From an industrial revolution to the present which is concerned with information transformation.The debate of digital technology and social change is part of the larger body of innovation theory literature. Digital living enhances many aspects of a person s job, leisure, and home lives. There are wide positive improvements as the internet transformed everything, from the most pressing intellectual and emotional experiences to some of the most mundane and ordinary parts of life. But when we view something on a screen are we missing something? Does it lose validity in being digital?

Because seeing a play is such a fleeting event, writing a play review may be a thrilling, though tough, effort. You must be both a spectator watching and appreciating the performance as well as a critical analyst of the production itself. You must be able to offer a quick overview of the play, as well as a close objective analysis of the performance you attended, as well as an interpretation and review of the full ensemble of staging, acting, directing, and so on. Couldn't the same be said about a file that is rendered on a computer screen, it has the ability to disappear at any point, so should we not read it carefully and think of why this specific work was digitized. What does this work really look like in its original form? How was this artifact written?

I never thought of this, we may receive an email and actually never read it or fully see the full email. So if someone were looking at our life and they were using our email as a source wouldn't their information be unsubstantiated? Is the person telling our story fully getting the information they need or are they being led down a different path away from the life we really led? However, I guess the same could be said about a letter, just because it is opened and a part of our possessions does not mean that we read it.

Through online collections, historians now have access to an ever-expanding richness of digitized versions, of a selection of original materials. At the same time, an unprecedented amount of born-digital material is being generated and gathered. Digital archives offer a somewhat different perspective on the nature of the idea of an archive. So my question is what happens to history when the sources and evidence it relies on become increasingly digital?

This is a comment on the whole concept really, but the best thing I ever did for myself in terms of gaining a better understanding of data and how to interpret it was to take a research and methods design class, and of course statistics as well. It helped me understand why researchers choose certain ways to represent data, and understand that to the untrained eye, data can be manipulated to seemingly prove almost any point. It is our responsibility to be clear and honest in our presentation of data. Kind of a "with great power comes great responsibility" moment. Because unfortunately, if you throw some statistics around people assume you must know what you are talking about, and often take it at face value without doing their own research, so it is incredibly easy to mislead and misinform the masses in this way.

I think this is super important to the understanding and analysis of data. Looking at a single group of information can skew your perspective on the scope of that data-sets impact. Being able to collect multiple sets of data and then use that information to essentially gather all new data is the heart of data analysis. To look at datasets in singular vacuums would depreciate the value of the data as a whole,

This is a very poetic way to look at data, I like how the writer points out that data not only tells a story, but that story/perspective can change based on who is analyzing the data. I think that sort of opens up data to a realm of understanding for the humanities, as data is often looked at as a specific set of information with a singular point to be made. This opens data to a realm of analysis that I feel is often overlooked

I find this is where a lot of the disconnect happens in the digital world. It is hard to think of the digital community as a part of 'reality'. But more and more it is becoming the case that the digital space is becoming more 'real' than the physical, as people get most of their interactions through a screen these days. for some reason though we spend our lives in a digital space we still find it hard to relate to digital information, like data.

Just in general, I didn't have a lot of annotations here because a lot of this is very simple, straightforward design advice. It is presented very well, in casual but informative language, but most of these ideas were not new to me as someone who's studied statistics and art.

Nice! I love the double-purpose of the legend. It's very clever and space-conscious.

Ironically, what is being praised here would have had me losing marks in my statistics class. I guess it really depends on the subject, as well as the difference in scale. Because while 1 to 100 is very doable here, if you have data that can range from 1 to 10,000.... things get harder. I do appreciate this though. It is easier to compare.

This marriage of data and art - and by extension, STEM fields and arts/humanities fields - is everything I want to see in academia. How much more engaging, and therefore effective, would academia be if people really presented their work? Would chemistry still put me to sleep? I don't think so.

I had NO IDEA this was a media of art that could be explored! I don't feel like I'm nearly creative enough to come up with an idea, but I would love to do a project like this in the future!

The best part of this graphic is the emphasis on men and women - someone untrained in statistics or graphs may have trouble seeing how "women live longer" because the lines do eventually merge - the emphasis shows where in the graph they should be looking to fully understand it.

This is so incredibly cool and is such a god study into the human experience of feeling like you're the only one experiencing something, while it is statistically likely that someone else is going through the exact same thing. Unrelated, the colours they chose are great too. Very 90s.

This ties in with last weeks annotations, where I talked about the inherent political nature of data/algorithms. This is the same idea, except I believe the author is going to put a more positive spin on things.

Labelling axis works to contextualize the data being presented, but sometimes the axis is not clear. It makes it so difficult to read a graph when the axis is a long drawn out sentence or uses jargon to define. If it is made for the public to be reading it, it needs to be easily understandable. Just as the design needs clarity, so do the axis.

This seems like one of the most important parts of data analysis. If people can not understand the way you have presented your data then all your hard work is worthless. This seems to especially ring true when it comes to more complex graphics. Even if it is pretty if it can not be read than it is not helpful or functional.

Relationships in data also create a greater understanding of the data in general. By having the causation or the correlation element present with the rest of the data, it can help prove or explain why something has happened or what it effects. Without supporting data information, in some cases it can be very difficult to understand, Data sets with relationship provide a fuller understanding of the data being presented.

It is so easy to forget that data statistics are all rooted in real life events. Whether its due to the separation in time from the event to us or a difference in a people group, it is often so difficult to grasp how real these stats are. However, this data represents human lives and experiences. For some people, certain data stats can have great meaning due to the direct impact on their lives, or the lives of those they love.

Remember to see how many times that video has been uploaded. Also check for the date in the title could also instigate that it is a fake.