I have had this happen to me twice as a pedestrian, in 2011 and 2012. I didn't care about what it does to the environment, it felt like a personal attack upon me.
> I can't use my Twitter!TeMPOraL_PL account to talk to you, because there's no transport between Twitter and HN. And even if it was, now two brands would be involved in communication.
You could almost do it if things like the Keybase identity graph were widely used. It seems like that concept would lift the identity out of the brands. As long as you linked back to an identity chain from your identity on each brand.
- Can you set it as the default search engine for your browser so these can just be typed into the main search bar instead of going to the Zapmarks site each time?
Firefox's built in keywords already do great for this, and I have seen https://shortmarks.com/ for other browsers. What does your site offer that those do not? They are both free options.
Variables aren't supported in the links yet, but this is definitely on our radar! We focused on keyword functionality for launch, but the search would definitely be handy as well!
Yes, you can manually change your default search engine using this url. Substitute %s for whatever your query string variable is for your device/browser.
On Chrome, you can simply install our extension which allows you to type 'z {keyword}' to access your Zapmarks. Other native browser extensions are in the works as well.
We have a few benefits over the competitors, like Secret Access Links which allows you to use your Zapmarks on new browsers and devices without logging in.
Yeah, the comparison logic is pretty simple right now (see my comment). Unfortunately, `\not\in` and `\notin` look slightly different.
We're figuring out the best way to accept slight variations. It's a tough problem and isn't as simple as increasing the pixel threshold. For example, replacing a + with a - has an extremely small pixel difference (and the two characters have the same width, so it doesn't affect anything else), but we shouldn't accept both.
You shouldn't accept slight variations IMO. One of the primary motivations for TeX (also the largest chapter in The TeXbook) is "Fine Points of Mathematics Typing". If someone types something that results in slightly different output, that is a good teaching opportunity (maybe highlight the visual diff in red or something) rather than simply accepting it.
I was able to complete one problem within the 3 minute time limit. I had to try multiple times to get the right code for two of the symbols required. The linked symbol drawing site would have helped on one of them.
I really like the format of the user interface with instant response/feedback.
It seems like you're pretty close to having an genuinely useful page.
Suggestions:
- As-is, this is really only useful to people who already have some familiarity with this material already. It would be way more useful if it had an additional mode for an absolute beginner
- Instead of being just a memory/recall test, the primary usage mode should be a tutorial and response format for learning
- In the learning mode, first present information on one new concept, then allow the user to test their new knowledge on a problem similar to the way the existing system works
Browsers have supported user defined CSS defaults since forever, and plugins like Stylish have been around for a while.
The practice of users customizing their CSS isn't prevalent because modern sites are incredibly complex and the average user doesn't want (or know how) to spend the time necessary to reverse engineer a site's layout and rewrite its CSS - there is no "quick and easy" way to do that for any but the simplest sites. Just consider how often professional developers complain about CSS, and they get paid to put up with it.
Not disagreeing, but why is this a good thing? Apart from that it's fun, are users really expected to be able to improve their browsing experiences with custom CSS?
User stylesheets are supposed to be applied at a precedence level below the page author's style, so any time the page author did not specify a style, the user's style can be used as default.
Browsers should have made this an easily accessible feature, but they seem to instead like to remove access to it. Think "Developer tools window", but persistent.
I got that, but why not just a bar chart? Is there something I should be learning from this design to use when I share information professionally? Because right now if I were to chart data in this format for work I'd raise a lot of eyebrows, and I'd like to know what the advantage is.
(For context: not a dataviz expert by any means, but I've done a bunch of work in that space for the last several years.)
For sharing information professionally? Not much - but you have to remember the context. Du Bois and his team were preparing these visualizations to be shown at the World Fair in Paris, not for a business meeting. As important as the data they portray is their underlying goal: to show that African-Americans are the equals of their European / Caucasian counterparts in cultural and intellectual endeavors. Presenting the ongoing socioeconomic plight of African-Americans as Modernist data art - at a time when Modernism itself was only just starting to spill over into the visual arts - definitely supports that goal.
Now, on to the visualization merits of the spiral. We have four data points spanning two orders of magnitude. To show those on a bar chart, you'd have to either: a) use a logarithmic scale, b) use a linear scale and accept that three of the bars are tiny, or c) use "scale breaks". Instead, Du Bois presents the data in a way that draws attention to the most prominent data point, while still preserving linear scale.
There are some highly effective techniques in the other visualizations as well. The property valuation chart uses annotations to provide narrative context. The freemen / slaves proportion chart uses filled-in space to lend it a stark visual weight that, again, speaks to the narrative impact. Data visualization is storytelling with data, and these charts are clearly designed to get their narrative point across - quite effectively, I'd say.
Finally: Tufte was printed in the 80s, nearly a full century after these visualizations. That, more than anything, makes these striking. With the exception of Playfair's charts, Oliver Byrne's treatment of Euclid's Elements, certain railroad timetables, and few others, the world hadn't seen much in the way of truly effective visualization. They were literally inventing effective visualization techniques. That we don't hear more about Du Bois' charts is unfortunate.
A linear bar chart would have the red bar be 10-20x as long as the other bars. That is a "correct" visualization but looks visually quite different from what was conveyed here.
No, you probably shouldn't be learning from this design; it requires significant skill and imagination to deploy interpretive graphics like this. Stick with simple things.
Can you add a column for whether or not these have cellular data capabilities? The HP Chromebook I bought in 2014 has cellular data and if I ever replace it I'll probably want one with the same.
Processor architecture would be helpful as well. Many games and other closed source applications don't work with ARM processors even though they support Linux.
The author of this page has made critical errors in either interpreting or creating many of the graphs on the page.
> Another housing trend that popped up in 2014 was the rise in homes with four or more bedrooms.
If you actually look at the graph, the rise in 4+ bedrooms had been going since 1985. In 2014 it just became the most popular.
> Demand for fireplaces has been cooling since the ’90s with 2007 being the first year that more homes were built without the feature than with.
Actually, that would be 2010. The "None" point is plotted higher than the "1" point in 2007 but still definitely below the 50% mark.
> The average square feet of floor area in a newly completed single-family home was down 2 percent or 56 square feet in 2017 from the high mark.
The graph above has percentages in the y-axis rather than square feet...no idea what happened there. Plus, it is somewhat misleading! In the real data chart [0, page 9], the median square footage actually increased in 2017, while the average did decrease. Additionally, this difference appears to be within the relative standard error window.
Here are some details about this process. Basically, your submission can get a second chance if a moderator thinks it was a good one that everybody missed:
