98 points

This is a weird ass pie chart using the US map as a base right? If I am correct then this is a terrible way to display this data.

permalink
report
reply
105 points

Why? It gives people a relatable size and shape to compare to. Like saying the 100 richest landowners own equivalent to Florida.

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points
*

I get that but it needs to be labeled some way to clarify this at least. A lot of people look at this and could easily think it is what each area has the most of and that the positions of the types of land have something to do with the states they are near or cover.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Agreed. I definitely thought that at first, thinking some of them seemed very off. Glad I read these comments. It’s especially confusing considering where some things are in the map that it seams almost believable for example that NY/NJ are made up mostly of mostly urban and commercial areas.

But it is a good chart (not map) for what it’s intended to show with some perspective provided in proper labeling.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

A lot of people sure keep saying “a lot of people” and getting mad at the graph instead of just laughing it off that they didn’t get it at first. It’s not the end of the world if you don’t immediately understand something.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

It’s very difficult to compare relative sizes at a glance compared to a pie chart, or other styles like just a bar graph. This is a graph crime.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

i really do not understand how anyone can be confused by this, obviously it’s not a geographical map because new mexico does not contain the sum total of all american railways…

It’s a fine graph that gives an intuitive sense for how much area is used for each thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

It’s really funny to imagine it literally, though.

“We’ll I’d heard some bad things about West Texas highways, but this just seems excessive.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

No no, that’s the Grand Texan Runway for landing and takeoff of the death star!

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yeah and Michigan doesn’t contain all the idle/fallow land in the US but the problem is some people look at this and think that Michigan contains the most idle/fallow land in the US which is why it was used to represent that portion of the data.

I feel like there is a single sentence or phrase that could be written above the or near the graphic which would make it clear but I honestly don’t know what it is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Why is some people’s inability to use critical thinking anyone else’s problem? Like, don’t make assumptions then. Or, take a beat to understand what’s in front of you. There’s nothing wrong with this graph.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

“land use amount is to scale, location is not”

Still seems kind of clunky, and given all the misunderstanding ITT it might do more harm than good.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I kind of like it tbh

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

I’m glad this community is following in the tradition of the reddit one, ugly graphics that communicate nothing useful yet somehow get upvoted to the top

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Yeah, this is a pretty appalling graphic that maybe seemed good in theory but is hostile to the reader in practice.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Oooooh. I assumed it was supposed to have a geographic relation. Yes, this is extremely unclear.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Has anyone started c/terriblemaps yet?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I like seeing the area.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Ah, that makes sense. I mean, it doesn’t make sense, but it makes more sense than looking at this as an actual map.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

This seems like it was developed as a joke. Not what I’m looking for in a data-oriented forum.

permalink
report
parent
reply
90 points
*

Seems like I’m getting 3 reactions to this map:

  • Neat map
  • I don’t understand this map
  • I will find you and kill your family for this crime against data
permalink
report
reply
32 points
*

cannot believe how many people are confused that the use blocks aren’t showing use in that location, just size in relation to the size of the country

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Wait what? Oh God that’s a horrible way to lay out data

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I found it immediately extremely obvious and intuitive

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

I’d say put me under #3, but I’d need you to draw me a map and we all know how that went last time

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Sick burn

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Thanks for putting out what is at least an interesting and engaging graphic for us to comment on! I myself have two of the three reactions you listed

permalink
report
parent
reply
53 points

Because everyone else is shitting on it - I just wanna let you know OP that I actually liked this map

permalink
report
reply
44 points

I’d suggest a merger between ‘100 largest landowning families’ and ‘Food we eat’.

permalink
report
reply
34 points

Why isn’t parking on here?

permalink
report
reply
18 points

!fuck_cars@lemmy.ml is leaking.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points
*

Oh great, the “everyone lives in cities and I have no concept of rural living” people are here now too.

Awww, ya’ll are butthurt and downvoting me for pointing out not everyone has access to mass transportation or reliable shopping within three blocks of their house.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

More like “what if people living in cities didn’t have to depend on a car”

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

Rual, as in my lively hood is based on the land I live on/near or “rual” as in a suburb built in the green way, but I still do the rest of my work and living in the city?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

The “80% of the us population” crowd is here. So cringe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Streets aren’t really mentioned either, besides “Rural highways”. I assume other streets and parking spaces are mostly included in “Urban/Rural housing” and/or “Urban commercial” (smaller rural streets might not be counted seperately from the surrounding land).

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

That was the first thing I was looking for too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I was looking for the people shocked 100 Americans basically own Florida, that’s a whole European country there

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Until fairly recently, i.e. the last 150 years, only a handful of people owned all of europe too.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Data Is Beautiful

!dataisbeautiful@lemmy.ml

Create post

A place to share and discuss data visualizations. #dataviz


(under new moderation as of 2024-01, please let me know if there are any changes you want to see!)

Community stats

  • 1.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 134

    Posts

  • 3.1K

    Comments

Community moderators