Best products from r/dataisbeautiful

Interesting question! 4757 was released during the middle of the 2004-2005 changeover, but it does retain more of the style from the first few years. We AFOLs like to make fun of this middle-period of Harry Potter, though -- it's the "silly face" phase. I'll tackle this question from a few angles.

First, what you pointed out, piece size. 4757 contains a lot of larger pieces whose molds have since been retired, like 30181 and 40253, and others that haven't been retired but are rarer than they used to be, like 30246. There are even more examples in early sets such as 4705 Snape's Class. The general movement post-2005 was to lessen the amount of large pieces, especially large wall pieces, in favor of more detailing and color variation. The best visual example is the gorgeous zenith of the HP line, 10217 Diagon Alley.

With the decrease in large pieces, there's been a corresponding increase in small pieces, which only seems to be increasing lately. 54200 was first released in 2004, but it was only included in a few sets, and nowadays you'd be hard pressed to find a single licensed set without some of them -- even dozens of them. The piece doesn't appear in 4757. That's one of the most famous "detailing" pieces, but there are many others.

Then there's the SNOT technique, which has nothing to do with boogers. Look at 4157 and then 10217 again, and you'll see a lot more pieces that are facing outwards instead of up. SNOT (Studs Not On Top) has been very popular since 2005, with a lot of new pieces released that assist SNOT builders, including this brand-new piece that's had AFOLs in stitches since it was announced a few months ago. SNOT has been one of the major factors in the increase in detail and aesthetics in Lego sets.

Style also changes. 4757 uses a lot of pillar-style pieces to create multiple floors in each building using only a few pieces, resulting in a very "open" look. This has become much less common. Given time, I could pick out more architectural differences, but I've never owned 4757, so I'm not too familiar with it. Other sets, like 4753 Sirius Black's Escape, are just so vastly different from anything Lego releases these days -- a hinged building that you can't see inside without opening, and the color usage looks positively ugly compared to later HP sets like 4738 Hagrid's Hut, and especially more recent sets in other lines.

Colors change. Lego realized that everyone loved Sand Green, which is the color used in HP roofs like the big one in 4757, so now it's underused.

Parts change -- the hinges in 4757 are the old style, and Lego now uses click-hinges, which were stolen from the Bionicle theme.

Printing is much much MUCH better than it was in 2004, and the detail on torsos and heads is absolutely amazing these days. Despite this, Lego now releases far fewer printed parts and far more parts with stickers, so things like that beautiful blackboard in 4757 would be a sticker nowadays, sadly.

I could go on, but I think that covers the basics. If you spend a little while studying older sets vs. new ones -- I HIGHLY recommend this amazing book -- you'll spot even more on your own.

Welcome to dangerscarf's school of data visualization!

Theory

Although you could just wing it, knowing some of the why's and why not's of data visualization will help put your creations an inch or two above the rest.

I highly highly recommend picking up Edward Tufte's The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. After you read it you'll be able to make jokes about inside jokes about pie charts and be everyone's best friend. On a first read-through it might not make too much sense, but once you start working on projects light bulbs will start going off.

Practice

These days the major thing to learn in the world of data visualization is D3. It's a big hunk of JavaScript code that can help with everything from drawing maps to making graphs.

If you want to learn D3 (which you now should), the best place to start is Mike Bostock's Let's Make A Map. The end result is a pretty boring map of the UK, but it steps you through the hows and the whys of every single piece of code. When I first started with D3 I could have saved myself a lot of headaches by reading it closely.

Once you get your feet wet, [http://bost.ocks.org/mike/selection/](How Selections Work) is great for clarifying some of the concepts behind how D3 deals with data display.

There's also a tutorials page on github, but the shortest and most efficient path to making cool visualizations is just plain copying. How to make great visualizations, in 3 steps:

1. Visit http://bl.ocks.org/mbostock
   
2. Scroll around until you find a couple examples of the kind of visualization you want to make
   
3. Copy the code, then hack away at it until it does want you want
   
   Since you've already got some coding background you might be all set. JavaScript can be an insane beast at times, but if you start simple and from existing code you should get the hang of it without too much work.
   
   A Brief Introduction To Coding For The Web
   
   OK, so maybe you do need to learn a little HTML/CSS/JavaScript first. But let me stress the little - it's easy to get bogged down in the details, and the skills you need to edit a visualization to do what you want aren't exactly the same as when learning JS from scratch.
   
   Fundamentals: HTML, CSS and Javascript. HTML is the information on a page, CSS is what makes it look nice. JavaScript it what makes it move around or be interactive. JS is the toughest, while HTML and CSS are easy (the basics, at least).
   
   Go ahead and learn HTML and CSS from Codacademy first. I disagree with the way that every single place on the Internet teaches this stuff, but so it goes.
   
   Check out these recommendations or these recommendations for JavaScript. If you don't feel like reading through them I'll just blindly point you toward Codecademy - JavaScript track, jQuery track.
   
   Sidenote: jQuery is a big hunk of JavaScript that makes common web programming tasks easier.
   
   But really, honestly, truly, you should read the links that aren't Codacademy.
   
   What do I make visualizations about?
   
   Any time you hear something interesting or read an interesting article or just think, "could I make a visualization out of this?"
   
   Other resources
   
   Pretend you're a developer for a news organization. Read up on Source, Data for Radicals, and a million other things I'm neglecting. If you want to get real crazy subscribe to the NICAR email list to see how people who do "computer-assisted reporting" think.
   
   But honestly, just do it! That singles map was the very very first visualization I ever made, and 5 years later it's still getting plenty of traffic. Throw a bunch of nonsense up on a site, submit it to reddit, and eventually you're bound to have something work out.
   
   Good luck!

The very recent Western civilization (if it could in fact be called a civilization) has a tendency to project it's own modern standards onto the entire history of mankind, as if it's the one and only proper worldview, according to whose standards every other past and present civilization on Earth must be judged. I challenge you to go read Orientalism by Edward Said to try to ameliorate any such unfelt tendencies. And don't worry, even the colonized end up measuring their own worldviews by the colonizer's standards, given the inferiority complex resulting post-colonization.

What I'm trying to say is that when you want to judge any far away culture (in time OR space) from your own, be very careful what elements you measure by your specific modern standards, and what elements you should judge by their distant standards. The prophet ﷺ was under constant attack by his enemies at the time, and his possible marriage to a 9 year old (many sources actually say 19, others 14, others 12 btw, but of course, the media will want to stick with the youngest of these), or the fact that he married multiple women weren't ones of the points of attack. Let that tell you something for starters: that both practices were considered normal at the time.

On another note, do you think a 9 year old female (or male for that matter) of 6th century Arabia would be the same as a 9 year old female in modern California, for instance? I'm talking in terms of maturity. Even today, have you ever met aboriginals? beduins? any community that still have not become completely westwashed and modernized? I have. And their 12 year old women can put our 21 year old women to shame in their maturity. Same with men, btw. At 21 years old, Mohammad alFatih led the Muslim army into Constantinople. There are many other examples. My own great grandmother, Syrian, married when she was 14.

Polygamy makes evolutionary sense more than polyandry, and our species have always been polygamous. So this, again, will have to be measured not by our current modern Western standards.

Actually, at the time of the prophet ﷺ, Islam came and limited polygamy to 4 wives, when the number was unlimited and when they had nothing to ensure the rights of the wives to inheritence and custody of children etc. Islam came to curb that and provided specific details about their rights.

I advise you also to read about the different understandings of "marriage" across human history. The model we're currently living (the marriage of romance and feelings) is but one of many in the genealogy of this institution.

Do you know anything about the wives of the Prophet ﷺ? We call them the Mothers of the Believers in Islam. Why don't you read and get to know them and understand the relationship going on in 6th century Arabia? For example, one of the common reasons behind marriage in premodern civilizations was for bigger tribal/societal reasons, like ending decade-long feuds between tribes and building alliances. Not to mention, marrying to provide divorced women and widows a safe haven to belong to a family and community.

That's not to say there was no love or beautiful romance. Go read about the Prophet's love to his first wife: Khadija, who was actually his employer at the time; one of the biggest business women of Mecca. Go read about his love for this wife Aisha you speak of. Talk about romance? He used to drink from the same spot where she placed her lips. They used to race and she'd always win (until she gained some weight, peace be upon her soul XD and he won for the first time.) He once ordered the entire army to stop and look for her necklace. She used to climb on his back and watch Africans dances when they come to Mecca. When he was dying, he asked the permission of his other wives that he be nursed and end his life in her appartment on her lap. He asked her for siwak before he died which she moisturized with her own mouth.

This Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her) became one of the most prominent scholars of Islam, she was the scholar of scholars. The love story of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ and Aisha is one of the most beautiful stories of Muslim civilization.

>I don't need to. The assertions is that a physical thing can't create another physical thing. That is demonstrably untrue. You're placing restricting characteristics, not me.

It's not that a physical thing can't create another physical thing (even though it would actually be a physical thing creating a physical thing out of nothing), it's that the werewolf, a physical thing, would have nowhere to be while creating the universe, and no time to do it in.

>If a wearwolf doesn't exist, it can be whatever definition I'd like. Just like your god.

No this is idiotic. The word werewolf has a definition. You can't just change the definition however you'd like. If you can, then the conversation is meaningless because you'll just change it to be exactly like god, and then we're not talking about werewolves anymore.

> I would need to know why you think anything is likely in order to demonstrate why my wearwolf is likely. You would have to present your argument for why god is likely to have created the universe. I can then replace god with anything, and the argument will probably not change, if it's any of the popular ones. To be clear. Any argument I present would be a straw man of whatever you actually believe God is. I don't know how else to explain this.

Wrong. What I have to do is show why a werewolf is less likely to have created the universe than god, and I have. You don't seem to have anything to say in response.

>It is informed. Not sure that infants have developed morals, but I'm sure you have a well thought out argument on why slavery and genocide are cool.

I never said slavery and genocide are cool, I said you have an infantile understanding of religion.

>They're equally likely within the context of an argument for the likelihood of any being creating a universe. I personally don't think the likelihood of either is even measurable. If you say god is likely, because of reasons. I could replace god with a wearwolf, and the reasons wouldn't need to change.

Yeah you keep saying this and it's not true. You get that you're supposed to be making an argument, right? All you're doing is repeating that they're same over and over, and not explaining how. Prove to me that they're the same likelihood. Why are you saying anything else? All you should be doing is proving that, or taking back what you said.

>If a being needs to be capable of creating a universe to create a universe, then that is the only characteristic necessary for creating a universe. Adding additional requirements only makes it harder to prove. My wearwolf can be both a wearwolf and have the ability to create a universe. That ability wouldn't make it less of a wearwolf. It could possibly be more likely, because the characteristics of a wearwolf can be found in nature. Whereas the common characteristics given to a god are found NOWHERE. So what seems like a bigger stretch? But again, if you assert that additional characteristics are required to be capable of creating a universe, the onus is on you to argue that assertion.

The fact that there were men and wolves in nature absolutely does not make it more likely that a werewolf created the universe, because NOTHING about men or wolves would indicate that they can create universes. In fact, we know so much about them that it makes it way less likely. God, being defined as an all-powerful metaphysical being is much more likely to have created the universe, because nothing about the nature of god, as is traditionally defined, prevents it from doing so.

>A omniscient god would know. Otherwise, we could start with any that is measurable and predictable, and work our way towards a reasonable conclusion.

An omniscient god would know what?

>I don't have an argument to present unless you give me your reason for believing a universe creating being is likely at all. Then we can discuss why a wearwolf is as equally as likely as a that being. I have no idea why you think what you think, and I'm not going to guess from a wiki page.

You're very confused. I'm not proving to you that god exists, I'm proving to you that it's more likely that god created the universe than a werewolf. The fact that there is a long line of argumentation for god is itself evidence, because there is no corresponding argumentation for a werewolf creating the universe. If you have some, feel free to present it. Since you flippantly dismissed the fact that I gave you a wikipedia page to introduce you to apologetics, here are some books:

https://www.amazon.com/Mere-Christianity-C-S-Lewis/dp/0060652926/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1509549912&sr=1-1&keywords=mere+christianity

https://www.amazon.com/Last-Superstition-Refutation-New-Atheism/dp/1587314525/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=V2XKAWX4HD8JGV0KGHDZ

https://www.amazon.com/Aquinas-Beginners-Guide-Edward-Feser/dp/1851686908/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_2?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=V2XKAWX4HD8JGV0KGHDZ

https://www.amazon.com/Five-Proofs-Existence-Edward-Feser/dp/1621641333

You're welcome. Great to hear that it's useful.

In many ways, I started the blog because I don't like most of the beginner resources. They either:

1. Start with boring, low level, low ROI things like data types (even though most of the time, you'll be working with data frames anyway), or
   
2. Tell you to start with the advanced stuff like machine learning, which is sort of like telling someone to start with calculus before doing algebra
   
   I definitely recommend starting with data visualization (out of the three "core skills" of data wrangling, data visualization, and machine learning).
   
   Conceptually, I think that Nathan Yao's Data Points is a solid introduction to data visualization. He covers just enough theory, but also lots of practical points concerning best practices, process, etc.
   
   Also, I think that two of the best data tools in R, hands down, are ggplot2 and dplyr. These two packages are the tools I wish I had years ago. In so many ways, they are perfect for the actual practice of analytics. (you can find the ggplot2 book here. I love the book, though keep in mind, it sometimes reads more like a textbook.)
   
   To be clear, I have lots of content (i.e., tutorials) that I'll be publishing over the next several months, so keep checking back for more.
   
   

Neither the United States or Britain really wanted to fight against the Nazis (Germany), or the Fascists (Italy), or the Falangists (Spain), they only did so when they absolutely had to. Well actually they never fought against the Falangists which is why they remained in power for many decades after WWII, they actually helped them take over in Spain as the Soviets also effectively did during the Spanish Civil War, the precursor to World War II.

https://richardlangworth.com/did-churchill-praise-hitler

What Churchill then said has often been quoted out of context to suggest that he was an admirer of Hitler. A partial quotation is in Churchill by Himself, the “People” chapter, Hitler, page 346. But just so there’s no doubt, I have supplied all the words represented by ellipses in my book:

>I have always said that if Great Britain were defeated in war I hoped we should find a Hitler to lead us back to our rightful position among the nations. I am sorry, however, that he has not been mellowed by the great success that has attended him. The whole world would rejoice to see the Hitler of peace and tolerance, and nothing would adorn his name in world history so much as acts of magnanimity and of mercy and of pity to the forlorn and friendless, to the weak and poor.
Since he has been good enough to give me his advice I venture to return the compliment. Herr Hitler also showed himself unduly sensitive about suggestions that there may be other opinions in Germany besides his own. It would be indeed astonishing if, among 80,000,000 of people so varying in origin, creed, interest, and condition, there should be only one pattern of thought. It would not be natural: it is incredible. That he has the power, and, alas! the will, to suppress all inconvenient opinions is no doubt true. It would be much wiser to relax a little, and not try to frighten people out of their wits for expressing honest doubt and divergences. He is mistaken in thinking that I do not see Germans of the Nazi regime when they come to this country. On the contrary, only this year I have seen, at their request, Herr Bohle, Herr Henlein, and the Gauleiter of Danzig, and they all know that.
In common with most English men and women, I should like nothing better than to see a great, happy, peaceful Germany in the vanguard of Europe. Let this great man search his own heart and conscience before he accuses anyone of being a warmonger. The whole peoples of the British Empire and the French Republic earnestly desire to dwell in peace side by side with the German nation. But they are also resolved to put themselves in a position to defend their rights and long-established civilizations. They do not mean to be in anybody’s power. If Herr Hitler’s eye falls upon these words I trust he will accept them in the spirit of candour in which they are uttered.

​



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill#Rejoining_the_Conservative_Party

Speaking in the House of Commons in 1937, Churchill said, "I will not pretend that, if I had to choose between communism and Nazism, I would choose communism.

In a 1935 essay, "Hitler and his Choice", which was republished in his 1937 book Great Contemporaries, Churchill expressed a hope that Hitler, if he so chose, and despite his rise to power through dictatorial action, hatred and cruelty, might yet "go down in history as the man who restored honour and peace of mind to the great Germanic nation and brought it back serene, helpful and strong to the forefront of the European family circle."

​

​

Sorry, but that image really hits a nerve. Don't take it personally, it might very well be a great idea, but the execution is jarring for us data-as-art people.

1. You should almost never use circles to represent data unless you have a very, very good reason to. It's harder to visually compare angles in a circle as opposed to height in a bar chart. And if you put the percentage points next to the area, you might as well just show the data in table format.
   
   
2. Neither the Z or the... theta(?) axes make any sense. Is time going outward from the center of the cup? Is it going inward to the end of the day? Is it over the course of a 3 month period? Do all the different categories share the same Z axis? Is the "Time spent on Spacebook" in minutes, hours, or fortnights?
   
   
3. You should almost never use 3D effects unless you have to. Don't feel too bad for this one since it's commonly ignored, but in this case it's very relevant. You could put a series of circles parallel to the coffee cup saying "time" and it would help clear up whether time was increasing outward or inward, but there's no way to fix the Z axis. If you had a series of circles going upwards in a cylinder, it would still be impossible to match any line with any amount.
   
   The picture you have behind the data is a really nice picture, and I could see how you wanted to use it to tell a story about your day. However, the way you're forcing the data into the picture is completely visually destroying that it.
   
   Further reading: The Visual Display of Quantitative Information by Edward Tufte. It's a thick book but it's mostly pictures :)
   
   Again, don't take it too personally, but I figured a harsh answer was better than no answer.

I agree that these data aren't nearly as interesting as the old posts but you're comparing two different blogs. The old one with all of the detailed insight was written by one of the company founders, Christian Rudder, who wrote an entire book on the subject. You seem like you're really into the deep data analytics side of things and if you or anyone else who loved the old style of posts hasn't read it, I highly recommend it: http://www.amazon.com/Dataclysm-When-Think-Ones-Looking/dp/0385347375

That blog was called OKTrends. It looks like it was last updated in 2014, the same year Match.com bought out OKCupid. Maybe Rudder didn't stick around to write blog posts anymore, I'm not sure, but this new blog we're all commenting about is called "The Deep End" so I suspect Rudder didn't write it.

Also, what makes any of you think that this simpler, less in-depth blog post has anything to do with a weakening of their matching algorithm in favor of more "folk wisdom and religion"? It's just a blog post.

I can't offer you squat on job hunting, but I used to be a water lawyer here in California and if you want to read an insanely interesting book, that will always up your interest with anyone in any part of the water business in the US (or probably Canada, too), read Marc Reisner's Cadillac Desert, which all about the history of the aquafication of the West. Looks like you are Europe-based from your job applications, but it is a fascinating story well worth your time.

https://www.amazon.com/Cadillac-Desert-American-Disappearing-Revised/dp/0140178244

EDIT: Many have reached out to me in DMs to ask advice. I'll answer the most common question here, which is "How do you learn about data visualization?"

My answer is: To do data viz well, you need both an understanding of design and data. 'Intro to design' and 'intro to data' are good things to google, to start. But the single best resource I've found is IBM's site on the subject. I also love Alberto Cairo's work (he is also active on twitter). I'd recommend his intro book, which is very good. His website is solid too.

This whole process was about 3.5 months and I am just 6 days short of my one year anniversary! I love my current job. As a note though: I applied to a LOT of jobs that weren't just data visualization, but almost all of the jobs involved visualization.

Before it is asked: 'Website Posting' had the highest response rate and also led me to the job I have now.

Explanation: I have seen these sankey flow diagrams on job applications and I always wanted to do my own version, since it is relevant (on the meta) for those interested in breaking into this field. I also saved a record of my application process, so it just took me a few minutes to format the data and put it all together.

Data is here

Tool used is SankeyMATIC

To understand the good practices of dataviz, you have to understand graphical design and statistics. Edward Tufte has some great books, like The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, that are great starters. Another great book is How to Lie with Statistics. Finally, an entry level book for statistics would be a nice addition, but only if you're interested in actually learning about statistics.

> I like this. It matched up very closely to my experience.

Thanks! That's awesome!

> It passed the test. http://reviewmeta.com/amazon/B00G9N3I7O

Technically it didn't pass; it got a "warn". There's 3 levels - pass, warn, fail. 3.2 stars is a pretty low rating, and since the ReviewMeta adjusted score stays at a 3.2 stars, it means that Amazon already did a pretty decent job of weighing the reviews to account for the unnatural reviews.

It's not always black and white, and often times we'll see products that have several fakes, but then a lot of honest reviews, and it doesn't makes sense to "fail" the entire product, especially if the rating is already pretty low.

I've bumped up the priority of the "full report" on this item to see if that changes anything. The reports that are generated on-the-fly in about 60 seconds aren't quite as perfect as the ones that take a few hours, so check that report again in a few hours and we'll see some more details about the reviews.

>You're basically saying the two countries (Mexico and America) took the routes to what they are today based on their competency then?

Yes. Another example: At the same time Mexico was dealing with the Texans' revolt, the Yucatan also broke away for similar reasons (dislike of the central government's corruption). Had the US agreed to its request for help, today there could be another US state there.

>As effective as the American government may have been back then, today's culture of pseudo-intellectualism, overzealous reactionaries and the jaded may be reflected in the incompetence we see in Washington.

People have always been complaining about corrupt politicians and they always will.

Whether speaking as Americans or humans, we are living in the greatest era in history. (For more detail, I recommend Bettmann's The Good Old Days: They Were Terrible!)

My first class in business school (a great school btw) was to read this book - the point was to be critical when looking at data/charts/etc and be mindful of this type of BS. Great book if this type of thing interests you.

http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

I think your daughter might enjoy this book: The Day the Crayons Quit.

It's a favorite in our household.

This is the source for my claim as to mate selection in reality not working like that: https://www.amazon.com/Sexual-Selection-Origins-Mating-Systems/dp/0199559430

it is far more complex than boiling it down to a numbers game based on arbitrary societal values for certain populations. Studies on China's dating scene are different again than the west. Also you just took said values from a different situation again and then applied that to the online scene. The online "dating" scene is largely a sex hookup thing for men which is where this large net of mostly right swipes comes from.

Thanks for the recommendation :)
I'm reading now some pages of its amazon preview.

I like these books:

• Show Me the Numbers: Designing Tables and Graphs to Enlighten by Stephen Few
  
  
• The Visual Display of Quantitative Information by Edward Tufte
  
  
• Visualize This: The Flowing Data Guide to Design, Visualization, and Statistics by Nathan Yau
  
  

Try reading this book. I've heard it really helps, surprisingly. Especially if you actually want to quit.

Funny children's book on that topic your kid would probably like.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Crayons-Quit-Drew-Daywalt/dp/0399255370

To anyone considering quitting please take the time to read the Allen Carr book. As a pack a day smoker it really made me realize what I was doing and quitting was honestly simple.
https://www.amazon.com/Allen-Carrs-Easy-Stop-Smoking/dp/0615482155

Yep, humans perceive differences in length much better than differences in angle. Yau's book Data Points talks about this extensively with examples.

I use San Fransisco Bay coffee from Amazon. They'd completely recyclable and about half the price or less compared to green mountain, especially if you use the subscribe and save option. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007Y59HVM

That was anything but a free market purchase of water rights. LA used massive amounts of political muscle to get those water rights. Cadillac Desert has a really detailed account of this, but wikipedia has a decent summary

Some pretty shady shit went down to build the LA Aqueduct.

There is no single formula to creating a beautiful, persuasive data presentation. It's not a question of choosing the right tool; it's a question of choosing the right means of communicating. With innumerable options at your disposal, your most valuable tool is your brain and your experience presenting to audiences that are critical, skeptical or easily confused.

Here's where I would start:

http://www.amazon.com/Visual-Display-Quantitative-Information/dp/0961392142/

He is most famous for his work on the philosophy of free will. I don't think he is that great of a philosopher but he defiantly is one.

You can buy recyclable ones.

I just bought these for the first time since I'm sick of cleaning the reusable and refillable cups. They're cheap and better for the environment, but I bought the Keurig for convenience. So what I just bought is good. Supposedly only the foil lid isn't compassable.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007Y59HVM?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00

I took a class in college based on The Visual Display of Quantatative Information that gave me such an appreciation for data and how it is displayed. This sub helped reignite that when I found it. Not all the post live up to it though.

Reminds me of the fun book, How to Lie with Statistics by Darrell Huff.

If you enjoy those kind of conversations, this might be the best $5.25 you'll ever spend.

I like this. It matched up very closely to my experience. I put in a product from a company that had a lot of problems but that I knew worked very hard to impress me and get me to change my review. I know that they wouldn't put this much energy into trying to get me satisfied based off my negative review if they had fake ones there. It passed the test. http://reviewmeta.com/amazon/B00G9N3I7O

And another product which had tons of great reviews over a short time period but which in my experience broke the first day I had it. Extremely fragile if not used in the right way. I couldn't believe the reviews were so high.. And guess what.. Sure enough... http://reviewmeta.com/amazon/B00SWSZ3OK

Or you can just read his PhD thesis, Computational Information Design, which covers pretty much all of the same conceptual topics but doesn't go into the technical aspects of project development as much. Other essential reading would be Semiology of Graphics by Jacques Bertin, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information by Edward Tufte, and Visual Complexity by Manuel Lima.

(And also Dataclysm, the book this article is based on, and where the graphics came from. I know I know, the article very clearly mentions the book, but for people who don't click your link, I want them to at least see its name.)

Your comment reminded me of [this book] (http://www.amazon.com/The-Crayons-Quit-Drew-Daywalt/dp/0399255370). Highly recommended.

Hadley (ggplot2 author) also has a book on the package if you want to get a solid foundation: here

A recommended read OP: http://www.amazon.com/The-Visual-Display-Quantitative-Information/dp/0961392142

I'd guess it's from Dataclysm, which just came out.

http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

The resin that green mountain uses in their cartridges isn't recyclable or biodegradable.

These are and they're a lot cheaper. If you use a keurig 2.0 you may need a clip to bypass the DRM.

http://www.amazon.com/San-Francisco-Bay-OneCup-Coffees/dp/B007Y59HVM/

The resin that green mountain uses in their cartridges isn't recyclable or biodegradable.

These are and they're a lot cheaper. If you use a keurig 2.0 you may need a clip to bypass the DRM.

http://www.amazon.com/San-Francisco-Bay-OneCup-Coffees/dp/B007Y59HVM/

You two should read this book together