A recent Boston Globe editorial covers the issue of multiple, seemingly (if obviously) contradictory statements that come from complex research, in this case around the oil spill:
Last week, Woods Hole researchers reported a 22-mile-long underwater plume that they mapped out in the Gulf of Mexico in June — a finding indicating that much more oil may lie deep underwater and be degrading so slowly that it might affect the ecosystem for some time. Also last week, University of Georgia researchers estimated up to 80 percent of the spill may still be at large, with University of South Florida researchers finding poisoned plankton between 900 feet and 3,300 feet deep. This differed from the Aug. 4 proclamation by Administrator Jane Lubchenco of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that three-quarters of the oil was “completely gone’’ or dispersed and the remaining quarter was “degrading rapidly.’’
But then comes the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, which this week said a previously unclassified species of microbes is wolfing down the oil with amazing speed. This means that all the scientists could be right, with massive plumes being decimated these past two months by an unexpected cleanup crew from the deep.
This is often the case for anything remotely complex: the opacity of the research process to the general public, the communication skills of various institutions, the differing perspective between what the public cares about (whose fault is it? how bad is it?) versus the interests of the researchers, and so on.
It’s a basic issue around communicating complex ideas, and therefore affects visualization too — it’s rare that there’s a single answer.
On a more subjective note, I don’t know if I agree with the premise of the editorial is that it’s on the government to sort out the mess for the public. It’s certainly a role of the government, though the sniping at the Obama administration makes the editorial writer sound one who is equally likely to bemoan government spending, size, etc. But I could write an equally (perhaps more) compelling editorial making the point that it’s actually the role of newspapers like the Globe to sort out newsworthy issues that concern the public. But sadly, the Globe, or at least the front page of boston.com, has been overly obsessed with more click-ready topics like the Craigslist killer (or any other rapist, murderer, or stomach-turning story involving children du jour) and playing “gotcha” with spending and taxes for universities and public officials. What a bunch of ghouls.
(Thanks to my mother-in-law for the article link.)
There may be many versions of the Periodic Table, but this is my favorite.
The image was created by The Dapperstache, who has since updated the graphic, but I prefer this version with its bevel-crazy gradient awful.
Ben Fry LLC now has a proper name, and it is Fathom. Or if you want to be formal about it, “Fathom Information Design”.
And today we launched a new site, fathom.info, for our work. (I’ll still be using benfry.com for my older research projects, Processing updates, software and visualization ramblings, book updates…)
We also have a new project that launched yesterday with GE, this time looking at shifts in age within world populations. A little more info about it is on the Fathom updates page (some might call it a blog). And when we have a chance, we hope to post a bit more of the process behind the piece.
New release available shortly in the pre-releases section of processing.org/download.
More bug fixes, and one new treat for OS X users. Hopefully we’re about set
to call this one 1.2. Please test and report any issues you find.
[ additions ]
+ On Mac OS X, you’re no longer required to have a sketch window open at
all times. This will make the application feel more Mac-like–a little
more elegant and trendy and smug with superiority.
+ Added a warning to the Linux version to tell users that they should be
using the official version of Java from Sun if they’re not.
There isn’t a perfect way to detect whether Sun Java is in use,
so please let us know how it works or if you have a better idea.
[ fixes ]
+ “Unexpected token” error when creating classes with recent pre-releases.
+ Prevent horizontal scroll offset from disappearing.
Thanks to Christian Thiemann for the fix.
+ Fix NullPointerException when making a new sketch on non-English systems.
+ Fixed a problem when using command-line arguments with exported sketches
on Windows. Thanks to davbol for the fix.
+ Added requestFocusInWindow() call to replace Apple’s broken requestFocus(),
which should return the previous behavior of sketches getting focus
immediately when loaded in a web browser.
+ Add getDocumentBase() version of createInput() for Internet Explorer.
Without this, sketches will crash when trying to find files on a web server
that are not in the exported .jar file. This fix is only for IE. Yay IE!
Mixed bag of updates as a follow-on to release 0185.
[ mixed bag ]
Android SDK requirement is now API 7 (Android 2.1), because Google has deprecated API 6 (2.0.1).
More Linux PDF fixes from Matthias Breuer. Thanks!
PDF library matrix not reset between frames. (Fixed in 0185.)
Updated the URLs opened by the software to reflect the new site layout.
Updated the included examples with recent changes.
Just posted release 0185 of Processing on the download page. It’s a pre-release for what will eventually become 1.2 or 1.5. Please test and file bugs if you find problems. The list revisions are below:
PROCESSING 0185 – 20 June 2010
Primarily a bug fix release. The biggest change are a couple tweaks for problems caused by Apple’s Update 2 for Java on OS X, so this should make Processing usable on Macs again.
[ bug fixes ]
+ Fix for Apple bug that caused an assertion failure when requestFocus() was called in some situations. This was causing the PDE to become unusable for opening sketches, and focus highlighting was no longer happening.
+ Fixed two bugs with fonts created with specific charsets.
+ Fix from jdf for PImage(java.awt.Image img) and ARGB images. The method “public PImage(java.awt.Image)” was setting the format to RGB (even if ARGB)
+ Large number of beginShape(POINTS) not rendering correctly on first frame
+ Fix for PDF library and createFont() on Linux, thanks to Matthias Breuer.
+ Fix from takachin for a problem with full-width space with Japanese IME.
+ Reset matrix for the PDF library in-between frames also added begin/endDraw between frames
[ additions ]
+ Add the changes for “Copy as HTML” to replace the “Copy for Discourse” function, now that we’ve shut down the old YaBB discourse board.
+ Option to disable re-opening sketches when you start Processing. The default will stay the same, but if you don’t like the feature, alter your preferences.txt file to change:
to the following:
The issue was originally filed here:
However the main problem with this is that due to other errors, the wrong sketches are being opened, sketches are sometimes forgotten, or windows are opened concurrently on top of one another, creating a bad situation:
Those bugs are not yet fixed, but will be addressed in future releases.
+ Option to change the default naming of sketches via preferences.txt.
First, you can change the prefix, which defaults to:
And the suffix is handled using dates. The current default (since 1.0) is:
Or if you want to switch back to the old (six digit) style, you could use:
+ Updated bundled JRE/tools to 6u20 for Windows and Linux
+ Several SVG fixes and additions, including some tweaks from PhiLho. These changes will be documented in a future release once the API changes are complete.
+ Added option to launch a sketch directly w/ linux. Thanks to Larry Kyrala.
+ Pass actual exceptions from InvocationTargetException in registered methods, which improves how exceptions are reported with libraries.
+ Added loading.gif to the js version of the applet loader. Not sure if this is actually working or not, but it’s there.
[ android ]
+ Added permissions for INTERNET and WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE to the default AndroidManifest.xml file. This will be addressed in greater detail here:
And with the implementation of code signing here:
+ Lots of work happening underneath with regards to Android, more updates soon as things start evening out a bit.
+ Defaulting to a WVGA screen for the default Processing AVD.
A wonderful article by Yale professor Paul Bloom on imagination:
Our main leisure activity is, by a long shot, participating in experiences that we know are not real. When we are free to do whatever we want, we retreat to the imagination—to worlds created by others, as with books, movies, video games, and television (over four hours a day for the average American), or to worlds we ourselves create, as when daydreaming and fantasizing. While citizens of other countries might watch less television, studies in England and the rest of Europe find a similar obsession with the unreal.
Another portion talks about emotional response:
The emotions triggered by fiction are very real. When Charles Dickens wrote about the death of Little Nell in the 1840s, people wept—and I’m sure that the death of characters in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series led to similar tears. (After her final book was published, Rowling appeared in interviews and told about the letters she got, not all of them from children, begging her to spare the lives of beloved characters such as Hagrid, Hermione, Ron, and, of course, Harry Potter himself.) A friend of mine told me that he can’t remember hating anyone the way he hated one of the characters in the movie Trainspotting, and there are many people who can’t bear to experience certain fictions because the emotions are too intense. I have my own difficulty with movies in which the suffering of the characters is too real, and many find it difficult to watch comedies that rely too heavily on embarrassment; the vicarious reaction to this is too unpleasant.
The essay is based on an excerpt of his book, How Pleasure Works: The New Science of Why We Like What We Like, which looks like a good read if I could clear out the rest of the books on my reading pile.
A reading pile that, of course, contains too little fiction.
A terrific set of videos from the “Best Illusion of the Year” contest. Congratulations to all the finalists, in particular first prize winner Koukichi Sugihara whose video is below:
More from Kokichi Sugihara (including an explanation of how this works) can be found here.
(thanks to my mother-in-law, who sent the link)
Has a couple nice visual touches that prevent it from looking like YAHSVPOQUFOTI (yet another highly-stylized visualization piece of questionable utility found on the internet). Also cool to see it was built with Processing.js.
Allie Brosh, who appears to be some sort of genius, brings us definitive arguments in the cake versus pie debate. Best to read the entire treatise, but here are a few highlights on how clearly pie defeats cake:
Ability of enjoyment to be sustained over time
Couldn’t agree more: it always seems like a good idea on the first bite, and then I catch myself. What am I doing? I hate cake. Another graphic:
Unequal frosting distribution is a problem
I grew up requesting pie for my birthday (strawberry rhubarb, thank you very much) instead of cake. This resonates. More importantly (for this site), Brosh cites the enormous impact of pie vs. cake for information design and visualization:
Pie is more scientifically versatile:
A beautiful image taken by a pinhole camera, showing the Sun’s path over six months:
From the explanation:
The picture clearly shows the path of the sun through the sky over the last six months. I believe you can see we didn’t have a great summer by the broken lines at the top. More sun shone in the month of October.
The post also links to a description of how to make your own.
I’m happy that Apple is being explicit about this sort of thing, rather than their previous passive aggressive stance that gave more wiggle room for their apologists. This is a big “screw you” to Adobe in particular, who had been planning to release a Flash-to-iPhone converter with Creative Suite 5. I understand why they’re doing it, but in the broader scheme of what’s at stake, why pick a fight with one of the largest software vendors for the Mac?
In addition to being grounded in total, obsessive control over the platform, the argument seems to be that the only way to make a proper iPhone/iPad experience is to build things with their tools, as a way to prevent people from developing for multiple platforms at once. This has two benefits: first, it encourages developers to think within the constraints and affordances of the platform, and second, it forces potential developers to make a choice of which platform they’re going to support. It’s not quite doubling the amount of work that would go into creating an app for both, say, the iPhone and Android, but it’s fairly close. So what will people develop for? The current winner with all the marketing and free hype from the press.
To be clear, developing within the constraints of a platform is incredibly important for getting an application right. But using Apple’s sanctioned tools doesn’t guarantee that, and using a legal document to enforce said tools steps into the ridiculous.
Fundamentally, I think the first argument — that to create a decent application you have to develop a certain way, with one set of tools — is bogus. It’s a lack of trust in your developers and even moreso, a distrust of the market. In the early days of the Macintosh, it was difficult to get companies to rework their DOS (or even Apple II) applications to use the now-familiar menu bars and icons. The Human Interface Guidelines addressed it specifically. And when companies ignored those warnings, and released software that was a clear port from a DOS equivalent, people got upset and the software got trashed. Just search for the phrase “not mac-like” and you’ll get the picture. Point being, people came around on developing for the Mac, and it didn’t require a legal document saying that developers had to use MPW and ResEdit.
The market demanded software that felt like Macintosh applications, and it’s the same for the iPhone and iPad. On the tools side, the free choice also meant that the market produced far better tools than what Apple provided — instead of the archaic MPW (ironically, itself something of a terminal application), Think Pascal, Lightspeed C, Metrowerks Codewarrior, and even Resorcerer all filled in various gaps at different times, all providing a better platform than (or at least a suitable alternative to) Apple’s tools.
But like this earlier post, it seems like Apple is being run by someone who is re-fighting battles of the 80s and 90s, but whose personal penchant for control prevents him from learning from the outcomes. That rhyming sound you hear? It’s history.
It’s actually a map of counter-insurgency strategy for Afghanistan?
Visualizing Data is my book about computational information design. It covers the path from raw data to how we understand it, detailing how to begin with a set of numbers and produce images or software that lets you view and interact with information. Unlike nearly all books in this field, it is a hands-on guide intended for people who want to learn how to actually build a data visualization.
The text was published by O’Reilly in December 2007 and can be found at Amazon and elsewhere. Amazon also has an edition for the Kindle, for people who aren’t into the dead tree thing. (Proceeds from Amazon links found on this page are used to pay my web hosting bill.)
Examples for the book can be found here.
The book covers ideas found in my Ph.D. dissertation, which is basis for Chapter 1. The next chapter is an extremely brief introduction to Processing, which is used for the examples. Next is (chapter 3) is a simple mapping project to place data points on a map of the United States. Of course, the idea is not that lots of people want to visualize data for each of 50 states. Instead, it’s a jumping off point for learning how to lay out data spatially.
The chapters that follow cover six more projects, such as salary vs. performance (Chapter 5), zipdecode (Chapter 6), followed by more advanced topics dealing with trees, treemaps, hierarchies, and recursion (Chapter 7), plus graphs and networks (Chapter 8).
This site is used for follow-up code and writing about related topics.
- Processing 2.0 alpha 3 released
- Processing 0195 now posted
- And speaking of height...
- The importance of showing numbers in context
- Come work with us in Boston
- Minnesota, meet Physics
- Two day visualization course at Harvard
- The growth of the Processing project
- Processing + Eclipse
- When you spend your life doing news graphics...
- November 2011
- April 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- Always makes me giggle to see the phrase “aesthetic appeal” used scientific papers (proxy for “we thought it was pretty” or “looked cool”) 2012-09-17
- @andybak They don't have an answer. If bzfileids.dat gets larger than 1GB, you'll have to uninstall, reinstall, & restart from scratch. 2012-09-10
- @L05_ @codeanticode this is not an appropriate place for bug reports. 2012-09-08
- @vhgalvao @processing_org @REAS documentation is in revisions.txt in the meantime. 2012-09-05
- @arctic_sunrise @alignedleft @REAS just a server config issue I need to fix with the new beta update. 2012-09-05
- After a promising start, very disappointed with @backblaze... Too many files corrupts backup w/o warning; now patronizing customer support. 2012-09-04
- @novalsi I think they're all backwards-compatible, but several can be simplified based on additions to the language. 2012-09-04
- Processing 2.0 beta 1 has arrived! http://t.co/jtgijsJ3 and the damage here: http://t.co/jGRH5ZSN 2012-09-04
- @cheesedeath nah, oddly enough it worked without any changes 2012-08-30
- (...bonus points if you misread "think C" as a reference "Lightspeed C"...) 2012-08-30
- More updates...