Where the money islemmy.oneimage BlinkerFluid ( @BlinkerFluid@lemmy.one ) Data Is Beautiful@lemmy.mlEnglish • 9 months ago message-square27fedilinkarrow-up175
arrow-up175imageWhere the money islemmy.one BlinkerFluid ( @BlinkerFluid@lemmy.one ) Data Is Beautiful@lemmy.mlEnglish • 9 months ago message-square27fedilink
minus-square davel [he/him] ( @davel@lemmy.ml ) linkfedilinkEnglish40•9 months agoEveryone knows data is not beautiful when you visualize scalars using area instead of length.
minus-square magic_lobster_party ( @magic_lobster_party@kbin.social ) linkfedilink14•9 months agoI’m pretty sure it’s by volume, which is even worse
minus-square bort ( @bort@feddit.de ) linkfedilink5•9 months agoI like it. you can visualize sizes with 3 orders of magnitude between them without one being microscopic. What makes this graph shitty, is that the spheres don’t look very 3D.
minus-square Otakat ( @Otakat@reddthat.com ) cakelinkfedilink6•9 months agoI respectfully disagree. If you want to compare orders of magnitude, you should use a logarithmic scale.
minus-square davel [he/him] ( @davel@lemmy.ml ) linkfedilinkEnglish3•9 months agoYeah these are long-ago settled, 101-level, wikipedia-level data visualization principles.
minus-square jeffhykin ( @jeffhykin@lemm.ee ) linkfedilink1•9 months agoWait like 3D volume? 😬 I was looking at it completely wrong
Everyone knows data is not beautiful when you visualize scalars using area instead of length.
I’m pretty sure it’s by volume, which is even worse
I like it. you can visualize sizes with 3 orders of magnitude between them without one being microscopic.
What makes this graph shitty, is that the spheres don’t look very 3D.
I respectfully disagree. If you want to compare orders of magnitude, you should use a logarithmic scale.
Yeah these are long-ago settled, 101-level, wikipedia-level data visualization principles.
Wait like 3D volume? 😬 I was looking at it completely wrong