• Hawk@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s common practice to cut the y axis, did you guys not cover that in visualisation?

    • agelord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      Could you please clarify why the baseline needs to be at 0? I’m genuinely curious.

        • summerof69@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          This graph gives the impression that the total installation number has been multipliés x4 or X5

          How so? It goes from ~7 to ~11. That’s not even x2.

          • geissi@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            It goes from ~7 to ~11. That’s not even x2.

            Yes but the graph goes from 2 rectangles above the bottom line to 8 rectangles above the bottom line in that final surge.
            So visually, it looks like it has quadrupled.

            • SwampYankee@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              10 months ago

              While I agree for the sake of clarity, a bigger problem is that it only goes back less than 2 months. Has the number of installs been steady at 7k for a long time? Or does it fluctuate wildly like this occasionally for reasons totally unrelated to laws?

              • geissi@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                I was just clarifying the original comment about the baseline not being 0.
                Tbh, I hadn’t even looked at it properly and only noticed now that the timeline isn’t one month per box.

    • Ross_audio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      40
      ·
      10 months ago

      No it doesn’t.

      It’s meant to illustrate a change and it does so perfectly fine. It’s not a scientific paper.

      It’s a 32-34% increase looking at the graph. That’s significant enough to shout about.

      Imagine any change you could make surprising competition by 25% in any market. That’s huge.

      • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s meant to illustrate a change and it does so perfectly fine

        Define “perfectly fine”. It is clearly exaggerating the change. At a glance it looks more like a 5 times increase, not a 30% increase.

      • geissi@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        It’s a 32-34% increase looking at the graph

        But you don’t get that percentage from looking at the graph. You get that from looking at the numbers.
        The graph height increases by 300% in the last 3 months 9 days.

      • Hobbes@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        You could say the same about a 0.001 difference if you zoom in on the y-axis. You don’t know what you’re talking about.