(no subject)

Date: 2012-05-15 02:53 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] publius1.livejournal.com
Now that's the kind of political satire I can get behind.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-05-15 12:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lederhosen.livejournal.com
This is obscene. I mean, he's using areas to represent a uni-dimensional variable.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-05-15 01:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
No worse than a standard graph with lines. He's just rotated it and filled it so he can have a PHYSICAL graph.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-05-15 01:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lederhosen.livejournal.com
But when you rotate it, the area swept becomes proportional to the square of the value represented. Edward Tufte would not approve!

(I'm being facetious here, but I'm not sure if Tufte would be. I guess it depends on whether you think of it as "a thing with a cross-sectional area" or "a thing with a line-graph silhouette". Which might depend on how you're using it.)

(no subject)

Date: 2012-05-16 07:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pappy-legba.livejournal.com
When you rotate a butt plug, volumetric disproportionality becomes the least of your problems.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-05-16 02:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gebkivistik.livejournal.com
You must commit to be with Mitt
Edited Date: 2012-05-16 02:23 pm (UTC)

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Jul. 14th, 2025 03:07 pm