Confidently Incorrect @lemmy.world ChaoticNeutralCzech @feddit.org 3 mo. ago

John Oliver is being pedantic about Venn diagrams...

Source (restricted to non-HBO-Max regions)

Kamala Harris is known to love Venn diagrams and would be cringing hard at this.

For reference, circles in Venn (Euler) diagrams are sets of objects with a certain property. Select objects are shown inside or outside of each circle depending on whether they belong to the set.
A good example is xkcd 2962:
Hard to imagine political rhetoric more microtargeted at me than 'I love Venn diagrams. I really do, I love Venn diagrams. It's just something about those three circles.'

37 comments

Can someone explain what part he's incorrect about? (Since we're in ConfidentlyIncorrect)
- A correct Venn diagram of "KAMA" and "BLA" would have only "A" in the middle, because that is the only part that is present in both.
  
  If we assume it's about letters, then the sets would need to be like
  
  ( KM ( A ) BL )
- The kamabla in the middle suggests that both kama and bla have kamabla in it, since that's what they have in common. But kama doesn't have bla, and bla doesn't have kama. So they should not overlap. Hope that makes sense.
  
  but that what I remember him saying.
- Which part of the tweet did you think was right?
  
  Maybe I should ask OP who it is they're saying is confidently incorrect? I originally thought that they were saying Oliver was incorrect, but your response makes me wonder if they meant the Trump campaign response was incorrect.
  
  Basically, I just want clarification.
  
  I'm not saying either is good use of Venn diagrams (as opposed to the provided xkcd comic). A better "mathematical" way to express the relation is simply "KAMA + BLA = KAMABLA" (yes, the mathematical sign "+" is not used for concatenation in math but you get the point).
  
  The tweet would work if we assume:
  
  Left set A contains words that include "KAMA", notably "KAMA" itself
  
  Right set B contains words that include "BLA", notably "BLA" itself
  
  Their intersection A ∩ B contains words that belong to both sets, notably "KAMABLA".
  
  Is it a technically correct Venn diagram? I'd say it could be, given the above weird assumptions.
  Is a Venn diagram the correct tool for the job? No.
  
  As for JO's example with sea creatures: if we assume
  
  A is a set of dolphins
  
  B is a set of sharks
  
  their intersection is an empty set: A ∩ B = { } because no dolphins are sharks
  
  JO's example might work if
  
  A was a set of properties of dolphins
  
  B was a set of properties of sharks
  
  their intersection includes "lives in the ocean": A ∩ B = {"lives in the ocean", ...} because "lives in the ocean" is both a property of dolphins and a property of sharks
  
  However, this essentially turns around the convention "sets are defined by properties and include objects" to "sets are defined by objects and include their properties", which is in my opinion even more cringey than considering "words containing 'BLA'" a notable set. (From a mathematical standpoint. The entire "Kamabla" thing is pure cringe in the practical sense.)
  
  It's certainly not very useful or informative.
  
  But please explain how it is incorrect.
Guess this is the difference between chart bitches and diagram enjoyers.
- Chart bitches be like: "The y-axis does not start at 0! Misleading!"
  
  Diagram enjoyers be like: "It mathematically cannot because it's a logarithmic scale, which is the only way this data can be reasonably visualized; but I suppose they should have made the y-labels bigger and add minor horizontal gridlines so even people like you notice that."
This guy has a very punchable face and is insufferable. I don't understand how he is so popular.
- It turns out funny news with lots of bias is a winning combination
  
  But he is not funny...
- The funny thing about this statement is that it's something John would say about himself
- The funny thing about this statement is that it's something John would say about himself
If you talk fast enough and are self deprecating its funny.
- He has a live audience so he (and the writing team) knows what's funny, and limits self-deprecation to about twice per episode. The show mostly features more conventional joke material (references to pop culture, defying expectations, reframing events in surprising context).
  
  Its even funnier when you explain it.

You've viewed 37 comments.