Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

It would be interesting to pull the data in from previous decades and see how the elevation has changed in different areas.

@adrian – it’s just raw totals, grouped geographically. These aren’t scientific by any means, I basically took the underlying pattern and extruded it out and smoothed it a bit to make it look “pretty”. But basically each image is the aggregate numbers for a single year of crime data.

@richard – yes, there is some smoothing in effect, which means that the ridge along Shotwell St (for the prostitution map) is indeed a bit smoothed between peaks. That’s not to say that there are only two peaks at Shotwell and 19th and Shotwell and 17th. There are incidents in between as well, but the big peaks at those major intersections does mean that the ridge between them appears higher than the actual incidents along those blocks support. A lot of people have commented on the usefulness of maps like these. I want to stress once again: this was done as an art project much more than a useful visualization. My goal was not to provide useful information that one could act on.

“one trick pony. these maps add nothing of value to a standard color plot.” I disagree: allowing for a third dimension of elevation makes the reality of concentration clearer – and half the point of crime mapping is to measure concentration, not simply “intensity.”

Great idea and nice work on the graphics, but there are at least three improvements you should make to reveal *true* patterns. Forgive me if you already did these. 1) Availability bias – normalize for population density (i.e. per capita activity) 2) Sampling bias – normalize for the number of cops on the beat (geographic and crime type) 2) Frame bias – break it up by daytime and night time

While it is obvious that information shaping approaches such as we find in newspapers and books are fading in prominence, we still need some type of framework to make sense of it all.

We all face information abundance. We all face the reality that we will always be missing some key pieces of information.

A common concern voiced by many of the active participants: how do we assimilate/makesense of this information?!? There’s just too much of it.

Part of the solution is to rely on one’s learning network to filter out nonsense and to draw attention to key ideas. This is particularly effective when we can “plug in” to a network with high levels of diversity and with people we quickly begin to trust.

dealing with the concept of self-construal, and the differences that exist among cultures and individuals who are predominantly independent or interdependent. According to those studies, one of these differences is precisely the sense of belonging that you mention. Interdependent self-construals feel more strongly about it than independent self-construals (you can see a more detailed explanation on this and other differences, along with a short literature review in Walker, Deng & Dieser 2005.)

four years ago, I conducted a survey among English and Spanish speaking Wikipedians, and the results regarding their motivation to participate in the Wikipedia project were worthy of note: “For Spanish Wikipedia contributors, the sense of building and being part of a large community pays off for the less-rewarding moments of their life as Wikipedians. This is obvious not only by analyzing the answers submitted by the survey respondents but also by taking a look at the large amount of hits that personal pages have in the Spanish version of Wikipedia. English Wikipedia contributors, on the other side, also acknowledge the joys of being part of a community, but, for the most part, they seem more interested in the administrative aspects of Wikipedia, such as creating rules and guidelines, enforcing them and providing for a smooth work with the administrators.” Other differences based on the type of self-construal are very common on our daily interactions on the network.

I find my network actually adds to my growing “to read” pile, I’ve read really good stuff because I have seen one or more of my Twitter contacts mentioning an item. I fear more technology will just highlight even more great material.