|
For one of the best examples of how computer charts and graphics especially when animated can reveal data. Check out the following link. I know the message is grim but for a moment think about the technical aspects of how any chart can show multiple aspects from the same data. How it is more powerful than just tables of numbers.
They say a picture is worth a thousand works. A moving must be worth a million.
The programmer that did this just earned his years salary. Maybe several years.
https://www.nbcnews.com/specials/how-america-gave-up/index.html[^]
Now we can go back to the grim message.
So many years of programming I have forgotten more languages than I know.
|
|
|
|
|
The data is not even correct. I looked at Georgia and it said there were no deaths until almost October.
I'm not sure I'm getting the point you are trying to make.
|
|
|
|
|
If each line represents a county and every so many pixels high represents a number of deaths then it may appear zero. It is more a mater of scaling than incorrect data.
The point is how much data was presented to you in such a short time. Think about having to do this program. Think about even coming up with the idea in the first place.
If you do not get the point you have never spent hours on doing graphs and charts.
So many years of programming I have forgotten more languages than I know.
|
|
|
|
|
michaelbarb wrote: every so many pixels high represents
Oh, I typed in Georgia where it says "Search for your state" and there it had a line that showed 0 until October.
michaelbarb wrote: how much data was presented to you in such a short time.
Ya, it's OK I guess. I have done lots with charts and this is just another one in the long list of charts.
|
|
|
|
|
you know it shows deaths per 100,000, rounded (or possibly truncated) to an integer? See the blips in April & May.
|
|
|
|
|
mngerhold wrote: rounded
Down to 0 apparently.
|
|
|
|
|
I posted this to another group. Someone reminded me of a saying. "A chart or graph is where data becomes art."
So many years of programming I have forgotten more languages than I know.
|
|
|
|
|
At the risk of turning this into a political discussion...(and yeah, I know, if I'm already feeling compelled to put in this disclaimer, it probably already is). But if we can get even a semi-coherent discussion going, I'm willing to risk getting this locked down/deleted/whatever and I'll refrain from further voicing my opinion on this matter. With this out of the way...
There's been so many discussions about discrepancies between in the ways different states or even entire countries test and report infection rates and hospitalizations and the fact that some people are completely asymptomatic and false positives and such, all numbers are questionable when you're comparing apples and oranges. As developers, we should all understand (I hope) that when you're working with data, all of your data points have to be measuring the same thing, otherwise, you end up with garbage in, garbage out. This is how one can make the claim that "the more people you test, the more infections you're going to detect, duh!". People can skew, twist and spin numbers to fit whatever agenda they're trying to push.
I'm absolutely NOT denying there's a pandemic out there and people are dying from it.
But what I'd like to see is a graph, over time, showing the total number of deaths--IRRELEVANT OF THE CAUSE--plotted year-over-year. This, we can get accurate numbers for. If it's "normal" for [x] many people to die in any given month of any given year, then I want to see those figures for a number of years. Then lets compare this baseline with 2020. IMO, how much 2020 deviates from that baseline (x+n) would be a much better indicator of the pandemic's cost in human life.
Yes, that would include deaths related to the increase in stress, depression, suicides, people avoiding the hospital out of fear of getting infected, etc. But isn't that the figure we should be trying to find out anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
These are reasonable comments we need to ask about any data we get. The comments are not that politically explosive. Still I was hoping to avoid them in this thread. I want to focus technically on the way the data is presented complete with animation. How many things is shows in a short time. Things you would never see by looking at tables of numbers.
The data is grim no mater the details of how one comes by it. Just for a fraction of second ignore the data and look at the technical art.
So many years of programming I have forgotten more languages than I know.
|
|
|
|
|
Right - I'm with you...ignoring the accuracy (or inaccuracy) of the data, there's something to be said about a graph to conveys information much more clearly than a table of numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
Some student at John's Hopkins did an analysis with the CDC's data. It got removed, but is still available in PDF. It showed no excess deaths. I read it, but didn't check the work, myself. Also, Dr Clare Craig (@clarecraigpath on twitter) does a lot of this type of analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
Some "student" ...
Chinese funeral urn sales have apparently sky rocketed. Urn speculating?
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
Genevieve Briand, assistant program director of the Applied Economics master’s degree program at Johns Hopkins University
|
|
|
|
|
|
This thread was started not to talk about the data but the way the data is presented. Ignore the data for just a split second and look at the art of presentation.
So many years of programming I have forgotten more languages than I know.
|
|
|
|
|
Your should read up on Mitchell, S.D. about their "attitude change".
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
Just because I am not like anyone else...
Does that make me a singleton?
[edit] thx Bill
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
modified 11-Dec-20 10:54am.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you crash when accessed from multiple threads? 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
You gave good engineering instincts!
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe your just Guid-y
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
no, it just reveals you either exhibit one, or both, of:
1) can't spell
2) can't type
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
3) or can neither!
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prince Charles has often been mocked in the media for talking to plants (which are at least alive, if not overtly sentient). He probably even talks to politicians.
So, how many of us can honestly say we don't "talk" to our PCs (ignoring "legitimate" use of any voice recognising apps)?
And by "talk" I'm guessing that "swear" would probably be a more applicable term.
In the last day or so, and cleaning it up, I can remember things like
"I asked you to paste the ****ing table not open an old document from yesterday!"
"Why do I need another update when I only just installed the "latest" version?"
"Have you really finished that print job or are you just waiting for me to leave the room before you ask for a new ink cartridge?"
So, is there anyone who doesn't talk to their machine and for those that do, what are the most common phrases?
Timely PS - as I was about to post, I heard the other half exclaiming "Oh come on, it's been nearly five minutes" - before anyone tells me off, yes I have got more RAM and an SSD ready to go in her laptop!
|
|
|
|
|
depends upon the computer.
My big brand spankin new butt kicker at work with 32 cores and 64gb of memory. I whisper sweet nothings too. It really is the bestest puter in the whole world. yes you are. You good puter.
My old rebuild of a rebuilt linux laptop at home. I swear at all the time. IT loves it.
My phone I threaten it with bodily harm all the time, and have carried thru a couple of times. I think it is beginning to learn its lesson.
To err is human to really mess up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
