Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

685327594 t1_itv9s66 wrote

This looks a whole lot more like noise than signal. Especially with these esoteric languages that probably have very few data points. Not like you just learn one language either. A lot are very similar to each with with just minor syntax changes or features.

69

gizzardgullet t1_itw3k2x wrote

> Not like you just learn one language either.

I work with multiple languages on the list on a daily basis. Coincidentally, they are back to back on the list though.

10

Poincare_Confection t1_itwvkgo wrote

I'm going to start calling people like you "picky eaters". Someone gives you a bowl of ice cream for free and your comment back is "but it doesn't have a cherry on top".

A data set can be useful even if it isn't a comprehensive representative of a situation covering every possible facet. I too often see comments like yours on this subreddit that suggest this data is lacking some key factor and therefore is flawed. You're right that there exists another factor that would help us better understand the situation, but that doesn't mean this data visualization is bad or suboptimal. You have all sorts of limitations when doing data visualizations, like limitations of your data, limitations of time (e.g. making simple 2D visualizations is MUCH faster than doing more sophisticated stuff in d3js), limitations of the READER'S ability to comprehend the visualization, and limitations of the reader's patience.

And you're going to come back and be like "oh, well, I didn't mean it that way. I just think it could be improved" blah blah blah. Nah. Bullshit. This subreddit is overrun by negative nancies coming in just smacking their lips ready to shit on every upvoted thread in this subreddit, when in reality they're perfectly respectable and useful data visualizations. Just a bunch of haters who are so negative and don't give props to the OP, and there's so many of you that comments like yours get upvoted to the top of threads. Fuck that. Ruins the sub imo.

−5

685327594 t1_itww66l wrote

I'm not nitpicking, I'm saying you shouldn't assert or imply a causal relationship exists when the data isn't sufficient to support that relationship in a statistically significant way.

8

lucun t1_ity08i6 wrote

From the graph's OP:

>Also for the language categorization, only the TITLE of the job offer has been analyzed. This means that for example, a title of "Backend developer" would be discarded, since it does not contain any language or stack valid on it. Analyzing only the title also filters out offers that require many languages and are fuzzy.

I get the negative pickiness about this sub, but he's really not being picky. The data is bad, suboptimal, and misleading. Most companies do not list job postings with very specific "language x developer" and sometimes put languages in the job details, so OP's very limited sampling method is a flaw. The last thing we want is a bunch of new CS students hyper focused on learning Solidify for the big money, but only to learn that most companies don't even know about that language or even allow answering technical interview questions with Solidfy.

4

BourgeoisCheese t1_ityg9i9 wrote

Dude, this chart is utter horseshit wtf are you writing a novel about?

1