Slashdot Mirror


Florence Nightingale, Statistical Graphics Pioneer

Science News has a fascinating look at an under-appreciated corner of the career of Florence Nightingale — as an innovator in the use of statistical graphics to argue for social change. Nightingale returned from the Crimean War a heroine in the eyes of the British citizenry, for the soldiers' lives she had saved. But she came to appreciate that the way to save far more lives was to reform attitudes in the military about sanitation. Under the tutelage of William Farr, who had just invented the field of medical statistics, she compiled overwhelming evidence (in the form of an 830-page report) of the need for change. "As impressive as her statistics were, Nightingale worried that Queen Victoria's eyes would glaze over as she scanned the tables. So Nightingale devised clever ways of presenting the information in charts. Statistics had been presented using graphics only a few times previously, and perhaps never to persuade people of the need for social change."

204 comments

  1. oh god by BigBadBus · · Score: 5, Informative

    For Christ's sake, spell her name right.

    1. Re:oh god by shanen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is /., remember? You're asking far too much to expect the so-called editors to use a spelling checker. Which came first, /. or the toilet?

      (I'm just extra annoyed since I've been a professional technical editor and rewriter for some years. Now after the nameless morons get through playing their moderation games I'll probably be seriously pissed--but that's the primary reaction I ever have to /. these days. I'm convinced that /. is just another interesting idea run into the ground.)

      --
      Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
    2. Re:oh god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yes I saw on wikipedia it is spelled "Nyghtengale"

    3. Re:oh god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Mystryss Nyghtyngyle? I never knew she was into goth stuff?

    4. Re:oh god by bmo · · Score: 2, Funny

      No kidding.

      I don't know what's up with the fundament haberdashery lately, but this is inexcusable.

      Calling the slashdot editors "editors" is like calling the janitor "sanitary engineer"

      No, wait, I'm being unfair to the janitors. At least they do their jobs.

      --
      BMO

    5. Re:oh god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      yes, because the fact that something is misspelled is positive proof that something has been run into the ground.

    6. Re:oh god by FlyingGuy · · Score: 1

      kdawson is not known for accuracy, grammar, correct spelling, timeliness or any other attribute one might associate with someone using the title of "editor".

      --
      Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
    7. Re:oh god by xs650 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "(I'm just extra annoyed since I've been a professional technical editor and rewriter for some years. "

      It's only fair that you be extra annoyed. As a technical editor and rewriter for many years you have undoubtedly pissed off many people yourself.

    8. Re:oh god by bXTr · · Score: 2, Funny

      Now after the nameless morons get through playing their moderation games I'll probably be seriously pissed--but that's the primary reaction I ever have to /. these days. I'm convinced that /. is just another interesting idea run into the ground.

      Yet, you still come here and even contribute. You probably support government censorship of TV, radio and video game content. "Please, someone, pass some legislation so I don't have to think for myself and change channels or buy a different video game!"

      Seriously, feel free to go to some other website. Some of us want lack of quality here on /.. That's what gives it character.

      --
      It's a very dark ride.
    9. Re:oh god by rubato · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Never mind the editors: what kind of imbecile spells the name wrong not once but three times when he includes a quotation which contains the correct spelling?

    10. Re:oh god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even more sad than the "editor"'s mistake is that her name is spelled correctly both in the original article itself (including the title) and in the quoted excerpt here on /..

      That's not even a typo. That's just pure negligence.

    11. Re:oh god by Garridan · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not goth, you cad. She was Victorian!

    12. Re:oh god by Kral_Blbec · · Score: 2, Funny

      Heck, if it had been me I would have misspelled it on porpose just to piss people off.

    13. Re:oh god by shanen · · Score: 1

      No, it seems the professional researchers I work with highly value constructive criticism before they send papers to the referees. We're basically on the same team, but specialists in different areas. My pitch is that it's a LCD thing. First-class research with a third-class description does not get averaged to second class.

      However, /. is not to be confused with a prestigious international conference.

      I used to visit /. because a reasonable percentage of the +5 funny posts actually were funny. A smaller (but still respectable) percentage of the +5 insightful posts were insightful. The polls were often interesting and especially likely to contain humorous posts--which is why it's especially annoying to see what hard times the polls have fallen on.

      By the way, I actually did offer constructive criticisms a few times over the years, but mostly wound up in "dialogs" with Taco defensively explaining why he thought /. was good enough for his purposes, though he never clearly stated what those purposes were. I can't pretend I actually care much, though at least Taco pretends to care. It appears my best suggestions are often five to fifteen years too early, and I've gotten used to waiting.

      --
      Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
    14. Re:oh god by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      It's a sign of the time that people seem to misspell "e" and "i" all the time.

      So soon et siims to mii that iviryoni es goeng to swap thim around.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    15. Re:oh god by blahplusplus · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      "Seriously, feel free to go to some other website. Some of us want lack of quality here on /.. That's what gives it character."

      More importantly, I think people who complain about spelling and errors forget what it is to be human. In fact I think most sane people as they get older are not bugged by the small stuff and know errors will happen. People aren't perfect and this naive idea that they should be held up to a "higher standard" is nonsense. I'd certainly like to talk to the co-workers and wives/husbands exboyfriends/girlfriends of these complainers and see what kind of mistakes they make in their lives and how they treat other people.

      People need to chill out and relax and not take everything so seriously, there are far more serious things in the world to worry about that actually need to be addressed like war and poverty, then pedantically worrying about mistakes people make. You'd think professionals would know by now that mistakes always happen, constantly, even if you are not aware of them and human beings are not these perfect machines. They get old, they have health problems, they are under constant stress... they are for the most part just trying to live like everybody else.

    16. Re:oh god by sodul · · Score: 2, Informative

      The sad thing is that it is spelled correctly twice in the quote from the article. An other sad thing is that the misspelling has been on slashdot for over 8hs, and you posted about it within 2 minutes. You would assume that the kdawson would at least check the chatter of the articles a bit and correct the typos since he posted 3 more stories in the hours after this one.

    17. Re:oh god by ookabooka · · Score: 1

      Which came first, /. or the toilet?

      Ugh. . neither came first, they both came from a single thing that slowly evolved into that system. Perhaps something like the droppings of a dog who had recently eaten some poor kid's science report. Or a soiled diaper made from newspaper.

      --
      If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
    18. Re:oh god by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Have you ever read any Shakespiar? That's how they used to spell it in those days. And they used to write on bits of leather, with feathers. Imagine that!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    19. Re:oh god by Linker3000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I always consider I'm onto a loser when I begin a sentence with:

      "You'd think that..."

      or

      "You would assume..." ...especially when people are involved.

      --
      AT&ROFLMAO
    20. Re:oh god by jvkjvk · · Score: 1

      Of course, it is always possible that they are just not living up to their end of the bargain.

      I don't consider myself a loser in those cases. I consider the person who isn't living up to their end of the bargain the loser, even if I suffer and they do not.

    21. Re:oh god by xs650 · · Score: 1

      I didn't way that you weren't useful.

      For example, I forgot to say that technical editors are often humorless people that take everything literally.

      Thank you for reminding me of that.

    22. Re:oh god by glittalogik · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that be fundament milliner? That's where I get my asshats...

    23. Re:oh god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not goth, you cad. She was Victorian!

      Yeah and 'gothic' and 'victorian' would never go together.

    24. Re:oh god by shanen · · Score: 1

      I highly appreciate a good joke. Your attempt was not, inane moderation notwithstanding.

      I really don't feel like my sense of humor has changed that much over the years, even though I'd like to think I've learned a bit along the way. My main point is that a visit to /. used to find some humorous posts, and now it rarely does. Just to check, I went through all of the posts modded "funny" in this topic and in the comments to the current poll. I found one fat cow joke that was rather funny, two "+5, funny" comments that actually were slightly funny, and the rest were un peu drôle, at best.

      Of course, another possibility is that the humor is still there and the moderation has simply become so bad that the humor doesn't show up with the search algorithm of looking for "funny".

      --
      Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
    25. Re:oh god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "An other sad thing is that the misspelling has been on slashdot for over 8hs"

      Correction:Another sad thing is that the misspelling has been on Slashdot for over 8hrs..

      Why isn't everything perfect all the time?! I demand we each hire our own editor to edit the editors. Perhaps an FOSS editor to make it free for us.. the quality may not be as good but..

      Ahh scratch that ;)

  2. Prior art on Microsoft. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Funny

    So Nightingale devised clever ways of presenting the information in charts.

    So, in other words, she invented PowerPoint.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Troll mod? Gee, looks like we have a PHB in the audience.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Must we malign this truly amazing woman with the word(s) "PowerPoint?"

    3. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never understood the name PowerPoint. Why would you name a presentation program "Electrical Outlet"???

    4. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It gives PHBs the ability to point at something colorful and flashy. It doesn't have to mean anything, but since they have a laser pointer, it must be insightful.

    5. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Funny

      I never understood the name PowerPoint. Why would you name a presentation program "Electrical Outlet"???

      For the same reason we named our planet "Dirt" - self-esteem issues ...

    6. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Must we malign this truly amazing woman with the word(s) "PowerPoint?"

      You're right. I apologize.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    7. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by girlintraining · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      No woman in her right mind would claim to have created Powerpoint. Every other woman who's had to sit through a presentation by some suit thinking he's all that and a bag of chips because he made pretty shiny on a screen would want her revenge. And trust me, us girls have ways of dealing with our own that would leave you wishing there was more than just your hands to cover your balls with after I told you even a tenth of what all that entails.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    8. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Yeah 32000 years from now that is really going to confuse the people trying to work out where the human race came from.

    9. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by bXTr · · Score: 1

      Well, to be fair, if you trying to win people to your cause and convince them to "Do The Right Thing", you should probably not bore them to death with a mountain of information. Even in the Victorian Era, conciseness was a good thing. That's why every research paper starts with an abstract. If you must blame some piece of Microsoft Office on Ms. Nightingale, blame the charting and graphing parts of Excel, and include Lotus 1-2-3 while you're at it, and MatLab, Minitab, SAS, SPSS,... She, like most people with lots of numbers wanting to create charts or graphs, would have used that rather than PowerPoint. If it makes you feel better, I was thinking the same thing. :)

      --
      It's a very dark ride.
    10. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was the one that modded it as a troll (and by posting here I am undoing it). It is now modded +5 Funny, and yeah in hindsight it is funny. But at the time I modded it Troll, it was +2 Insightful, which I thought was an abomination. Insightful?

      I was thinking in particular over all of the critisism powerpoint (and other packages) have received for making it so easy to produce manipulative and misleading graphics. Plenty of stuff on Edward Tufte's site, eg on Nasa abusing powerpoint to mislead management, resulting in poor decisions, in particular the Columbia accident.

    11. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by bXTr · · Score: 5, Funny

      For the same reason we named our planet "Dirt"

      which, ironically, has 2/3 of its surface covered by water. I guess "Mud" would have been a better choice.

      --
      It's a very dark ride.
    12. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by bXTr · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm guessing you're originally from the area of the river running between the countries of Crimea and Fughen; the Crimea-Fughen river.

      --
      It's a very dark ride.
    13. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by girlintraining · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm guessing you're originally from the area of the river running between the countries of Crimea and Fughen; the Crimea-Fughen river.

      Ah, not a country actually -- just Minnesota. Which has over 10,000 lakes, but no rivers named Crimea or Fughen that I know of. I do have some crackers here though to go with that wine of yours. You're welcome to come over eh.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    14. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by kohaku · · Score: 1

      Yeah 32000 years from now that is really going to confuse the people trying to work out where the human race came from.

      I hate to break it to you, but in 32000 years, nobody is going to care where a bunch of damn dirty apes who barely even made it to their own moon came from.

    15. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Yeah 32000 years from now that is really going to confuse the people trying to work out where the human race came from.

      I hate to break it to you, but in 32000 years, nobody is going to care where a bunch of damn dirty apes who barely even made it to their own moon came from.

      Um maybe, but I interpreted tomhudsons post as a Harry Harrison reference. Modern humans are at least 100000 years old, so I wouldn't be surprised if we are still around in this form in another 100000 years.

    16. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by McWilde · · Score: 1

      Call it Alowishus Devadander Abercrombie, that's long for Mud..So I've been told.

      --
      Maybe
    17. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by FlopEJoe · · Score: 1

      Sigh. Just because you can do evil with X does not make X evil. A car can be used to kill, a computer can be used to steal an identity, and PowerPoint can be used to mislead.

    18. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 1

      Ok, but it invites you to mislead. It would be quite possible to design it in a way that encourages good practice. I mean, Microsoft are already masters at inane dialog boxes. If clippy popped up and asked "are you sure you want to chop off the axes of this plot?", or "are you sure that your bullet points accurately represent the data?" it would make statisticians very happy (as well as pissed off at the interference :-)

      Tools can be designed with a focus on best practice, or they can be designed to appeal to the ignorant or liars. Similarly, a car can be designed to have features that make it perform better and safer in the event that the driver tries to misuse it. Or it can have a big bullbar on the front with spikes on it. Such a car would be very popular among some sector of the population, but is it a good idea?

      There are plenty of guides around on how to best design graphs and slides. These range from relatively easy to near-impossible to actually utilize in PowerPoint.

    19. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by hey! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The fault isn't the tool, the fault is education.

      I can hardly count the number of managers I've met who've claimed to be "visual thinkers". Without denying such a thing might exist, I've seldom seen any evidence of outstanding "visual reasoning" from such people.

      For example, I often use diagrams as an adjunct to my reasoning, and find that "visual thinkers" often have strong opinions about the aesthetic aspects of these diagrams. Seldom is the opinion about things in the diagram that carry semantic information: spatial, thematic or topological relationships for example. Furthermore, their aesthetic contributions aren't very aesthetically sophisticated, demonstrating of bad typography choices, cluttered compositions, insensitivity to color complementarity and value.

      I call their claims into doubt because I have known unusual individuals who could be described as visual thinkers. One was an architect who was nearly incomprehensible without a pencil in his hand, but wonderfully eloquent with one. None of these people ever claimed to be "visual thinkers", as if that were a loftier kind of cognition. I suspect that's because it is not how a "visual thinker" would conceive of or express the distinction between themselves and "normal".

      It is my opinion that the popularity of claiming to be a "visual thinker" stems from "visual reasoning" not being part of most people's education. An opinion justified as "visual thinking" is therefore unlikely to meet an informed challenge. Put most "visual thinkers" in front of a panel of artists or architects, and they will be reluctant to claim that label for themselves.

      I happen to think that computer based presentations are very useful communications tools, but you really have to start by having something worth saying.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    20. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by Cowmonaut · · Score: 1

      Having used PowerPoint, I just don't see how it invites you to do anything. I've never seen it make suggestions or provide any tips. It gives you a blank card and several templates that you can choose to ignore. Beyond that its a bit like a word processor with extra graphical options thrown in and a restricted page size. I think you're a bit wrong here.

    21. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by Golddess · · Score: 1

      I thought we've only existed as our current species for ten thousand years?

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    22. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I consider myself a "spacial thinker" -- I conceive of algebra geometrically and programming problems as digraph problems (from eliminating repeated subgraphs to shortest path &c.)

      While I agree that some people are able to express/explore problems in the visual medium, I think what you are describing above is "If I see it, then I'll know it." The obsession with minor and unsophisticated aesthetic differences is really just handwaving as the hapless fool is unaware of why it doesn't "look right" (why they don't understand it, or why it does not meet the expectations.) And when their thought patterns are incomprehensible, they use vague visual language ... but no actual visual constructions... to attempt to convey and persuade. The description of the visual with language is something that people are used to being imprecise and inaccurate, and these charlatan 'thinkers' exploit this in an attempt to hide their imprecise and confusing thoughts.

    23. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by 32771 · · Score: 1

      HA, words are cheap!

      You could set out on a literary expedition of your own and find out whether Edward R. Tufte did sufficiently honour that woman. Actually a cursory glance over "The Visual Display of Quantitative Information" didn't turn up anything. Maybe there is something to be found in here:

      http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/books_pp

      --
      Je me souviens.
    24. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      I thought we've only existed as our current species for ten thousand years?

      About 200000 years apparently.

    25. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I was the one that modded it as a troll (and by posting here I am undoing it). It is now modded +5 Funny, and yeah in hindsight it is funny. But at the time I modded it Troll, it was +2 Insightful, which I thought was an abomination. Insightful?

      Well, you really shouldn't mod based upon existing moderation, I think. Moderate on your own opinion of the post, not what other people happened to think.

      But if it makes you feel any better, I was just trying to be funny.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    26. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I thought we've only existed as our current species for ten thousand years?

      About 200000 years apparently.

      As intelligent species go, it's obvious that we're a little slow.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    27. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by glittalogik · · Score: 1

      I think 'visual thinker' is often a euphemism for 'poor literacy.' That said, I have known people with quite incredible visualisation and spatial thinking abilities; the sorts who can take a glance at this, work out in a fraction of a second that it will form this, and if each face is numbered, be able to tell you if two given numbers on the edges of the flattened shape will touch each other or not.

    28. Re:Prior art on Microsoft. by kandela · · Score: 1

      What I got out of this article: the type of patience required to be a statistician; or should that be patients?

      --
      Conservation of angular momentum makes the world go round.
  3. Better graph by PIPBoy3000 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I searched around for a more readable graph and found one here, at the bottom of the page.

    1. Re:Better graph by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know it's hard, but if you read all the way to the bottom of the FA, you'd have seen a very well drawn graph. In fact, it even has the words.

    2. Re:Better graph by aevans · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That chart looks exactly like a "wind rose" found in pilot books for at least 100 years before that. It was a common statistical diagram on charts used by sailors to show the odds of a wind blowing from each compass point at a certain time of year.

    3. Re:Better graph by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's another sample and another sample.

      Edward Tufte's forum also has a discussion on Nightingale's diagrams.

    4. Re:Better graph by Timmmm · · Score: 0

      Apparently she was also a pioneer of deception. I seriously doubt that that graph is by area rather than by radius.

    5. Re:Better graph by xaxa · · Score: 3, Informative

      You could have read the page the post you're replying to links to:
      You and I are shown graphs every day. Some are honest; many are misleading. Nightingale could, for example, have scaled deaths according to the radius, instead of the area, of the segments. That would've strengthened her case. But it would've misled people, since area is what the eye sees.

    6. Re:Better graph by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      I did read that page, but it only says what she *could* have done. It makes no claim to say what she *did* do, let alone provide evidence. The page that that page links to states that the figure caption indicates area is used, but it would be good to see actual numbers.

  4. Remarkable predicament by sleeponthemic · · Score: 1

    Pie charts or the headsman.

    --
    I record my sleeptalking
  5. Thanks to her, I get it by Forrest+Kyle · · Score: 4, Funny

    So if it wasn't for Ms. Nightingale, I would never have understood the deleterious effect my cat was having on my homework performance, as it might never have been properly explained.

  6. oh, those silly editors. by momerath2003 · · Score: 1

    Tagged "oheditors"

    --
    I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
  7. Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If she'd been a man presenting this, she'd have made the equivalent of surgeon general in her career. -_- No joke--Despite the blessing of Queen Victoria herself, she was denied a chairman position that oversaw general health affairs in the military. I doubt there's an academic statistics book currently in circulation that gives her any credit for this. Even this--a zine read by only a tiny, tiny fraction of the people who go to school every year and rely on her innovation. Hell, the entire field of field medicine was in disrepute at that time in history -- who needs medicine? Most nurses spent at least part of their time in the kitchen, which was viewed as more important. She made it important. It's been two centuries since then and she's still only a footnote. Today, graphical statistics are used in every trained discipline from engineering to medicine to management, but nobody knows this woman's name. They should -- they owe her a lot.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But conversely, if she was a man nobody would feel the need to write an article about it.

      Of course they would: great people are great people, and their accomplishments stand by themselves. The difference is, if she were a man, her (uh, his) sex wouldn't be worthy of note.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      Looking up this entry in Wikipedia and her entry, it looks like you're right!

    3. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by sw155kn1f3 · · Score: 1

      No offence, but graphical representation and statistics was used from Archimedes days by your so-hated by feminists "men". This is how our brains work.
      And no, Ada Byron wasn't the first programmer.
      Sorry to burst your shiny little bubbles, girl.

      --
      - Arwen, I'm your father, Agent Smith.
      - Well, you're just Smith, but my father is Aerosmith!
    4. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      No offence, but graphical representation and statistics was used from Archimedes days by your so-hated by feminists "men". This is how our brains work.

      Sure, but that's irrelevant. It was her application of those techniques, her recognition of the need, and her perseverance in the face of considerable resistance that are admirable. She was a remarkable individual, whether you agree with girlintraining's estimation or not.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe; from the little I know she seemed very capable. But conversely, if she was a man nobody would feel the need to write an article about it.

      You're absolutely right, nobody would feel they had to. When a woman is acknowledged it's out of pity or some emotive source. When a man is acknowledged it's because of his (objective) accomplishments. Two hundred years and you've just underscored how very little things have changed. When people no longer have to go out of their way to find and honor the contributions of women, when their names simply added to the book without a second thought -- then we'll have progress.

      Thank you for showing us just how deeply sexism pervades our society, even amongst the most technical and literate of the population (like here, on slashdot).

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    6. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Funny

      ... even amongst the most technical and literate of the population (like here, on slashdot).

      Ah ha ... now there's where you went wrong.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    7. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by gregbot9000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, all statistics books I've read that have a section on history mention her graphs, and Charles Joseph Minard's graph of Napoleons losses in Russia. Most people I've meet and discussed statistics with have heard this before, and I was taught it like the first week of class, so save me the bleeding heart rant about social injustice.

      So she didn't get to a high station because she was a woman in a society thats over 100 years dead, that really sucks for her, but only marginally relevant today.

    8. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      o she didn't get to a high station because she was a woman in a society thats over 100 years dead, that really sucks for her, but only marginally relevant today.

      Today a black President, tomorrow ...

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    9. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by sw155kn1f3 · · Score: 1

      I agree, but calling her "First human to use graphical representation of data" (Pioneer) is completely bullshit. The same bullshit as calling Ada Lovelace (Byron) to be the first programmer.
      I'm just sick of feminists claiming positions they do not deserve. Just use your brains to get the titles you need. No corner-cutting, no vagina using, no feminist propaganda, no tricks, just raw thinking power.

      --
      - Arwen, I'm your father, Agent Smith.
      - Well, you're just Smith, but my father is Aerosmith!
    10. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      Ah ha ... now there's where you went wrong.

      Compared to the general population, even Anonymous Coward is educated. Is probably an alcoholic too, but with a name like that I'd probably drink too.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    11. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      No corner-cutting, no vagina using, no feminist propaganda, no tricks

      Well. Some would say that's just working from your strengths.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    12. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      I agree, but calling her "First human to use graphical representation of data" (Pioneer) is completely bullshit.

      I didn't say that and neither has anyone else. I said she deserves a lot more credit than she's gotten, and that has nothing to do with her equipment, feminism, propaganda, or tricks. It has everything to do with her working her ass off to save lives, and applying a very creative solution to a previously intractable problem and then succeeding against the incredible stigma and prejudice that beset her on all sides -- a disreputable profession, an entrenched bureauacracy, and sexism that makes your brand of idiocy look like decaf.

      Now bugger off or I shall taunt you a second time.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    13. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by gregbot9000 · · Score: 1

      So, when you say "our brains" in relation to graphical representation and statistics are you talking about humanity, or are you one of those sexists who mean "mens" brains? I think theres some distinction needed.

      Also saying "no offense" is kind of negated by saying "Sorry to burst your shiny little bubbles, girl". No offense, but "No offense" isn't a Get to Act Like an Ass Free Card.

    14. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by shermo · · Score: 1

      Lots of people know her name. Unfortunately, the editors don't fall into that group.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    15. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      >> No corner-cutting, no vagina using, no feminist propaganda, no tricks

      Well. Some would say that's just working from your strengths.

      Hey, did you hear the story about the person who was born with both sex organs? Apparently, they had a penis and a brain.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    16. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Blue+Stone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >She made it important. It's been two centuries since then and she's still only a footnote.

      I don't know about that. She was possibly one of only three important people in the history of medicine that I learned about when I was a child here in the UK. And my impression was that she was somewhat sainted (despite any lack of formal 'establishment' status); regarded as a genuine heroine to be lauded by all.

      (The others were Alexander Fleming and Louis Pasteur).

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    17. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      taxed into the poor house

    18. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 0, Troll

      So she didn't get to a high station because she was a woman in a society thats over 100 years dead, that really sucks for her, but only marginally relevant today.

      The Holocaust is over 50 years dead now. It must have really sucked for them, but it's only marginally relevant today.
      Slavery in this country is over 150 years dead now. It must have really sucked for them, but it's only marginally relevant today.
      Some morons died for their country 200 years ago after signing something called a Constitution. It must have really sucked for them, but it's only marginally relevant today.

      I've heard this line before. Maybe her name was in "all of those statistics books with a history section", maybe not, I'll never know without a citation. But I do know this: You haven't read much history at all, or if you have you've managed to retain a stunning lack of understanding of its relevance to make a statement like that one.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    19. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by cheater512 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Same with the recent US election.

      I find it appalling that Obama is celebrated because of his skin colour.

      I like the guy but I care just as much about what colour his car is, as what colour his skin is.

      It just goes to show that the US is still extremely racist - just now its sympathetic and not derogatory.

    20. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      That would be funny if the brain was a sex organ.

    21. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      That would be funny if the brain was a sex organ.

      Well if you had one you might have a different opinion.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    22. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Today a black President, tomorrow ...

      fried chicken for everyone?

    23. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      don't know about that. She was possibly one of only three important people in the history of medicine that I learned about when I was a child here in the UK. And my impression was that she was somewhat sainted (despite any lack of formal 'establishment' status); regarded as a genuine heroine to be lauded by all.

      You limeys take your history and literature a bit more seriously than us yanks. ;) You should see what they put in our history books these days; The books get more colourful by the year to make up for the total lack of content.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    24. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When a woman is acknowledged it's out of pity or some emotive source. When a man is acknowledged it's because of his (objective) accomplishments.

      Conversely, when a woman *is* acknowledged for her objective accomplishments, it's invariably accompanied by some mention about the tribulations she endured because of her sex, and how she didn't get "the recognition she deserved." It happens with such extreme regularity that it has become trite, and frankly speaking, counterproductive.

      They've done studies which have found that signs such as "Please leave things where they are. This nature area is being destroyed by a large number of people taking souvenirs." actually *increase* vandalism, because the subconscious message is "a large number of people tak[e] souvenirs [so why don't you?]". - Humans have a tendency to look for what the group is doing and go along with it.

      I'm therefore concerned when people pull out the "Women scientists aren't getting the respect they deserve, because of all the people with the perception that women aren't any good at science" argument, readers are left with the subconscious message "all the people [perceive] that women aren't any good at science".

      And as far as "reputation they deserve" goes, reputation is fickle. There are a whole swath of men who did great things, yet are still unrecognized. I saw a recent blog post which was lamenting the fact that, when asked to name a women scientist, most college students name Marie Curie, with a smattering of Barbara McClintock, ignoring all the other women scientist. No one in the comments stopped to consider that when asked to name a male scientist, most would have responded Albert Einstein, with perhaps a smattering of Richard Feynman, ignoring all the other male scientists. Yet somehow gender was thought to play a major role in those other female scientists being marginalized in this example.

      Keep in mind you can flip the classic XKCD comic on it's head and still have it be "How it Works": "Why don't you respect me? Is it because I suck at math?"/"Why don't you respect me? Is it because I'm a girl?"

      (All this is not to say that Florence Nightingale doesn't deserve oodles of respect, or that her sex didn't cause her to be unfairly marginalized. I'm just tired of the same old arguments being wheeled out every time, distracting from substantive discussion. This thread, for instance: instead of discussing her objective accomplishments, we feel we need to bring up the role her gender played.)

    25. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Xiroth · · Score: 4, Informative

      While I completely agree that she was not given the prestiege due her while she was alive, I think you underestimate her fame in the time since. There have been monuments erected in her honour, museums named after her, and books, television shows, and no fewer than 4 films about her, and I think she could reasonably accurate be described as a household name today (who hasn't at least heard the name?). Most of them concentrate on her contribution to our understanding of sanitation (in which she was truly revolutionary) and nursing, but I do not think that she could reasonably be described as lacking in recognition in the modern era.

    26. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by bXTr · · Score: 1

      In other words, women were treated as second-class citizens back then. Do tell. If you think you're angry now, wait until you find out how non-whites were treated, and still are. You'll have so much steam blowing out your fucking ears, you'll be contributing to global warming.

      --
      It's a very dark ride.
    27. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by hedwards · · Score: 1

      And just for the fun of it, what other developed western nations have elected a black man to the highest office? I'm just saying that for all the applauding in Europe, I don't believe even one of the nations has done so, nor Canada, and I'm not sure I can name a major nation anywhere outside of Africa which has done so.

      Perhaps I'm ignorant of things, but while we definitely have problems with racism, we are in pretty rare company to have been willing to vote him in.

    28. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by gregbot9000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the problems facing this country were government actions killing whole races then it would be relevant today, as it stands the Holocaust is marginally relevant today.

      If slavery existed in this country than abolitionism would be relevant today. It is not.

      The constitution is still relevant today because the issue of the rights and power of the government is still ongoing, the rights of slaves and Jews aren't. Battles fought, won, buried. womans lib is still hanging on.

      I understand history very well, and I stand by my statement. Womans lib has destroyed itself through success. It has become marginalized in todays society because there really isn't any systematic discrimination left for them to strike down. I'm sure you'll disagree with that statement, but I have stopped listening to fringe groups spout about their relevance years ago, be them Marxists, La Rouch, Gold-bugs, neo-cons or feminists. If your so big on womans lib go to Afghanistan where there are still battles to be fought. In the US all thats left is marginalized gripes about textbooks, maternity leave, sexual advertising, and pushing statistically dubious arguments about wage gaps.

    29. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I saw a recent blog post which was lamenting the fact that, when asked to name a women scientist, most college students name Marie Curie, with a smattering of Barbara McClintock, ignoring all the other women scientist. No one in the comments stopped to consider that when asked to name a male scientist, most would have responded Albert Einstein, with perhaps a smattering of Richard Feynman, ignoring all the other male scientists. Yet somehow gender was thought to play a major role in those other female scientists being marginalized in this example.

      Hmmm. That may be a leap. Being a female scientist in and of itself causes a certain level of marginalization. That doesn't mean it can't be overcome (as with any stereotype). Discrimination is usually pervasive but subtle. Gender discrimination effects those who are truly talented less than those who are average because it's harder to ignore real talent. But for the mediocre -- the lab assistant, the post-doc, the grunts of the community, discrimination looms large in their world.

      And to answer to another point in your post -- this is also why the people who do struggle to the top have a lot to say about the discrimination they endured. It's because they've watched so many of their friends and colleagues drop off because of it, and because the higher you go the fewer like you there are. It may be trite and tiring to hear, but the stereotype is still there and for my small part I don't mind being considered trite and tiring to listen to because stereotypes come the same way -- hearing the same thing over and over again. The only way to break the cycle is to keep people from only hearing one message.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    30. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by hedwards · · Score: 1

      You do of course realize that you're at least as bad as the, presumably, male posters you're arguing with, right?

      I've got a tremendous amount of respect for women, but really women do a piss poor job of treating men with any sort of meaningful respect. I've been fortunate enough in recent years to deal with a higher class of women, but really being liberated isn't any reason for being rude.

      It isn't a feature of liberation to behave in a similarly boorish manner to the men that are being shouted down for behaving in a boorish fashion. Really equality is equality, not being equal or past customs as is convenient.

    31. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If the problems facing this country were government actions killing whole races then it would be relevant today, as it stands the Holocaust is marginally relevant today.

      The holocaust wasn't about killing off a race. It was about attacking and marginalizing a minority. And it is happening today, on a smaller scale; Guantanamo Bay.

      If slavery existed in this country than abolitionism would be relevant today. It is not.

      It's successors are; Illegal immigrants and their poor working conditions, prisoners being forced to do 'hard labor', so-called wage-slaves, and federal legislation to prevent unions (in particular those who work for the airlines) from striking and walking off the job en masse by threatening jail on the participants, medical workers who can legally be forced to work for sometimes days straight due to "urgent need", etc.

      Womans lib has destroyed itself through success. It has become marginalized in todays society because there really isn't any systematic discrimination left for them to strike down.

      Consider this as my challenge to your statement: Go to work for the next week in female attire appropriate to your work environment and tell me how well that works for you. Decline to answer questions about why, simply do so and then try and carry on with your job. If you can't see why this is directly relevant to your comment, you need to sit down and have a hard think about what systematic discrimination is.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    32. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      I rest my case. Most of the rest of the world doesnt care. :P

      But I'll humor you. I'm a Aussie.
      If we look at the CIA factsheet, we see that 92% of Australians are white, 7% are Asian and 1% are Aboriginal.
      We've only had 26 Prime Ministers so we are ok so far.

    33. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Dude, you so need to get laid.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    34. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      >If she'd been a man presenting this, she'd have made the equivalent of surgeon general in her career.

      And if she'd been black, few people would have heard of her at all.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Seacole

    35. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      I've got a tremendous amount of respect for women, but really women do a piss poor job of treating men with any sort of meaningful respect. I've been fortunate enough in recent years to deal with a higher class of women, but really being liberated isn't any reason for being rude.

      If you've "been fortunate enough in recent years" its likely because you're giving respect first instead of expecting it. That said, I don't think you've come as far as you think you have. The reason so many women are rude is because so many men have the expectation that they should be respected as a matter of course. As to being a bitch, I freely admit I'm being one here... like so many women, I sometimes get sick of having to deal with this crap day in and day out. The thing is, I lose my cool, I'm suddenly being compared to a "lesser class" of women and I'm somehow representing all of womankind here? I don't think you'd give that much weight to the previous poster, suggesting you've been blessed with being around a "higher class" of men, or that he's representative of all of mankind. At least you're thinking about it though, that's a start.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    36. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      In other words, women were treated as second-class citizens back then. Do tell. If you think you're angry now, wait until you find out how non-whites were treated, and still are. You'll have so much steam blowing out your fucking ears, you'll be contributing to global warming.

      Dear, there's injustice everywhere. There's no point in comparing scars. It's like the "Well what about the starving children in Africa?" argument... No matter how bad it is for you, someone's got it worse, and someone else has it better. You pick what matters most to you and do what you can. If you've got a good heart and an open mind, you can go one more step and listen to what matters to other people and then try to make their lives a little easier while you're in it. That's all anyone can ask of another human being, be they black, white, jew, christian, atheist, gay, straight, male, female, or anything else.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    37. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If "girlintraining" is a parody of all that is bad about the least intelligent end of the feminism spectrum, *congratulations* to whoever is behind it.

    38. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by amirulbahr · · Score: 1

      The Holocaust is...

      Isn't this where the thread comes to an end?

    39. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      All I ever knew about her was that she was the "lady with the lamp" with all of her good deeds summed up by the description of her caring attitude and the succor she brought. This new (to me) information gives a lot more texture and certainly makes me want to learn more about her.

      --
      Nullius in verba
    40. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by MrMista_B · · Score: 1

      You really hate women, don't you? Listen, just because you might have been brought up to believe than women are inferior to men, that's just not true. Women aren't only ever acknowledged out of 'pity or some emotive source', and I'm sorry you feel that way, but women are important and capable in their own right, just as much as men, and there's no need to put down an entire gender like that.

      If you don't feel any need to find and honor the contributions of women, that's fine, but just because they're women, doesn't mean they haven't accomplished important things, and contributed great things that deserve to be honored, just as much as the great things and contributions of men.

      In short, stop being a mysoginist, girlintraining, especially here on slashdot we don't need any more of that than is already here - as you say, sexism does deeply pervade our society, and I'd appreciate it if people like you made an effort to realize that men aren't always superior.

    41. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I think Nightengale and Curie (and let's not forget Franklin) realized that the only way to be taken seriously in fields dominated by men was undeniable achievement.

      I can't remember seeing a textbook, even at the high school level, that made no mention of them in the context of their achievements.

      I hope as a scientist, you spend the bulk of your time as they did: working hard to further research, rather than bemoaning your perceived status as a woman, and that of those who came before you. Then maybe we'll remember your name in the same way - not under the heading of "Women in Science", but "Great Scientists in History".

    42. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      If she'd been a man presenting this, she'd have made the equivalent of surgeon general in her career. -_- No joke--Despite the blessing of Queen Victoria herself, she was denied a chairman position that oversaw general health affairs in the military. I doubt there's an academic statistics book currently in circulation that gives her any credit for this. Even this--a zine read by only a tiny, tiny fraction of the people who go to school every year and rely on her innovation. Hell, the entire field of field medicine was in disrepute at that time in history -- who needs medicine? Most nurses spent at least part of their time in the kitchen, which was viewed as more important. She made it important. It's been two centuries since then and she's still only a footnote. Today, graphical statistics are used in every trained discipline from engineering to medicine to management, but nobody knows this woman's name. They should -- they owe her a lot.

      Actually most of the real work was done by her assistant, skilled surgeon Jack D Ripper. Unfortunately Queen Victoria and Florence both conspired to erase Jack from history because of his gender. As a pioneer masculinist Jack to revenge by chopping up whores in the East End of London.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    43. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by seyyah · · Score: 1

      Actually, all statistics books I've read that have a section on history mention her graphs, and Charles Joseph Minard's graph of Napoleons losses in Russia. Most people I've meet and discussed statistics with have heard this before

      For the sake of completeness, you should have mentioned that in your history books you read that Charles Joseph Minard's graphs started appearing after the Crimean War and, consequently, the graphs of Florence Nightingale.

    44. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by gregbot9000 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      You are talking about successors, not the parent issues now, Hard Labor for a crime is a far cry ethically from forced labor. Lessons are learned from past events, society moves on, the arguments from those past events are then marginally applicable, and are changed into something new, Thesis vs. anti-thesis creates a new synthesis, leading to new arguments about new issues. The arguments of VHS v. Beta are not applicable today even if the debate of blue ray and HDDVD were similar and drew a lot of lessons from it. Womans Lib has died down because there are not a lot of arguments to be won about equality of the sexes. There is still progress to be made but nothing like what has been made. Nightengale's patriarchal repression IS only marginally relevant seeing as she would be surgeon general in todays society.

      Consider this as my challenge to your statement: Go to work for the next week in female attire appropriate to your work environment and tell me how well that works for you.

      Why would I? I know what will happen and so do you, but it doesn't mean jack about systematic discrimination. The social mores that exist have more to do with Sexual Dimorphism and gender differences that even baboons exhibit. I will guarantee you they are supported just as strongly by women It is not patriarchal repression that makes dumb girls slaves to fashion, but the same force that also makes dumb men slaves to power tools and guns. You can rail against gender differences if you want, I've yet to hear a good argument though.

      Besides I look terrible in Heels :-p

    45. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Ardeaem · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely right, nobody would feel they had to. When a woman is acknowledged it's out of pity or some emotive source. When a man is acknowledged it's because of his (objective) accomplishments.

      If I tell you I walked 10km, you might say, "that's no objective achievement!" But then I say, I walked 10km to the peak of Mount Everest, with several people trying to keep me from doing so, then THAT'S an objective achievement. Even if I weren't the first to get to the top of Mount Everest.

      The point is, context matters. When a women in history is celebrated, you might not feel like her objective achievements merit note. However, people with more, *ahem*, subtle reasoning abilities realize that everything should be considered in context, and women often achieved great things in spite of people attempting them from keeping them from doing so.

      Also, what in the world is an "objective" achievement? Value of anything, including achievements, is inherently subjective. Just because you can't see that doesn't give you the right to decide what an "objective" achievement is.

      Thank you for showing us just how deeply sexism pervades our society, even amongst the most technical and literate of the population (like here, on slashdot).

      No, no, thank you.

    46. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by famebait · · Score: 1

      Only shows how little you know.

      Her work was not just capable, it was revolutionary, and it is noted not because she was a woman but because it was groundbreaking in several fields central to modern civilization, largely founding one of them. It would have attracted attention in any case. And it did.

      What the parent to your post quite rightly claimed was merely that such accomplishments, in that time, were it by a man, would normally bring with it not just recognition but a high position and significant power. In fact she received (mostly) only the recognition, while some of the the career paths she had clearly qualified to remained simply not open to women regardless of merit. As most loyal citizens of the time probably considered both normal and proper.

      --
      sudo ergo sum
    47. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No matter how bad it is for you, someone's got it worse

      Will someone please think of the whales!?

    48. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      I think Nightengale and Curie (and let's not forget Franklin) realized that the only way to be taken seriously in fields dominated by men was undeniable achievement.

      Psst... It's the ONLY way to be taken seriously. Even for men.

      I wouldn't want to cram a history textbook full of people without undeniable achievment.

      --
      bickerdyke
    49. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      The holocaust wasn't about killing off a race. It was about attacking and marginalizing a minority. And it is happening today, on a smaller scale; Guantanamo Bay.

      Oh, fuck off. Guantanamo Bay is an atrocity that blackens the good name of the United States and for which I hope the name of George W. Bush will be remembered with greater loathing even than Nixon. But it is nothing remotely like the Holocaust - it's similar only insofar as it's a prison camp. Call me when they install gas chambers there.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    50. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by attributed+insanity · · Score: 1

      I lose my cool, I'm suddenly being compared to a "lesser class" of women and I'm somehow representing all of womankind here?

      Hardly, and I would argue strenuously with hedward's use of "class" (lesser or otherwise). But the generalisation you are objecting to here is the same one that you have been making.

    51. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by smoker2 · · Score: 1, Insightful
      You are a fool and your last comment proves it.

      Consider this as my challenge to your statement: Go to work for the next week in female attire appropriate to your work environment and tell me how well that works for you. Decline to answer questions about why, simply do so and then try and carry on with your job.

      So you are asking someone to deliberately make themselves stand out from normal for no reason and then be expected to be treated the same way ?

      This is what pisses me off about your type. You don't want equality of anything. You want inequality because you would have nothing to complain about otherwise. If everybody was equal, you would want to be given special mention because you were gay, or pregnant, or disabled. It has nothing to do with the facts, just your desire to be seen as special for no reason other than your circumstances. There is a reason you have separate races in the 100m for men and women. If they were to run together, then the women would always have to complain about how unfair it all was. They would want a 50m head start, and if they didn't win then it would be down to some other perceived slight.

      I'm all for equality of status. But the minute *you* introduce a perceived inequality to game the system, then there can be no equality in your mind. I have nothing against homosexuals, but why do they feel the need to tell everybody at every opportunity ? It has no bearing other than to gain an advantage. Do we have a heterosexual parade every year ?

      It seems to me that you have the issues, believing that your achievements are DESPITE being who you are, not BECAUSE of who you are. For all we know you are a man anyway, that's the thing about the net, you can be anybody you want. And yet you choose to stand out and argue things that don't matter here. One thing I learned early on in my life was - If you stick your head up, you get it shot off. It doesn't make it right, but complaining about it makes you look stupid. Especially if you have no reason to stick your head up except to deliberately stand out.

      You would fight to be given a task and argue you should be allowed to because you are female. If you fail at that task, you would then blame everybody else saying it was because you are female and it's not your fault. Make your mind up. Start acting as an equal and you'll find you get treated as an equal. This isn't the 19th century any more, you don't have to chain yourself to anything.

      BTW, the holocaust was precisely about genocide. The Jews have been marginalised since history began, because they marginalised themselves. They set up the ghettos, not the rest of the people. Hitler simply decided to get rid of them permanently. And that was largely due to control of money. Jews were originally the only people whose religion allowed them to charge interest on loans. Hence people in business used them yet simultaneously hated them for the simple fact they couldn't do without them. You bang on about history yet you appear to have read only those bits you find offensive to you. Did you realise that the universal right to vote was not even extended to MEN until 1928 ?

      Electoral reform continued through the 19th century and into the 20th century. The Reform Act of 1867 extended the right to vote to 13 adult men out of every 100.

      In 1872, an act was passed that introduced voting by secret ballot, which was an important advance.

      Then there were the Representation of the People Acts of 1884 and 1918. The 1918 act was momentous in that some women at last had the vote after years of fighting by the Suffragettes.

      In 1928, uniform voting rights were granted to all men and women over the age of 21. Some 99 adults out of every 100 could now vote.

      http://bygonederbyshire.co.uk/articles/1800s:_Rioting_over_the_right_to_vote

      So all your bleating about men v women in Nightingales time is more accurately described as rich v poor, and that is what still needs to be addressed, not whether a person wears a skirt.

    52. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      GirlInTraining wrote If she'd been a man presenting this, she'd have made the equivalent of surgeon general in her career.

      Maybe; from the little I know she seemed very capable. But conversely, if she was a man nobody would feel the need to write an article about it.

      Or he'd have been kicked out of the hospital where he worked and later put into an asylum like Ignaz Semmelweis. Oh and forgive the AC, I'm at a public terminal and I've forgotten my password.

    53. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by ErkDemon · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Yeah, there's a classic little book by Darrell Huff called "How To Lie With Statistics", and it credits FN with being a pioneer in the art of the misleading graph. :)

      FN wanted the Crimean statistics to look as horrifying as possible.

      The little Huff book is excellent, and very well known (and inexpensive!), so I think that most people who've read a bit about statistics probably already know the Florence Nightingale story.

    54. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by paradoja · · Score: 1

      Well, to start, what's the percentage of black people in Europe and what's it in the US. By the way, how many women have been president in the US. Compare it with Europe...

    55. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by ErkDemon · · Score: 1
      Florence Nightingale was famous (still is), and got a good career out of it. If she didn't get to be surgeon general ... well, can most people recite the names of surgeon generals from the period without looking them up? FN was bigger than that.

      Florence Nightingale wasn't overlooked, she was regarded as a popular hero of the time, and when I was a kid, she was on the back of the UK Ten Pound Note! If anything, her fame probably unfairly eclipsed that of a number of other people who also deserve to be remembered.

      Mary Seacole, for one.

    56. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      Is it racist to be happy that color is less of an insurmountable barrier than it once was? I'm not seeing how.

      Also, "derogatory racism" is hardly dead, just because we have a black head of state.

    57. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      Grace Hopper was one of the (collective, admittedly) first programmers of an electronic computer, as well as being the inventor of the first compiler.

      Also, feminism is about equality, not about some weird, man-hating agenda. Put away the tinfoil hat, please.

    58. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      Oh noes! Inaccuracy in terminology and assignation that is exactly that often used when talking about male accomplishers-of-things!

      Is it on account of penis-using that we credit Columbus with discovering America? Or is it because we're reducing the thing he did to a sound-bite? I'm guessing the latter.

    59. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Dude, people do know her name.

      She's just famous for the wrong thing: Being a nurse. Like she was the only military nurse ever for some reason.

      When she actually should be famous, as this article points out, for managing to convince the British military (With the rest of the world learning it from them) that disease (was) the largest killer in war.

      She not only used statistics and tried to convince the military, she personally published pamphlets for the British people to read and got them to force the military to take action.

      The military liked to pretend it couldn't do anything about this, but, in one of her most famous graphs, she demonstrated that a good deal more soldiers in barracks in England were dying of disease than the general population. I.e., it wasn't some unique unsolvable problem of soldiers on the move.

      Almost everyone knows that more soldiers used to die of disease than battle, but almost no one knows who first informed us of this.

      OTOH, she probably wasn't the first user of graphs to represent 'statistics', whatever that means. She did seize upon that format, not so much to convince the military, who were used to numbers, but to convince the general population, a good deal of whom couldn't read to any extent and were very innumerate.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    60. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      The arguments of VHS v. Beta are not applicable today even if the debate of blue ray and HDDVD were similar and drew a lot of lessons from it.

      I think I see your problem; History has no value to you. Nothing old does.

      The social mores that exist have more to do with Sexual Dimorphism and gender differences that even baboons exhibit.

      I suppose we should all just give up then and fling poo at each other, because we are only our genes, nothing more. You then go on to implictly state that only dumb girls and dumb men subscribe to this (never mind your choice of pronouns, which is comparing a child to an adult). You're just full of contradictions and you can't even see them; Which is essentially what prejudice is.

      Forget you, you're what I call an educated moron -- someone who's come up with extremely rationalized prejudices that sound great on the surface. I've met people like you -- the fact that you're smart and educated doesn't prevent you from making stupid mistakes like this one. Apparently repeatedly. There's good news for you though -- you've got a lot of company.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    61. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by fumblebruschi · · Score: 1

      Most nurses spent at least part of their time in the kitchen, which was viewed as more important.

      To be fair, at the time it really was more important. The state of surgery and medicine in general at that time was abysmal, and nurses had much more of an effect on soldiers by making their conditions, including the food, sanitary, than by assisting in surgery. To quote historian Barbara Haber:
      "But for most nurses in the North and South their greatest challenge...came from finding ways to prepare nourishing food for wounded soldiers. This work, sometimes performed in defiance of male hospital authorities, saved far more lives than primitive Civil War surgery."

    62. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      Isn't this where the thread comes to an end?

      Clearly not. I thought it was a signal that we're now diving into the shallow end of the pool but it keeps going... :\

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    63. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Space_Nerd · · Score: 1

      Well, 100 or 200 years ago, i'm sure that being a woman in any field meant that they needed to work twice as hard as any other male colleage, since it was not a "womans place" to be doing science, medicine, etc, especially in europe.
      Today, that's not so much the case, the playing field is more or less equal for all sexes, races, etc, but back in that time, just daring to go against the norm and becoming a woman scientist would be an achievement itself.

      Just my 0.02 pesos.

      --
      Everybody has a purpose in life, maybe mine is to lurk in slashdot.
    64. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      Yeah it is. Your discriminating because of his race.

      If another president came along who had white skin, nobody would bat a eye lid.
      But when a black president is elected there is a huge fuss.

      You say its less of a insurmountable barrier now.
      Thats exactly my point - why is there still a barrier at all?

    65. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Actually, it's funny despite it being a sex organ (i.e. necessary for the enjoyment of sex). I say "despite" because being funny kind of depends on it NOT being a sex organ.

      On a side note, I really didn't like seeing the words "corner-cutting" and "vagina" in the same sentence.

    66. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It was about attacking and marginalizing a minority.

      Uh ... what? I'm not even Jewish and I have to say, that's pretty far off base. I suppose you could call attempted genocide "marginalizing a minority". I suppose. Most of us would call the Holocaust by its proper name: mass murder, murder on a Biblical scale. The black population of the United States has been marginalized for a long time (less so in recent decades, perhaps) but we're not packing them into freight cars and shipping them off to be killed en masse.

      And just by way of comparison, Guantanemo Bay is a detention camp and torture facility (maybe not as horrific as those maintained by many other countries, but the same in principle), not a tool of a genocidal totalitarian State. Anyone worthy of being an American citizen is horrified by what our government has done in our name in the pursuit of counter-terrorism, and wishes it would stop.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    67. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Call me when they install gas chambers there.

      AND start shipping every last Arab citizen we can get our hands on there to be gassed. There are no half-measures when it comes to genocide.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    68. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by gregbot9000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It strikes me that we aren't really arguing about the same things. My position is that history has value in lessons learned but the arguments used at the time are not applicable.

      The Suffragettes argued for the right to vote. Arguing for the right to vote today would be an anachronism at best. Your parent post seemed to be arguing against Gender Discrimination using it's loss to society as an example of why Gender Discrimination was bad, a position that's accepted unquestionably in the US.

      My position is that Gender Discrimination is a minor aspect in today society that is shrinking rapidly, therefor the old arguments against Gender Discrimination are marginally relevant to today's society.

      Since we both hold the position that Gender Discrimination is morally wrong the key here is what we should be arguing over, which is A) What exactly is Gender Discrimination, and B) Whether or not Gender Discrimination still exists in any large way.

      I believe Gender Discrimination to be any negative or POSITIVE treatment based on gender by individuals or institutions. I also believe that Gender Discrimination is marginal and shrinking fast, therefore arguments against it are marginally relevant.

      I know all about Qualitative studies of the Wage Gap and Glass Ceiling that show American business to be Sexist pigs, I also know a lot about Quantitative studies of the economics, and woman's differing career goals, that show the results are not clear enough to make a call one way or the other. Females make $.75 for every $1 a male makes, but it is not proof of Gender Discrimination, only different goals and motives.

      I've read the reports and I don't see the Gender Discrimination on the part of the state or society, you can call me a trained monkey but I only go by the facts as presented.

      Another place where we seemed to lose touch is about violating social mores. What I should have said is 'it doesn't mean jack about systematic gender discrimination.' There is widespread discrimination against culture and things that violate the excepted social mores, this is true, but it is not Gender Discrimination, it is run of the mill Discrimination.

      You seem to be of the position that gender differences in GENERAL mean systematic discrimination, Which is a position that has merit but one I do not agree with.

      I believe gender and culture roles that are IMPOSED are discrimination, and that there is a lot of work to be done to end discrimination on that front. I also believe that most gender roles and their norms are a continuation of biology(nature, not nurture) and willingly taken on by individuals, not Patriarchal or cultural repression. I also believe that education is vital to overcoming "our genes" and "poo flinging" urges, but the fact that it is human behavior can not be denied. We've managed to cut back the human urge to murder anyone who looks at you cross-ways, so I think we can move forward.

      That is Liberation in general not Woman's Liberation. Arguing that Florence Nightingale's discrimination because she was a woman was a detriment to society is not relevant today. The lessons learned from it that discriminating against someone because they do not follow traditional norms is a completely different argument and not one you were making.

    69. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by gregbot9000 · · Score: 1

      Today a black President, tomorrow ...

      Pailin! Woo Woo! 2012 Here We Come!

    70. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by paulgrant · · Score: 1

      I'm more interested in the report than the statistical graphics - yay she plotted x vs y and overlayed.
      830 critical analysis of medicinal topics as it relates to military and military campaigns is way more fascinating.
      As to your point about women, their are far more salient examples (say the Nobel prize for crystalizing HIV and analyzing it overlooking
      a significant female co-discoverer and awarding it 3 men, one of whom who's claim was weaker).

      But then you didn't bring that one up, you chose *this* as your example.

      Which is why men rock and women suck :P
      Just kidding.

      Maybe.
      --

      All joking aside, as a fairly analytical person, get over it. The sooner you stop paying attention to gender
      as it relates to academic research the sooner you will concentrate on the quality of your work rather than
      who did it. and maybe *next time*, you'll get the Nobel. once you break the glass ceiling honey, its over.

    71. Re:Mod me down, but you know I'm right by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      There is widespread discrimination against culture and things that violate the excepted social mores, this is true, but it is not Gender Discrimination, it is run of the mill Discrimination.

      Gender = does
      Sex = is

      If people are attacking you because of how you dress or act, that's discrimination. If it's because you're doing so because the style of dress or mannerisms is gendered (ie, man or woman), then it is gender discrimination. Treating someone differently on the basis of their sex is something else entirely.

      also believe that most gender roles and their norms are a continuation of biology(nature, not nurture) and willingly taken on by individuals, not Patriarchal or cultural repression. I also believe that education is vital to overcoming "our genes" and "poo flinging" urges, but the fact that it is human behavior can not be denied.

      Most expressive behavior that would be classified as a gender role or norm have been at various times in our history adopted by both genders. The expression of these things is cyclical -- when our country was founded, men wore wigs and makeup, as one example. The problem isn't gender role, the problem is linking gender roles to sex and saying one is better or worse than the other -- ie, that a female who acts manly instead of womanly = bad, or a male who acts womanly instead of manly = bad. The two are in fact completely unrelated; But until we have social equality, that is is okay for a female to act manly or a male to act womanly, any attempt to separate the two will simply reflect our own prejudices.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  8. anyone been to Tufte's one day seminar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I get a postcard every year, but I've been too busy.

    Thinking about attending though. Any reviews?

  9. The Lady Tasting Tea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...by David Salsburg mentioned Florence Nightingale (jeez, who proofreads Slashdot contributions?):

    ...the real Florence Nightingale was a woman with missions. She was also a self-educated statistician.

            One of Nightingale's missions was to force the British army to maintain field hospitals and supply nursing and medical care to soldiers in the field. To support her position, she plowed through piles of data from the army files. In them, she showed how most of the deaths in the British army during the Crimean War were due to the illnesses contracted outside the field of battle, or that occurred long after action as a result of wounds suffered in battle but left unattended.

    Although I think her most lasting legacy was to lend her name to the daughter of her friends, Florence Nightingale David, who went on to make valuable contributions to combinatorics and statistics.

  10. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  11. Credit? by Jeheto · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nightingale didn't get the credit she deserved, but I don't think that credit is really what matters here. Yes, she did it, but shouldn't we look at the results rather than the person who caused them? I do not know much about Nightingale, but most people who choose to work in the medical field back then did it out of selflessness. You didn't become a doctor because you wanted glory, you became a doctor because you wanted to help people.

  12. Re:"Okay" by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    She used graphs to make a point about the importance of cleanliness. Why is this on /.? And why was it in Science News? Slow week...

    It's just history, which is often fascinating in its own right, and a rather important part of it at that. You (like most of us) take a lot for granted.

    Florence Nightingale's accomplishments are particularly relevant in the context of modern medical science, when you consider how much of that advancement is a direct result of efforts made to improve field medicine. By presenting her case and the facts in such a way as to persuade the powers-that-were in her time to increase that investment, she did all of us a huge favor.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  13. Re:"Okay" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Because she was the first nerd who ever used interesting graphs to impress a PHB. Bonus points that the graphs were scientifically valid and useful.

    She matters for the same reason that people still care about 1-2-3 or the 4004.

  14. Reforming attitudes about sanitation??? by dos4who · · Score: 0, Troll

    ... this, coming from a woman who wholesalely was the greatest single cause of spreading V.D. amongst the troops. True. Look it up.

    --
    "Yes, I have a Disaster Recovery Plan. It's called my Resume"
    1. Re:Reforming attitudes about sanitation??? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      ... this, coming from a woman who wholesalely was the greatest single cause of spreading V.D. amongst the troops. True. Look it up.

      Saavik: iic veni... komi. (He's so... human.)

      Spock: liingeth flamii bufith*, Saavik. (Nobody's perfect, Saavik.)

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Reforming attitudes about sanitation??? by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      A very insightful comment... wrapped in a Star Trek reference in vulcan. I love this place.

    3. Re:Reforming attitudes about sanitation??? by FlyingGuy · · Score: 1

      I presume you have references to support your slanderous remarks other then "Look it up", or are you simply someone who is being a -10 flame baiter or even quite possible just a -10 asshole?

      --
      Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
    4. Re:Reforming attitudes about sanitation??? by MicktheMech · · Score: 1

      For every insightful comment in Vulcan there are one hundred pointless memes in Klingon.

      Now, wait and see how long it will take someone to translate the Natalie Portman meme into Klingon...

    5. Re:Reforming attitudes about sanitation??? by Internalist · · Score: 1

      spreading V.D. amongst the troops

      Seriously? "V.D."?!? The 70s called and they want their terminology back.

      Also, -1 Grammar for (i) superfluous, and (ii) incorrect use of an archaic 2nd person suffix.

      --
      Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing. -- Wernher von Braun
    6. Re:Reforming attitudes about sanitation??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I might've found what he's referring to. She opposed some prostitution regulations (the continental system). From what I gathered, the regulations were being created to register prostitutes, and prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.
      Here's a link to a book page, that mentions it.

      "Prostitution and Victorian Society"

      http://books.google.com/books?id=3wbfmH9L9qoC&pg=PA75&lpg=PA75&dq=florence+nitingale+v.d.&source=web&ots=75gyJb3ELT&sig=v_BPwsl-awlrfVqS3NhmmlEQ_Vw&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result

    7. Re:Reforming attitudes about sanitation??? by psmears · · Score: 1

      Also, -1 Grammar for (i) superfluous, and (ii) incorrect use of an archaic 2nd person suffix.

      Second person suffix? What are you talking about? Much as I dislike "amongst" (and its friend "whilst"), it's neither incorrect nor anything to do with second person suffixes... it's not even a verb :-)

    8. Re:Reforming attitudes about sanitation??? by Internalist · · Score: 1

      Pffft. *sigh*

      You're right, of course. My head was clearly on backwards & upside-down.

      My apologies to the OP.

      --
      Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing. -- Wernher von Braun
  15. And let's just admit it by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

    The Crime War has been just another boondoggle.
    They should concentrate on defeating the Czars, not appointing them.

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  16. Hottie From History by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh yeah!

  17. Re:"Okay" by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    Because she was the first nerd who ever used interesting graphs to impress a PHB. Bonus points that the graphs were scientifically valid and useful.

    She matters for the same reason that people still care about 1-2-3 or the 4004.

    She also matters because a lot of people lived who otherwise wouldn't have.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  18. someone tell the webmaster the reference is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't feel like signing up just to tell them, but their web reference for the image at the bottom of their page should be understandinguncertainty.ORG, not understandinguncertainty.com

  19. somebody find her family FAST! by acedotcom · · Score: 0

    they might be able to sue Microsoft back to the stone age.

    --
    they say it is often more relevant then the comment above, all we know is its called the Sig!
  20. Just a note... by Chmcginn · · Score: 1

    Today a black President, tomorrow ...

    I'm assuming you were going to end that sentence with 'a woman President.'. I just feel the need to point out that, in every way that matters for a leader, there's a much bigger difference genders than between races.

    --
    Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
    1. Re:Just a note... by EveLibertine · · Score: 1

      It's much make point in sentence words not missing.

    2. Re:Just a note... by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      You're saying I could be a male Rosa Parks by refusing to leave a womans sauna??

      --
      bickerdyke
    3. Re:Just a note... by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately for your point, legally and practically there is no way that gender (or race, for that matter) matters in a leader.

    4. Re:Just a note... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately for your point, legally and practically there is no way that gender (or race, for that matter) matters in a leader.

      A. I was not really making a point, just trying to be funny, and

      B. What?

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:Just a note... by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      Commenting on Chmcginn (201645), actually.

      Sorry for the confusion.

    6. Re:Just a note... by Chmcginn · · Score: 1
      Legally speaking, in the US, men of any race had the right to vote in the US for a long time before white women did.

      And practically speaking, minorities have a much better representation (in the federal government, at least) than women. As in, while African-Americans make up 12% of the voting population, they make up just over 7% of the current Congress. Women make up about 51% of the population, but only 16% of the Congress.

      --
      Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
    7. Re:Just a note... by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      Currently, which I think can be assumed from context, there is no difference legally.

      Practically meaning in terms of fitness for office and ability to serve.

      I'm unsure as to how these statistics bear on the second.

  21. Lies, damned lies, and statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The chart is one of the worst I have ever seen: Is the length of the pie segments representative or the surface?

    If it's the length then it's very misleading because the surface increases quadratically.

    If it's the surface it's less misleading but still bloody confusing.

  22. Re:"Okay" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yes, this is /.

    ANYTHING making a point about the importance of cleanliness is welcome.

  23. wow by Garganus · · Score: 1

    You're seriously comparing the historical significance one individual's recognition in her own time or her "social station" to the holocaust, slavery, and the "morons" of the American Revolution. Did I get all that right? Maybe her social strata is still relevant today, but I'm edging toward "bring up the nazis and you immediately lose."

    1. Re:wow by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      You're seriously comparing the historical significance one individual's recognition in her own time or her "social station" to the holocaust, slavery, and the "morons" of the American Revolution. Did I get all that right? Maybe her social strata is still relevant today, but I'm edging toward "bring up the nazis and you immediately lose."

      "So she didn't get to a high station because she was a woman in a society thats over 100 years dead."

      Please don't forget the forest while you're looking at the trees.

       

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    2. Re:wow by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      I think the above poster's argument is that sexism is still an important issue today, and that historical examples of it are thus still relevant.

  24. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  25. Obama is as much white as black by corsec67 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Except calling Obama "black" is inherently racist.

    His mother is white.

    His father is black.

    Shouldn't that make him "half-black" or "half-white"? How about being "Kenyan-European"? Or does the European parts of his mother's heritage need to be broken out, making him "Kenyan-English-Irish-German"?

    How about him just being "American", and only mention his heritage when it is relevant, like when asked where his parents were born.

    --
    If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    1. Re:Obama is as much white as black by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      How about him just being "American", and only mention his heritage when it is relevant, like when asked where his parents were born.

      How about when describing what he looks like, are we allowed to use color adjectives then?

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    2. Re:Obama is as much white as black by corsec67 · · Score: 1

      How about when describing what he looks like, are we allowed to use color adjectives then?

      You can say whatever the fuck you want.

      You would be describing his skin color if you don't use the phrase "African-American".

      Except, if you go by actual color, he isn't black, and I am not white.

      "Brown" to "light brown" is much closer to his skin color.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    3. Re:Obama is as much white as black by grouchomarxist · · Score: 1

      Note that Obama identifies himself as "a black man of mixed heritage".

  26. Polar graphs are often very misleading by the_other_chewey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm just going to comment on the graph itself, without connection to the person:

    Presenting this kind of data - abolute numbers and their breakdown into individual contributors,
    for consecutive, identical intervals of time - in a polar graph as some kind of piechart is a very bad idea.

    Piecharts are good to represent relative parts of a whole, by segmenting a circle. That's it. As soon as a radial
    component is included (as is the case here - it even is the main component), they become at least misleading, and I'd call it useless.

    What does the radial dimension mean? Is it linear (I presume it is - but how can I be sure?)? Are we supposed to interpret
    the sizes of the areas? Note that the exact same radial length leads to a much larger area on the outside of the graph than
    at its center. And we tend to see areas, not lengths. Imagine the order of subnumbers switched: The area of the orange parts
    ("death from battlewounds") would grow considerably, while the blue area ("death from disease") would shrink quite a bit, thereby
    of course reducing the point this graph tries to make. This point is actually a perfectly valid one - but trying to "sex it up"
    with a misleading graph is a bad idea. Also, the segments themselves are unnecessary and don't contribute to the information:
    We know months are roughly the same length each. No information gained here.

    This graph is actually a very good example how not to do it. The unambiguous, easy to interpret graph to use here is a simple histogram.

    1. Re:Polar graphs are often very misleading by bonhomme_de_neige · · Score: 1

      This poster is right on the money. If you click through to TFA (*gasp*), at the bottom they have a link to a flash widget allowing you to switch between (digitally recreated versions of) the Nightingale's Rose graphs, and a simple bar chart showing the same data.

      The bar chart is ridiculously easier to read and still makes the same point about causes of death just as strongly - even more so, because it's actually understandable.

      If only I had mod points.

      --
      "Why are you watching the washing machine?"
      "I love entertainment, as long as it's clean"
    2. Re:Polar graphs are often very misleading by laddiebuck · · Score: 1
      It's good that you feel the need to discuss this graph. It sucks that you didn't bother to read two English sentences that go along with them.

      The Areas of the blue, red, & black wedges are each measured from the centre as the common vertex.

      The blue wedges measured from the centre of the circle represent area for area the deaths from Preventable or Mitigable Zymotic diseases, the red wedges measured from the centre the deaths from wounds, & the black wedges measured from the centre the deaths from all other causes.

      I think it would insult your intelligence (although not your attention span) if I were to comment further on these perfectly lucid sentences.

    3. Re:Polar graphs are often very misleading by the_other_chewey · · Score: 1

      Hm, yes. I admit to have overlooked that part. In most cases, graphs that stack colours are cumulative, so I
      assumed it here as well - and assumed wrong. Also, the proportionality actually is in the areas, not
      the radii. But all this in fact makes my point: This graph cannot be understood without additional information.

      The histogram that is shown as comparison at the bottom of the article is simple and easy to understand without
      further knowledge about projections or areas or common vertices. And still delivers the message perfectly well.

    4. Re:Polar graphs are often very misleading by famebait · · Score: 1

      This graph cannot be understood without additional information.

      No graph can. Today we have many established idioms for graphs that provide that extra information (and that some graphs try to exploit to mislead us).

      Back then all this was fairly new.

      But, yeah, bars have the advantage that they work whether you read them by area or length.
      The disadvantage is that if you have both very small and very large values, they become hard to compare and the small ones will be hard to read. If you vary more than one dimension of each 'blob', you can express a larger range of values in an appreciable way and in in a smaller space. And the scale of the values are easier to compare visually, if you know that area is the key.

      --
      sudo ergo sum
    5. Re:Polar graphs are often very misleading by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      It's important to note she also did bar graphs. One of her most famous graphs, called 'Lines', is a bar graph showing the rate of deaths from disease from civilians vs. soldiers still stationed in English barracks. (Where, despite not being in war conditions at all, and presumably some of the healthiest and most able members of society, the soldiers still died almost twice as much. Yeah, sanitation was that bad.)

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  27. Prior art in the Economist by baomike · · Score: 2, Informative

    It appears they are finaly getting around to last years issues.
    http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10278643
    >

  28. Inventor?!?!? by Secret+Rabbit · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From even the summery:

    """
    Statistics had been presented using graphics only a few times previously
    """

    So, she didn't invent them then, now did she. One of the first, fine. One of the ones to popularise its use, fine. But, invent, hardly.

  29. Leading ultimately to more casualties by kanweg · · Score: 2, Funny

    Proves that good intentions may cause unexpected harm. Here development ultimately lead to Death by Powerpoint casualties.

    Full circle. She couldn't win.

    Bert

  30. From a bio of Nightingale by Lucy Parsons by influenza · · Score: 3, Interesting

    History is full of women who's contributions have been forgotten. Another one is Lucy Parsons. Her and her husband were anarchist labour leaders in Chicago where they helped organize the events known as the Haymarket Riots which gave the rest of the world May Day.

    The Chicago police called her "more dangerous than a thousand rioters" and she was a major influence on labor politics until she died in a house fire in 1942 that also consumed most of her many writings.

    In 1905 she wrote this piece for The Liberator, published October 22:

    FAMOUS WOMEN OF HISTORY: Florence Nightingale

    Amid the general consternation, the minister of war wrote a letter to Miss Nightingale, stating that he considered her the only person in Great Britain capable of bringing order out of confusion, and imploring her to organize and direct the reform of the military hospitals; and this letter was crossed by one from Miss Nightingale, volunteering to place her strength and ability at the service of her nation. Good trained nurses were almost unknown quantities in those days; yet, nothing daunted, Florence Nightingale sailed from England with thirty of the best nurses that she could muster within the week from her letter. In required a good deal of tact to overcome the prejudices and jealousies among the physicians and surgeons at the "womanly prominence" and the conciliate the general disapproval of medical and military officials. For these were the days when it was considered that "the proper place for the woman is at home."

    Overcoming professional jealousy, she set herself to the task of cleansing the Augean hospitals containing over 4,000 patients. These barrack hospitals at Scutari, which had been loaned to the British government by the Sultan of Turkey, were 100 feet above the Bosporus. The day before the arrival of the staff of nurses the wounded from Balaclava had been landed; packed in the overcrowded transports, their wounds had not been dressed for five days, and cholera and fever were reaping their fearful harvest. The poor men outside with cold and starvation were faring far better than the sufferers in the tainted wards of the disordered hospitals.

    -------------

    I got this out of "Lucy Parsons: Freedom, Equality and Solidarity".

    Off the top of my head, some other woman who have been mostly forgotten include Elizabeth Gurley Flynn (a co-founder of the ACLU), Ada Lovelace (perhaps earliest programmer), Hedy Lamarr (co-invented spread spectrum wireless communications years before it was technologically practical to implement, but better known for being a babe). How many people here know the name Rosalind Franklin? All of these women and many more excelled in male dominated fields.

  31. Dr. John Snow by mcubed · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not to take away from Nightingale's achievements, but the most groundbreaking and impactful innovation in graphical representation of disease vectors came from Dr. John Snow, who created a map of SoHo's (London) devastating 1854 cholera outbreak that convincingly made the case that cholera was water born and not the result of miasma. The medical establishment at the time largely dismissed Snow's findings, but the power of the graphical representation convinced the people it needed to in the end and Snow's theories were ultimately vindictated. Unfortunately, Snow didn't live long enough to see his ultimate triumph. Some speculate that his habit of experiementing on himself with ether and chlorophorm may have contributed to his early demise. (Snow was also a pioneering anathesiologist, and even assisted in the birth of Queen Victoria's eight and rather difficult childbirth.) All this is recounted in Steven Johnson's excellent book The Ghost Map (2006). He talks about Nightingale as well, though not about her charts and graphs. Nightingale was, at least through the 1850s a proponent of the eventually discreted miasma theory.

    --
    "No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality;..."
    1. Re:Dr. John Snow by hey! · · Score: 1

      Yes, but Snow's famous map was really an innovative use of an existing technique: mapping. In fact, Snow's map, while effective, is quite crude. Water borne illness of the era is a special case: in most public health applications such a crude map of mortality is not usually so effective, because infection carriers tend to be mobile.

      Nightingale's "Coxcomb" diagram is quite interesting. In effect it is a twelve month bar graph wrapped around in a circle, and scaled by proportional area rather than radius. I don't particularly like the way she applied it to a single year, but it might be an interesting way to aggregate seasonal data across years.

      Maps of instances and time series graphs are, of course, useful. But they simplistic and unreliable. It's not proof of anything that clusters "jump out" at you; not unless you can control for things like population. Again, they're worth doing, but the kind of success Snow had was a special case.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  32. Obama's skin color by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 1

    I find it appalling that Obama is celebrated because of his skin colour.

    If you pay attention, you will notice that it is not Obama that it is celebrated because of his skin color. It is the US society that, with good reason, is celebrated because of Obama's skin color. It is fucking amazing for anyone old enough to remember segregation that the US would elect a mulatto president, and it has forced a lot of people outside the US to readjust our prejudices against Americans.

    1. Re:Obama's skin color by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      They've reinforced my prejudices.
      Not much has changed.

  33. Western nations and black leaders by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 1

    And just for the fun of it, what other developed western nations have elected a black man to the highest office?

    What other developed Western nation has a significant black population?

    I was pretty amazed that the French were willing to elect a East-European as president though.

  34. Please explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, I'm curious now - according to your perception/definition, is there ANY way for a male person to not be sexist?

    As far as I can tell, the reasoning is that if we *don't* acknowledge Nightingale's accomplishments, we'd be fearful little cowards who're worried that their penises might shrink if a woman accomplishes anything, while if we *do* acknowledge Nightingale's accomplishments, we are smug bastards who underhandedly imply that women can't accomplish anything, since otherwise it would be business as usual and not newsworthy.

    Seriously, it's times like these when I'm glad I'm gay...

    (On a little less snarky note, the reason why your reasoning is wrong is that you're not taking into account that Nightingale is not our contemporary. No doubt women achieve lots of things today, and no doubt reporting on these achievements for *no other reason* than "a woman did it" is sexist, but given that Nightingale lived in a genuinely sexist society where women, as a rule, did not get to choose the same careers as men, reporting on her accomplishments and noting that they are all the more noteworthy because she was female is not sexist. Given the times she lived in, it *is* true that they're more noteworthy because of that, and acknowledging the inherent sexism in society back then is not itself sexist. Quite the opposite.)

    (That said, I still am glad I'm gay.)

    1. Re:Please explain by Count+Fenring · · Score: 1

      You're glad you're gay because... then you can ignore half of the population and the problems thereof? Did you stop being human, or something?

      I'm really not getting what you're trying to say there.

  35. well... by argStyopa · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "...an innovator in the use of statistical graphics..."
    Really? I'd have said that she was an innovator in the use of statistical graphics to MISLEAD and 'spin' her data to enhance what she wanted to show (so in that sense, I guess she was in fact ahead of her time, the foremother of all crappy powerpoint presentations).

    Why do I malign such a wonderful woman? Because her presentation is misleading and not so terribly well-presented in terms of either accuracy or simplicity.

    1) while the method of graphing the data is perhaps novel in it's way of advancing over time, it's NOT USEFUL. It's finite - once you've determined the proportion each pie piece is of the circumference, that's it. If your pie pieces are going to each be 30 degrees, you get 12 data points, and that's IT...have a 13th point? Sorry, need to start another roundel (or whatever it's called) subsecting the data in ways that are at least hard to interpret and possibly misleading.
    2) circular (area) presentations of linear data should always make the viewer suspicious, and this is no exception. Circular data emphasizes change in disproportional ways, as recognized and explained perfectly by Tufte. For example if you're showing your information as 'circles of relative size' but your data is implemented as the diameter of those circles, a simple doubling of the diameter actually increases the AREA of the circles (what your eye instinctively recognizes) by FOUR. So if you want to mislead people that a small increase really 'feels' quite a bit larger, circular graphs are the ticket. This is precisely what FN did here. Her goal was to show the HUGE number of 'preventable' deaths, and she did this in two ways: first, she chose the circular-presentation which exaggerates increases by ballooning the area disproportionally to the actual numeric increase. Secondly, she even further stacked the graphs, pushing preventables out to the circumference of the circle, further exaggerating the numbers because they were then stacked ATOP the death data, sneakily increasing the radius (and thus the displayed 'area') even if preventables did NOT increase.

    She obviously had the best of intentions, but let's recognize this 'graph' for what it is: a very clever presentation of highly massaged data to induce an administrator to come to the conclusion desired. It's propaganda, nothing more. Well intentioned, but still propaganda.

    So clearly, she's not simply the mother of the Red Cross, but the ancestor of all modern hatable powerpoint quackery to the present day.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:well... by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      You are incorrect. Her graph is scaled by area, not radius. If anything it understates the problem, as you would have noticed if you'd bothered to play with the chart at the bottom of the article and flipped it to a bar chart. January 1855 had thirty times as many deaths due to disease as battle, and that radius is only about four or five times as much, because it is, as I said, by area.

      And the point is to compare each slice to itself. There's not really any logical reason to compare each month to the next, which renders your objection about 'stacking' rather moot...no one is going to be comparing casulaties from March to February. You didn't even bother to learn what the graph was trying to demonstrate.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  36. Not given due credit? Whu? by ErkDemon · · Score: 1
    Who says she didn't get the credit she deserved? Wikipedia calls her arguably the most famous Victorian after Queen Victoria!

    When I was growing up, the two historic people everyone knew from UK banknotes were Isaac Newton and Florence Nightingale.

    How much more credit would it be possible for one person to get?

    1. Re:Not given due credit? Whu? by Jeheto · · Score: 1

      Hmm... alright, I concede. I suppose I don't know the situation well enough to judge. Thanks for the info.

  37. historical charts by udittmer · · Score: 1

    An interesting article on historical charts -including this one and the one by Minard- was published by the Economist last year: http://www.economist.com/world/europe/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=10278643

  38. Re:well...duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RTFA and this time pay attention.
    There are surely valid critiques of the charts, but you haven't made any.
    This is not an MS Excel pie chart.
    The 30 pieces are based on 12 months of the year, so, yes you need another chart for the next year's data; that's a feature, not a mistake.
    Their _areas_, not their radiuses, are proportional to the data, so no misleading disproportion shown.
    The graphs of the data are _not_ stacked, they are overlapped, so no exaggeration there, either.

  39. This was like the invention of the powerpoint by Sheik+Yerbouti · · Score: 1

    So she had a PHB that needed convincing and invented the Powerpoint. Sorta debatable the value of that. Can't we just get rid of all the little monarchs?

  40. And the way "most folks" act like children?? by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

    Mary Poppins for President!!

    --
    Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  41. Tufte discussion of Nightingale charts by sz1975 · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's an interesting discussion thread on the Ask ET section of the Edward Tufte web site that starts with the Nightingale charts. Note that the thread started in March of 2002. I'm not sure why this is making headlines now.

  42. William Playfair by pfafrich · · Score: 1

    FWIW William Playfair is credited with inventing statistical graphics. Nightingale used playfairs pie chart, but is credited (along with others) with the Polar area diagram.

    --
    There are four sorts of people in the world: fools, lunatics, idiots and morons. - Umberto Eco, Foucaut's pendulum.