• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      169 months ago

      This graph gives the impression that the total installation number has been multipliés x4 or X5 while it is not the case when looking at the raw numbers.

      Any variation can look impressive if you zoom enough, that’s why you need a baseline at 0. This way you see thé entire scale of the phenomenon

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        49 months ago

        This graph gives the impression that the total installation number has been multipliés x4 or X5

        How so? It goes from ~7 to ~11. That’s not even x2.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          129 months ago

          It goes from ~7 to ~11. That’s not even x2.

          Yes but the graph goes from 2 rectangles above the bottom line to 8 rectangles above the bottom line in that final surge.
          So visually, it looks like it has quadrupled.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            59 months ago

            While I agree for the sake of clarity, a bigger problem is that it only goes back less than 2 months. Has the number of installs been steady at 7k for a long time? Or does it fluctuate wildly like this occasionally for reasons totally unrelated to laws?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              29 months ago

              I was just clarifying the original comment about the baseline not being 0.
              Tbh, I hadn’t even looked at it properly and only noticed now that the timeline isn’t one month per box.