Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Difference Between Funny and LOL

readtapestry.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 56 posts

Re: The Difference Between Funny and LOL

#14

Post by jezebel6 »

daurnimator wrote: post #5

Took me a while to figure out it was more than a gif.... on hacker news. Eventually I clicked and figured out it was a slideshow. Is it possible to go back a slide?

If the slide's author is really trying to demonstrate the effectiveness of network graphs, then he needs to find a different presentation platform. The conclusions come after the graphics, and there's no way for the reader to go back and analyze them for himself. No one likes being led around by the nose. Pass.

Re: The Difference Between Funny and LOL

#15

Post by shortstuffsushi »

Le sigh. All of the comments are on the UX of the site, and not the content of the article. Come on guys.

This article was really interesting to me (though obviously he doesn't get terribly into depth). I find data vis like this, whether it be super meaningful or not to be really cool. I'd like to see more analysis like this done with it.

Re: The Difference Between Funny and LOL

#16

Post by drivebyacct2 »

daurnimator wrote: post #5

Took me a while to figure out it was more than a gif.... on hacker news. Eventually I clicked and figured out it was a slideshow. Is it possible to go back a slide?

Finally, something more infuriating than accidentally clicking a scribd link.

Re: The Difference Between Funny and LOL

#17

Post by alanctgardner2 »

I worked on a project with a guy who did network analysis like this. It was pretty cool... the first three times. After that it seemed like every problem had to involve a whizbang graphic - then I realized he didn't actually know how to program at all. His whole job was 'analysis', which was using Tableau and a graph partitioning program to produce visualizations (pretty much using the defaults), and then try to explain what they meant.

I was kind of in awe that this was a whole job by itself - I've never really seen an analysis of one of these graph diagrams that wasn't really superficial, like the examples in this presentation. It kind of makes me wonder if the "complexity" of the graph visualizations doesn't cow the viewer a bit, and make them more impressed by subsequent, not-super-interesting insights. I'd be interested in a comparison with and without the graphics.

Re: The Difference Between Funny and LOL

#19

Post by hamburglar »

shortstuffsushi wrote: post #15

Le sigh. All of the comments are on the UX of the site, and not the content of the article. Come on guys. This article was really interesting to me (though obviously he doesn't get terribly into depth). I find data vis like this, whether it be super meaningful or not to be really cool. I'd like to see more analysis like this done with it.

This is what happens when your UX is so bad it's a distraction. It's like complaining that nobody is listening to your lecture on particle physics just because you are delivering it in full bondage gear. I personally was too dumb to figure out that the OP isn't just a link to a gif, and came to the comments here to see what the deal was.

Given all the distraction and lack of attention to whatever the subject actually is, I'd hope the author might reconsider the delivery method.

Post reply on HN