumanizes women and gays, views educational/career
achievement as betrayal of black identity, and tolerate men who willingly
abandon their families.

America will not succeed as a nation unless black Americans succeed, and
political correctness throws them to the wolves by pretending a problem they
are victimized by doesn't exist.

~~~
Anechoic
* This is elementary statistics based on data collected by the FBI. If this problem [..] can't be discussed in an honest fashion due to political organizations which will threaten politicians with boycotts/villification/etc due to their refusal to acknowledge inconvenient truths, then the problem will simply continue.*

These statistics _are_ discussed in an honest fashion, from Saturday mornings
in the barber shop to academic works. The problem isn't _discussion_ , the
problem is that too many folks don't realize "blacks are overrepresented in
crime" is not the same as "most blacks commit crimes" and use those statistics
to justify policies like "stop and frisk" and "it's okay to follow a black kid
a night because he's wearing a hoodie."

 _Political Correctness prevents us from collectively helping the
predominantly black victims of a large sub-culture of black America that
celebrates crime, dehumanizes women and gays, views educational /career
achievement as betrayal of black identity, and tolerate men who willingly
abandon their families._

This sentence would be equally true without the word "black." Political
correctness indeed.

~~~
JPKab
"This sentence would be equally true without the word "black." Political
correctness indeed."

Sorry, but the phenomenon of being accused of betraying your cultural identity
by peers if you succeed in school and get a job is mainly a phenomenon found
in a sub-culture of black America. Anyone who has been immersed in an African-
American community for any length of time can tell you this. The typical
insult among school-children is "acting white" or "Oreo" and it is widespread
enough to warrant heavy discussion within the mainstream black community. My
best friend growing up was harassed and bullied constantly in this way. It was
a particularly vicious kind of bullying that I've never seen Asian, Hispanic
or white children ever have to deal with.

~~~
Anechoic
_is mainly a phenomenon found in a sub-culture of black America._

You only have to watch prime-time television to know that phenomenon is common
amongst many demographics.

 _Anyone who has been immersed in an African-American community for any length
of time can tell you this._

I'm black. I went to an upper-class mostly-white private school, and there was
some pressure to "fail" but it came from both whites and blacks. One the other
hand, my peers who went to the local inner city high schools found extremely
supportive environments, so much so that I really regret that my parents sent
me to the private school.

 _The typical insult among school-children is "acting white" or "Oreo"_

It might be "typical" yet I never heard anyone say it out loud IRL. However
terms like "nerd," "geek," "dweeb" etc were common occurrences IME. And it
wasn't coming from black kids.

 _it is widespread enough to warrant heavy discussion within the mainstream
black community._

Heavy discussion is not academic rigor. It's been studied by a lot of people
(not just Ogbu) and as might be expected, the results are complicated. Quoting
from an older post of mine:

Tyson et al found that reduced academic achievement was generally for a
variety of reasons ("fear of not doing well academically" being the biggest)
and not "acting white":
[http://www.tc.columbia.edu/students/see/events/Darity_et_al_...](http://www.tc.columbia.edu/students/see/events/Darity_et_al_Understanding_Burden_Acting_White.pdf)

Cook and Ludwig as well found that "acting white" was not much of a factor in
academic perforamnce:
[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/%28SICI%291520-66...](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/%28SICI%291520-6688%28199721%2916:2%3C256::AID-
PAM4%3E3.0.CO;2-H/abstract)

I had quoted from two other papers by Erika White and Roland Fryer (who is a
proponent of the "acting white" hypothesis but had to adjust his definition to
show any trends) but those links are dead now.

~~~
jessedhillon
_I 'm black._

Holy shit, sir. I salute your patience and compassion as you dealt with this
self-appointed expert on race relations. Your capacity for longsuffering is
legendary, and if you are ever in the Bay Area, please contact me.

Seriously.

I would buy you a keg of beer.

~~~
HeyLaughingBoy
That's a bit much, don't you think? FWIW, I'm also black and I agree with
JPKab more than I do with Anechoic probably because his experiences (second-
hand or otherwise) are closer to mine. Where does that get us?

They both make valid points, likely because they're coming at the issue from
different directions. Listen to them both and balance your viewpoint but try
to be a bit less snarky.

------
ozh
"African American" and "White". This is grotesque. Either say black & white,
or african american & caucasian american. Pick one.

------
danso
HN has a policy against numbers in titles as they come off as link-baity...I
wish a similar policy applied to titles with such absolute statements as "the
best ever" or "what you never knew about..."

This map is not the "best" map ever of racial segregation, though it may be
the most comprehensive. I'd argue that a more effective map would include some
kind of time element, to show how formerly integrated areas slowly became
segregated.

~~~
knowtheory
If that data could be collected/found/cross referenced. I doubt that is a
possibility, and thus this probably is one of the 'best' maps of segregation
(for some definition of best).

Also, this is what a history of segregation looks like. Its worth remembering
that small towns, at least in places like Ohio, were so inhospitable to
African Americans that they were referred to as "sundown towns"
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundown_town](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundown_town)
).

When people think that racism is over, maps like these serve as a pretty good
starting point for asking them to reevaluate their POV.

Of course, there's always this you could start with too:

[http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/08/13/white-
definiti...](http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/08/13/white-definitions-
merit-and-admissions-change-when-they-think-about-asian-americans)

------
nonce42
Looking at the Bay Area in this map, I noticed a very dense African-American
region near Dublin CA that looked out of place. I investigated what it was and
was shocked to discover it was the Santa Rita Jail. The map really made it
clear how racially skewed the jail population is.

------
shawnee_
One of the interesting things about this map is that it shows not just
_distribution_ , but also _density_. Non-Caucasian ethnicities are not only
concentrated in certain "neighborhoods", they also tend to live in households
with far more people per square foot than whites.

From the map, overview of the Bay area: [http://hackeress.com/ethnic-
distribution-bay-area.png](http://hackeress.com/ethnic-distribution-bay-
area.png)

------
munificent
It's interesting that you can almost always spot the university areas in a
city on this map by looking for the cluster of asians.

------
guard-of-terra
Russian here. We won't see a similar map of Moscow for two reasons:

1) Immigrants can't afford any housing.

2) Most rent is private and not reported anywhere; most immigrants are illegal
and not accounted anywhere.

Moscow won't segregate because people are awfully un-mobile.

If this changes, we may share the fate of cities in USA/Europe.

The problem is that a lot of immigrants are flowing in (from central asia) and
there is no political will to limit their influx / control their quality.

Right now all the immigrants work and only resort to crime in dire situations,
but I'm afraid this is bound to change if measures are not taken.

------
Jgrubb
That's hilarious, I was wondering if my hometown (ATL) would be broken down,
and it's the second one. When I moved back there after college I wanted to do
some sort of study of the racial segregation in that city. It's totally along
that east-west axis, more precisely at Ponce De Leon Ave. All these upper-
class streets that run through the nicest neighborhoods in north Atlanta even
change their names as they cross over Ponce.

God, I miss that town every now and then. I'd kill for a hot Krispy Kreme
right now.

~~~
GrantS
Also from Atlanta here and I'm always most aware of this when riding MARTA to
the airport. Once you get south of downtown, it becomes hard to ignore the
strange fact that the only white people still on the train are those with
luggage.

And in case it consoles you to know that others are living your dreams, I just
had two donuts at the Krispy Kreme on Ponce earlier this morning -- in fact
right around the time of your comment. They were delicious but I should really
stop going so often.

~~~
Jgrubb
Aww man. I used to live right around the corner on 3rd street. I don't know if
midtown is still as colorful these days, but about ten years ago if you saw an
attractive female walking around after dark you could rest assured it was a
man. Rural Jersey is slightly less exciting..

------
ebspelman
These guys did an amazing job with the interactive element, but a lot of this
is borrowed work! Let's give credit where credit is due:

Bill Rankin posted maps in this exact visual style back in 2009. You can see
them (and many other amazing maps he's done) at his blog --
[http://www.radicalcartography.net/index.html?chicagodots](http://www.radicalcartography.net/index.html?chicagodots)

Eric Fischer picked up Bill's project and ran with it, composing maps for most
of the major US cities with census 2010 data. You can see them all on his
Flickr page --
[http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/sets/7215762481267496...](http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/sets/72157624812674967/)

I love great maps, but it's a little disheartening that these precursor
projects aren't mentioned anywhere in the article/comments.

------
Pxtl
Oh god, I read the comments. I know comments on news sites are awful, but I
didn't expect that on Wired.

~~~
acchow
Rookie mistake. Standard rules apply
[https://twitter.com/AvoidComments](https://twitter.com/AvoidComments)

------
wahsd
What I find interesting is that the racial breakdown is still so racist....
White, Black, Asian, Hispanic, Other/Multi-racial ??? It's shameful! It's
racist because only the White cohort shares any measurable uniformity. Blacks
are African-Americans of slave decent, North, East, South, West, and several
other groups in between Africans, Asians are even more differentiated.
Really??? Tadjiks, Indians, Chinese, Japanese, Malaysians are all just Asian?

It's such a degenerate, lazy, white-centric breakdown. It's a disgrace.

Nice map though!

~~~
setitimer
Italians, Germans, Russians, Irish are all just White? It's such a degenerate,
lazy, anti-white breakdown. It's a disgrace.

------
cfesta9
This is a really cool map! I have a few questions about it though. Racial
Segregation are very strong words to use when describing this map. I have
lived in Chicago for my whole life. I have heard people say that Chicago is
the most segregated city in the US. That line might be true. But when I look
at this map it is very hard to draw the assumption that Chicago is incredibly
segregated. Looking at this map you could easily say white people live here
african american live here and asian / hispanic live here etc... But it is
much deeper then the top overview. Chicago has a huge polish , german, irish
community. I'm talking about people who have moved from their home country to
live in the US. I notice a trend that when polish people move to chicago they
move to where polish people live not any old "white" neighborhood they move to
a place where they feel comfortable and have common ground. Never in my life
have I or the city say white people need to live here and african american
live here. There must be a reason that Chinese live on the south side
Vietnamese live on the north side and Korean live on the further north side.
Latino is the same. I forgot where i was going with this point. But I feel the
way we see racial segregation is that some higher power says that we must not
live next to each other. When in truth people want to live by their people.

~~~
tptacek
When people talk about segregation in Chicago, they are mostly referring to
the black south and near west side, and to a lesser extent the hispanic near-
southwest and Little Village areas.

Look closely at the map on this thread, and match it up to a Chicago
neighborhood map. Look at the border between Beverly (where I grew up) and
Gresham and Brainerd. Look at the borders around Hyde Park. Look at the border
between Austin and Oak Park (where I live now). For that matter, look at
Lawndale vs Little Village. The borders are sharp, they follow regular lines,
and generally involve a 90+% majority black neighborhood on one side.

There are a bunch of reasons this happened:

* The Great Migration, during which Chicago was a giant magnet for rural black southerners

* Redlining, the overtly racist/segregationist practice of refusing home loans to black families in "non-black" neighborhoods

* The construction of the Ryan, which displaced black families who ended up moving to places like Englewood

* The construction of the CHA high rise housing projects, which were concentrated in areas that would eventually become majority-black

* The subsequent flight of white families from places like Englewood, which went from 10% black immediately after WW2 to 98+%(!) black in 1980

It's important to note that with the possible exception of Beverly, which
really is a white Irish enclave, the non-black non-hispanic neighborhoods in
Chicago aren't intolerant, and have black representation roughly in line with
their representation in the population as a whole. If you live in Avondale or
Rogers Park or Lakeview, it probably doesn't look at all segregated.

Also, Chicago isn't the most segregated city in the US.

~~~
cfesta9
Thank you for responding. I just feel that "racial segregation" are the wrong
words to use when describing this map. and yes the reasons you have posted are
for the most part true. They are now a little outdated but they were things
that happened in the past that have contributed to our present. I would like
to believe that chicgoans have made many strides in certain areas of the city
to become more diverse. But who knows. If we continue to try we can hopefully
change our present to a better future.

------
cjensen
I love this map, but really hate the implementation. Dots overlaid on white
makes dots really hard to see. I'd love to be able to set the background to
black or something.

Also, last time this was featured on Fark the map became quickly unusable.
Would be nice if they could generate some KML files or something that could be
used outside of their website.

------
cutie
After seeing Los Angeles and the map of the west in general, I believe the
Latinos are significantly under-counted.

I had anticipated this to some extent in daily life but it was driven home a
few years ago. I lived in a very "latino" neighborhood, unusual to see anyone
else...

When election time came around, I got in line of perhaps 50-100 people at a
very busy polling place. Bored, I looked down the line at each person. Gone
were the folks I was used to seeing every day, in fact I was hard-pressed to
find any. I counted one or two latinos in the whole line, and they were not
from the migrant-worker class... i.e. poorer Mexican or Central American
Indians.

It is probable a larger percentage of these folks will submit to the Census
bureau than registering to vote, but how much? As a whole they are not well
integrated.

------
detcader
Before this comment forum devolves into the usual level of strife trying to
grapple with what race "is," I'd like to offer two articles.

What We Mean When We Say 'Race Is a Social Construct' \-
[http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/what-
we-...](http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/what-we-mean-when-
we-say-race-is-a-social-construct/275872/)

The Point Is Not To Interpret Whiteness But To To Abolish It by Noel Ignatiev
-
[http://racetraitor.org/abolishthepoint.html](http://racetraitor.org/abolishthepoint.html)
(the stuff about "White Studies" (obviously contextual) and Marxist tie-ins
are totally optional to understanding the central points, I believe)

------
frogpelt
If there was not hatred (not gonna happen, by the way), would segregation
still be a bad thing?

Is there something inherently _WRONG_ with people gravitating toward and
feeling most comfortable around people who look like themselves?

------
jebblue
I ran a check with Google using "define: segregation" and the definition
included, "the act of setting". The title uses the term segregation perhaps
innocently but incorrectly. People live where they choose. If the government
said they had to live somewhere then it would be segregation. So it's really a
map of where people tend to settle. HN should not have allowed the title to
stand as is. Perhaps HN feels it's necessary to engage in sensationalism like
some of the other similar sites I never or rarely go to any more for technical
news.

~~~
mkr-hn
Words rarely have a single definition. Those definitions often have
substantial history behind them.

~~~
jebblue
I gave you the step to find the top level, world-wide definition in Google.
You say there are other definitions. Ok let's check the Wiki:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation)

"Segregation itself is defined by the European Commission against Racism and
Intolerance as "the act by which a (natural or legal) person separates other
persons"

If people separate, or group, themselves according to their own desires then
that is not segregation according to Google and according to the Wiki which
sites at least the "European Commission against Racism and Intolerance".

You may disagree with me but I've provided two worldwide known references both
in agreement with each other and with me. The use of the word segregation was
wrong by the original author and wrong by HN for posting it that way.

------
johnbburg
I'm surprised they didn't use Washington D.C. as one of the featured images.
The contrast is nearly as start as Detroit's.

~~~
flatline
Me too - for the lazy:

[http://i.imgur.com/dBIBuCD.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/dBIBuCD.jpg)

The Rock Creek Park divide is just as noticeable on the map as it is driving
around the area. On a larger scale, the SE/NW divide is exactly what you'd
expect. Keep in mind that the city itself is (or at least was, before
gentrification) predominately black, and the SE areas are the poorest.

------
jccalhoun
Interesting project but it seems only useful at all for large cities. I zoomed
in on the rural area I live in and there wasn't anything. They mention
toggling between color and black and white but there still wasn't anything
there.

------
protomyth
Given the reservations in the US, it would have been nice to see Native
Americans have their own color. It would be a nice touch to compare
reservation vs. urban conclaves.

------
helipad
Take a guess where 8 Mile Road is in Detroit:

[http://cl.ly/image/2m0u3y282M1H](http://cl.ly/image/2m0u3y282M1H)

------
daigoba66
I'd like to see a similar map that explores other attributes such as income,
family size, etc.

------
karlkatzke
Dang. I have been looking for a GIS/BigData project, and this was one of my
ideas.

~~~
BrandonMarc
Try doing this for previous datasets, so that you can compare maps and
extrapolate trends over time. Say, the 2000, 1990, 1980 census data.

------
humbyvaldes
Hispanic isn't a race

------
amerika_blog
Stop trying to force people to like one another. Social engineering is not
like other forms of engineering; it depends on values outside a count of
interchangeable parts. Many of humanity's worst outcomes have emerged from
such well-intentioned but oblivious social engineering.

~~~
pessimizer
Stop projecting.

------
mumbi
Oregon looks like a nice place to live </sarcasm>

Cool and interesting maps.

~~~
doktrin
> _Oregon looks like a nice place to live </sarcasm>_

Not sure why you applied a sarcasm tag. I can't speak for all of Oregon, but
Portland is quite nice.

~~~
mumbi
The sarcasm tag was because Portland is all white. I didn't want to offend
anyone.

