SupportSQL

Forward

Is it a memory, somehow held in an artificial mind? No such thing.  Is it  what has happened. Not at all. It’s not what will happen either. Is it about the the present? Kind of, but no.

 Let’s start with what we use it for. I use data to recall the past. Because I remember, meaning I have this thing called memory, therefore this data becomes classified as history, as a record, recorded, but of what? Seems like what has happened, but it doesn’t show that. After years of yielding data, I haven’t seen much of either the past or future, to some degree the present but not directly from the data.

 We use data to conjure the near future, through memories and records, forecasting, calculating, to guide our basic world of opportunity and consequence, through these bits of data, holding they are real and true, or close. These tiny bits sure seem to carry hints and clues to what is coming. Ask any Wall Street Analyst.

So if they are clues to the future, they must be magic…or I’m wrong…

I too will claim data carries the essence of my ideas of what will happen, generally and to the world in general, but not personally. I base personal opinion far from data’s reach, and leave it to faith or my gut, as most do.

So basically I’m wrong. Data is not magical. Data is wrong with regard to unquestionable fact. But wrong can still be data.

Thank you for joining this discussion on the elusive definition of data. We just got started.

Part I

Data. It exists in this world as do our dreams exists in this world. I am the database administrator for ahem, inc., a multi-acquisition consumer interest public corporation. I’m expected to help realize the value of our data and more so to protect that value through my position as the database administrator. I’m paid as much as VPs layers above me. Everyone seems to like me, and they like what I have, what I bring, through the realization of data and being its administrator. The hard part of my job may seem the actual administration and all the included responsibilities therein. However I must say the difficult endeavor that is my primary focus is more of a moving target; the identification and application of the data I administer, specifically it’s relevant meaning to my coworkers, managers, stockholders, vendors, and not least, customers. Knowing what people need from the data I guard is to me not just more important, rather the very reason the data exists at all. Managing the meaning or purpose of data is the basis for what I do every moment of my work day.

Identifying “meaning” in anything is no small or static concept. Getting to the elusive “top” of data’s conceptual structures in order to protect it, and fulfill my job, I have to start with a simple question:

What is… Data? So let’s define data as a real affect.

We all seem to agree on the definition, the general idea of “data”, but what is it? “Information, tiny bits or pieces of something, about something.” is one description, and yes, data is made up of ever smaller data. Defined by humans at the bottom level are commonly agreed upon letters or numbers, maybe bits and bytes to us geeks. Then those pieces form words, sentences, which then make up ideas and concepts. Data starts tiny and grows, into ever larger constructs called data too. What I’m doing tomorrow is data, like the time the sun rises is data. The latter data (sunrise) is encapsulated and related intrinsically to the former data (my day).

That is an observation about data, not its meaning or definition. Truly, data is what we can agree it is. Our courts process the determination of data most important, as is the law. It takes the court to “call it” when it comes to really putting your finger on something in this world. When resolving disagreement about data arises, we go to a judge. Whether facts are true or false, choosing between innocence and defense, is determined mostly by our ‘agreement’ on the data presented. We can agree easily that an ‘A’ is just that and not any other letter, and we all do agree. Then the letters grow to words and we mostly agree now, with arbitrating Webster as the tie breaker for what must be ambiguity, maybe ignorance. When we can’t agree on the meaning of a word, which doesn’t happen often (or not often enough), we have a source for resolution when needed. Somehow we all get along just fine with words even knowing we don’t all speak them with the exact same meaning. Such is data.

Data moves onwards, into higher realms where the words and actions of those words now convey ideas, concepts. A lot of words go into an idea or a concept, and a lot of data for sure to make it all clear, to convey the details of something complex. Data does it; Convinces, brings belief, resolves society, founds reality, establishes justice, economy, the future we hope for, all tied together through data and its representation of something meaningful. Data will light the way for us, we all (mostly) agree, and that’s good enough for society.

Data has to be the best it can be to help us make “common sense” of the world around us. More than ourselves we trust data, and trust it with the very meaning and purpose of our lives. How we all go about our lives is based upon the data we each have from birth, from parents, from the world around us, from genes, from the One Above.

Say the word “data”. Does its synonym “fact” come to mind? Data seems accepted as a piece of, and also itself as something “true”, “proven”, “witnessed”, “trustworthy”, “judged correct” as we use the term publicly. However, none of those are synonymous to “data”. Worse, they block the clear view of what we hope “data” would bring by allowing us denial over data’s truth, that it does not represent truth at all.

Defining facts is no perfect science, and even science is good with “good enough”, or “close enough” in many cases. Particle physics, quantum mechanics, general relativity, biology and chemistry all have statics, and some have singularities, and all have unanswered questions. These are all agreed upon definitions of what we agree we have yet to define purely. In fact, all science is non-deterministic as every scientific realm depends upon some external unexplained starting point. Non convergence of the main scientific theories confirms that somewhere we are so very wrong, or better said, incorrect even if albeit slightly. Data is data if its close enough for us to live with, and to use for benefit and specifically human benefit. We may agree that data is not truth, but in our world today, if its close enough to look like truth and act like truth, then “data” it is.

Please stay tuned, or subscribe to the rss for the next installment of “What is data?”

and thank you for reading,

Alek Kirstein

References:

American Psychological Association (APA):

datum. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Retrieved October 27, 2008, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/datum

Chicago Manual Style (CMS):

datum. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/datum (accessed: October 27, 2008).

Modern Language Association (MLA):

“datum.” Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 27 Oct. 2008. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/datum>.