PYF awful/funny graphs and charts: May you live in statistically significant times

The Something Awful Forums > Main > Post Your Favorite: Carefully Curated > PYF awful/funny graphs and charts: May you live in statistically significant times

«‹›2 »

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

wayne curr posted:

I have to admire the sheer audacity of that one.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Oct 8, 2015 09:10

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 07:42

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Carbon dioxide posted:

That looks more like a character sheet for some role playing game.

Yeah, it clearly is. Pips for parry always give the game away.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Nov 1, 2015 23:39

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Fathis Munk posted:

Holy poo poo that was published? That must have been part of a bigger thing right? There is some graph just beside that one where that scale makes sense right?

Yes and no. The paper was retracted, apparently for unrelated reasons; the graph in question is on page 8 (327). There are indeed other similar graphs near it, but the fold enrichment scale is slightly different from them, as the others go to a maximum of 90 instead of 100.

# ¿ Nov 7, 2015 05:36

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

BravestOfTheLamps posted:

Do tables count?

These, of course, are just examples.

# ¿ Nov 7, 2015 11:04

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

That makes it twice as informative.

# ¿ Nov 25, 2015 19:53

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Albino Squirrel posted:

Slovenia and Slovakia are both proportionally terrible at reading. Personally I blame confusion over which country they're in. How're you supposed to read if it's impossible to differentiate the name of your country from another one?

The disparity between Slovenia's reading and math scores is only two more than that between South Korea's.

# ¿ Dec 5, 2015 21:12

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Hm. Prosperity's going to be a little light this year.

# ¿ Dec 31, 2015 20:08

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Ishamael posted:

GOO FACTOR

GOOF ACTOR?

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Feb 12, 2016 21:25

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

ikanreed posted:

Maybe it's just because I took too much math in college, but this chart communicates a rather complicated notion(assuming it uses any sort of meaningful data) pretty effectively, and I'd certainly ding it for style, the substance seems really good.

Business people don't use data.

# ¿ Feb 15, 2016 09:56

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

AlphaKretin posted:

This is not so much awful, more funny in what it means. The numbers are average OKCupid compatibility scores for that starsign combination.

Well, the idea that that meant anything.

I can't take credit for this by the way, I found it catching up on the pseudoscience thread in SAL.

Maybe astrological signs are meaningful, and it's just the "match percentage" that's the pseudoscience.

# ¿ Feb 26, 2016 07:18

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Still, it's a bit surprising that the "step" part of that would make it in, much less take it to the top search term.

We need access to the raw data.

# ¿ Mar 3, 2016 02:51

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Absurd Alhazred posted:

You want raw porn data?

Yes. Yes I do.

# ¿ Mar 3, 2016 09:13

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Henchman of Santa posted:

Why???

Because it was deliberately created to be a bad graph.

# ¿ Apr 2, 2016 03:43

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

That's actually one of the rare cases where a radial graph has value, because there's a relationship between adjacent 'spokes.'

# ¿ Jun 13, 2016 07:14

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

flosofl posted:

I know you meant it as rhetorical but...

Because it *doesn't* cancel it out? It's not Watt per hour (W/h) but Watt hours (Wh) which is a different metric. W/h measures change in power over time. Wh is energy as the product of time and the power consumed for work. It can be converted directly to Joules (1 W = 1 J/s; 1kWh = 3.6 MJ)

You just explained yourself how it cancels it out. J/s * h = J/s * 3600 s, canceling out the seconds.

# ¿ Jun 28, 2016 05:03

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

jeebus bob posted:

Everything about this screams fake.

No kidding.

Crust First posted:

I didn't even know Koko the Gorilla took the SAT!

# ¿ Aug 17, 2016 19:04

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

gradenko_2000 posted:

Amazing. Do you know the context in which/by whom this was presented?

# ¿ Aug 22, 2016 06:41

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

gradenko_2000 posted:

There was a Senate fact-finding session today on extra-judicial killings. One of the Senators, Alan Peter Cayetano, who was the running mate of current President Rodrigo Duterte, used this graph to say that under the previous administration, murder/homicide averaged at 35 per day, compared to just 20/day under the Duterte administration.

He, of course, arrived at the figure of 20/day by taking 681 murders reported and dividing it by the 34 days since the new President has taken office.

Well, the math on that's not so bad. It's the placement of the single-month and six-month totals on a line plot with previous annual totals that's such a magnificent offense against earnestness that I'm saving it for my stats students.

# ¿ Aug 22, 2016 06:53

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Outrail posted:

I need some context here. It's a water cycle/weather diagram but mixing of species... something about airborne pathogens?

'Species' can refer to any different varieties of (something). Between that and the bit about 'tracers,' I want to say it has to do with fallout, radioactive elements in the air.

# ¿ Oct 12, 2016 19:10

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

LogicalFallacy posted:

I really hope you're being sarcastic, but if not, let's start with how different periods of sampling are placed on the same graph as if they're directly comparable.

They're labeled as percentages, which would indeed make them directly comparable.

# ¿ Nov 5, 2016 10:20

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

CellBlock posted:

An indeterminate form. 0^x = 0 and x⁰ = 1, so 0⁰ could be either.

What's the limit of x^x as x approaches 0?

fake edit: looks like it's 1.

Strudel Man has a new favorite as of 22:09 on Nov 28, 2016

# ¿ Nov 28, 2016 22:06

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Jabor posted:

Right, lim_x->0(x^x) is 1. That's not the only way to have 0⁰ show up in an equation though, and in other contexts you get other answers.

Oh, sure. I was just curious as to what answer that approach would give, since the other two are obvious.

# ¿ Dec 5, 2016 19:26

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Gorilla Salad posted:

I read the 'significant figures' in the mathematical sense and was confused as hell how it could be a percentage.

Percentage of the digits that are significant, clearly. Like 125,000 is 50%.

# ¿ Dec 6, 2016 10:48

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Whooping Crabs posted:

There's so much going on with this, from the transposed results, the bad rounding to have 101% voting, to the confusingly-phrased title. It's perfect.

Also, the fact that it's a kind of pointless edit of the actual image.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Feb 6, 2017 03:34

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Maxwells Demon posted:

The phrase is Monday Morning Quarterback. Monday Night is when the last game of the week is played.

I don't think that makes a lot of sense, since 'monday morning quarterback' has the connotation of someone making judgements which are easy with the benefit of hindsight.

# ¿ Feb 22, 2017 10:04

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Chitin posted:

That is... exactly what that means.

With hindsight. Monday morning does not offer hindsight for a game played on monday night. Maybe Maxwells Demon meant they're played Sunday nights.

Strudel Man has a new favorite as of 00:48 on Feb 23, 2017

# ¿ Feb 23, 2017 00:44

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Yes, that would make the explanation sensible.

# ¿ Feb 23, 2017 00:49

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:

House price doesn't mean poo poo if you can't sell it because no one can afford it

I don't think that's how prices work.

# ¿ Apr 2, 2017 17:59

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Sure, demonstrates relative change. Nothing wrong with that.

# ¿ Apr 2, 2017 23:45

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Breetai posted:

That better be a negative log scale there on the right, is all I can say.

# ¿ Apr 2, 2017 23:59

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

It is mildly amusing to see the Roman road network presented like a subway map, I think is the idea here.

Also the streamlined aquila logo.

# ¿ Jun 9, 2017 23:06

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Hyperlynx posted:

Oy vey.

Can't we just have a sensible chuckle together over a metro map of Roman roads? Like a family? Like we used to?

Certainly not, you varlet!

# ¿ Jun 10, 2017 10:55

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

cinci zoo sniper posted:

I don't keep track of every unfunny shitposter around.

Hey, that's uncalled for.

# ¿ Jun 10, 2017 18:34

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

The Cheshire Cat posted:

Sexist too. 1st ed D&D female characters had a lower strength cap than males. Just because.

What could they possibly have been thinking?

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Jul 1, 2017 20:29

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Just that the "elite female athlete" sample pool is different from the general female pool, rather than a subset of it.

# ¿ Jul 1, 2017 20:45

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Praseodymi posted:

But it's not a subset, otherwise the strongest female athlete and strongest female would be the same value.

Strudel Man posted:

Just that the "elite female athlete" sample pool is different from the general female pool, rather than a subset of it.

# ¿ Jul 1, 2017 20:49

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

From a game mechanics perspective, I think a balanced diversity of choices is actually better than just "everyone's the same." :shrug:

IIRC, female characters got -1 strength and +1 constitution compared to male.

# ¿ Jul 1, 2017 21:49

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

vyelkin posted:

It's very important to me that my fantasy game about killing imaginary creatures in an imaginary world accurately represents that men have a higher maximum hand-grip force than women. Anything else would ruin my immersion.

Well, no, it's not particularly necessary for a fantasy game to model real-world differences. It just seems a bit silly to say that doing so constitutes sexism, particularly if it's done in a way that matches penalties with bonuses for overall mechanical parity.

# ¿ Jul 1, 2017 22:10

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

Is that a thing where you roll to see what you have to roll, giving you effectively the same odds as a coin flip? I vaguely recall hearing about something like that.

# ¿ Jul 1, 2017 22:13

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 07:42

Strudel Man: May 19, 2003; ROME DID NOT HAVE ROBOTS, FUCKWIT

WrenP-Complete posted:

I don't know what ⁊ means.

lol, like anyone isn't familiar with notae Tironianae.

# ¿ Jul 1, 2017 22:29

The Something Awful Forums > Main > Post Your Favorite: Carefully Curated > PYF awful/funny graphs and charts: May you live in statistically significant times

«‹›2 »