• tiny_electron@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    This graph gives the impression that the total installation number has been multipliés x4 or X5 while it is not the case when looking at the raw numbers.

    Any variation can look impressive if you zoom enough, that’s why you need a baseline at 0. This way you see thé entire scale of the phenomenon

    • summerof69@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 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
        ·
        4 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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 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
            ·
            4 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.