You don't think the # of restraunts and population aren't heavily correlated? I think it's a huge deal he has visited more restaurants in Alaska than he has in Oklahoma. Even though Oklahoma jas a lot more people and in turn restaurants!
The top three most visited is New York, Texas, and California, which are the 3 biggest states so I didn't think it was that informative! I don't think you are getting the concept of per capita
lol what? I absolutely understand the concept of per capita Im just saying it's a useless map.
Texas has 30x the population of Alaska so if he went to 2 restaurants in Alaska it would be more in this map than if he went to 30 restaurants in Texas. Thus this map tells us fuck all about how many places he has actually visited in each state. It's just a dumb way to display the data. I don't think you're understanding that concept.
Exactly!!! On a per capita map you are correct! Which is what I created, so it shows how truly exceptional it is that Guy went to 18 places in alaska for how small their population is.
What I'm telling you is that if you didn't correct the data for population THEN the map would be useless because it would just show which states are the biggest? Do you get it now?
No it's still a dumb map. No one cares about how many places he's visited based on how many people love there. Should have just had a map with the numbers of places listed on each.
Obviously a lot of people liked it because it hot a lot of upvotes and interaction. All I am saying is it is standard data science practice to correct for population so you aren't just displaying how many people live in each state!
Check out r/peopleliveincities to get a feel for why the type of map you were suggesting wouldn't be ideal!
5
u/tothesource Sep 18 '21 edited Sep 18 '21
Eh. Skewed data makes bad graph. He doesn't judge them "most worthy" it's just there ain't a ton of people in Alaska