Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 21 May 2015 12:42:24PM 3 points [-]

Who should I talk to in a group? I have a bunch of existing "social senses" for navigating this, but they're not very reliable. If a clear You-Should-Talk-To-This-Person sense went off whenever I encountered someone appropriate, that would be nice.

Comment author: MSwaffer 20 May 2015 05:08:26PM 2 points [-]

You are definitely right in that we need to think about how it will look to another human being.

If you are interested in pursuing this idea further, Don Norman has written a number of books about design in general. These are not about graphic design but just design thinking. The Psychology of Everyday Things is a classic and Emotional Design builds on the work of people like Antonio Damasio with regard to the role of emotion in cognition. Norman has another book called The Design of Everyday Things which I have not read but I imagine is a great read as well.

All of these works emphasize the role of design in helping humans accomplish their goals. Some practitioners of data analytics view the output of prose, charts, tables and graphs as the final product. In most cases however the final product of a data analytics effort is a decision. That decision might be to do more research, to buy one company versus another or propose a new policy to Congress. Regardless of the nature of the decision, how well you design the output will have an impact on the quality of the decision made.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 20 May 2015 06:31:22PM 2 points [-]

I've read The Design of Everyday Things. You don't need to read The Psychology of..., as it's the same book, renamed for marketing reasons.

Comment author: Lumifer 19 May 2015 02:20:54AM 1 point [-]

I don't know, esr seems to be stretching the point here. His two "good" types of anti-intellectualism, Hayek and Sowell, I would probably call internecine warfare. Both his examples were intellectuals and I doubt they would object to more intellectuals like themselves.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 20 May 2015 01:55:50PM 0 points [-]

Completely off-topic, but do you have a policy for when you emphasise with italics and when you emphasise with bold?

Comment author: [deleted] 19 May 2015 11:35:02AM 3 points [-]

If using multiple screens at work made you more productive, care to give an example or two what do you put on one and the other and how they interact? Perhaps also negatives, in what situations that doesn't help?

Hypothesis: they only work with transformation type work e.g. translation where you read a document in one and translate in another, or read a spec in one and write code to implement it in another or at any rate the output you generate is strongly dependent on an input that you need to keep referring to.

I actually borrowed a TV as a second screen because I need to re-create the layouts of document reports from an old accounting software in a new. So it is handy to have the example on the TV while I work on the new one. Of course a printout on a music-stand would work just as well...

In response to comment by [deleted] on Open Thread, May 18 - May 24, 2015
Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 19 May 2015 11:31:49PM 1 point [-]

I don't know how common this is, but with a dual-monitor setup I tend to have one in landscape and one in portrait. The portrait monitor is good for things like documents, or other "long" windows like log files and barfy terminal output. The landscape monitor is good for everything that's designed to operate in that aspect ratio (like web stuff).

More generally, there's usually something I'm reading and something I'm working on, and I'll read from one monitor, while working on whatever is in the other.

At work I make use of four Gnome workspaces: one which has distracting things like email and project management gubbins; one active work-dev workspace; one self-development-dev workspace; and one where I stick all the applications and terminals that I don't actively need to look at, but won't run minimised/headlessly for one reason or another.

Comment author: MSwaffer 19 May 2015 07:32:41PM 4 points [-]

With your background in web development have you read things like Krug's Don't Make Me Think and William's The Non-Designer's Design Book? These are focused more on the design aspect of web however they contain some good underlying principles for data visualization as well.

Tufte's book are all great for underlying principles even though, as you noted, they aren't focused on modern technologies. Beautiful Evidence from 2006 has some updated thoughts but he still borrows heavily from his earlier books.

For general multimedia concepts, Mayer's Multimedia Learning is good from a human learning perspective (my background).

I found Data Points: Visualization That Means Something to be a good modern guide.

From my perspective, I am glad you are looking down the road and recognizing that after the data are analyzed the analysis must be communicated.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 19 May 2015 10:52:30PM 2 points [-]

This is all kinds of useful. Thanks!

You can learn an astonishing amount about web development without ever having to think about how it'll look to another human being. In a professional context, I know enough to realise when I should hand it over to a specialist, but I won't always have that luxury.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 19 May 2015 02:11:52PM 3 points [-]

How are we operationalising "best" here? The purpose of textbooks is to efficiently impart material. Popular books have a wide variety of purposes (to inform, inspire, entertain, polemicise, etc.), so by what standard are we holding one popular book to be superior to another?

Comment author: philh 18 May 2015 04:40:22PM 6 points [-]

I feel like you two are talking about a different type of variance. It may be that Titanic is well-loved in every culture all over the world, ever. But there are still individuals who didn't enjoy it. I think sixes means that LW is unusually good at alieving that not everybody enjoyed Titanic.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 18 May 2015 09:57:12PM 2 points [-]

I endorse this interpretation.

Comment author: palladias 18 May 2015 09:33:58PM 3 points [-]
Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 18 May 2015 09:50:58PM 3 points [-]

Do you love it to the tune of $20?

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 18 May 2015 05:32:50PM *  3 points [-]

Learn the library ggplot2. It is worth learning the language R just to use this library (though there is a port in progress for python/pandas). Even if you cannot incorporate the library into your workflow, its very good defaults show you what you should be doing with more work in other libraries.

It is named after a book, the Grammar of Graphics, that I have not read.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 18 May 2015 06:13:42PM 2 points [-]

I've dabbled with ggplot, but I've put it on hold for the immediate future in lieu of getting to grips with D3. I'll be getting all the R I can handle next year.

I did not know about the book, but it's available to view from various sources. If I get time I'll give it a look-in and report back.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 18 May 2015 03:10:51PM 8 points [-]

A lot of online communities pay lip service to the idea that their experiences aren't universal, but Less Wrong seems to be one of the few places that takes that idea seriously.

View more: Prev | Next