Sjmarf@sh.itjust.works to memes@lemmy.world · 2 years agoMafssh.itjust.worksimagemessage-square58linkfedilinkarrow-up11.22Karrow-down113
arrow-up11.2Karrow-down1imageMafssh.itjust.worksSjmarf@sh.itjust.works to memes@lemmy.world · 2 years agomessage-square58linkfedilink
minus-squareLocalhorst86@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up28·edit-22 years agothis comic uses a log scale (I extrapolate this from the only two data points given).
minus-squareNeatNit@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up4·2 years ago(apologies for pedantry) This can’t be the case, as the zero point is visible in the graph and even gets crossed to the negatives. Log scale graphs only show positive values and place zero infinitely below the horizontal axis.
minus-squarethreelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·2 years agoIf that were the case, the y-axis label would be log(NUMBER OF HUSBANDS), no?
minus-squareoce 🐆@jlai.lulinkfedilinkarrow-up5·2 years agoIt’s a choice, it’s not mandatory to use a log on your y axis when you plot a log.
minus-squarewischi@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 years agoNice. Haven’t thought about that 🤣
this comic uses a log scale (I extrapolate this from the only two data points given).
(apologies for pedantry) This can’t be the case, as the zero point is visible in the graph and even gets crossed to the negatives. Log scale graphs only show positive values and place zero infinitely below the horizontal axis.
If that were the case, the y-axis label would be
log(NUMBER OF HUSBANDS), no?It’s a choice, it’s not mandatory to use a log on your y axis when you plot a log.
Nice. Haven’t thought about that 🤣