Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Why a table is not enough?


Because humans are really good at seing patterns.

I've been saying this for years now in the context of sysadmin work and dashboards.

Some people think about graphs in dashboards as pointless frivolity and for show. I've heard/seen people claim: all we need is an indicator: green if OK, else red.

In my opinion, while that is useful, in my position that is often too late.

Always visible that shows whatever is important to my work: disk space, numbers of errors, (mega/giga/tera)bytes in/out pr second/minute/hour, that allows me both to predict and react, often ahead of time and also to easier diagnose, both because I now have an eye into the system but also because I have over time built a feeling for what is normal and not.

The same is true for visualizations and we also have the same enemies, for example misleading scaling and too little/much detail, distracting details and colors that looks way too similar.


Fair enough.


The usual example used in teaching is Ansombe's Quartet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anscombe%27s_quartet

It consists of 4 datasets with the same summary statistics, but when plotted look very different. It's much easier to see the patterns in the plots than in the data table.


Thanks for that reference.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: