The Difference Between "Data" and "Information"
[Reading over my previous blog I noticed that I left two important terms undefined. Today I'm correcting that mistake.]
Imagine a machine capable of receiving all the types of inputs human beings are capable of receiving. The laws of nature determine that the machine can hear, see, feel, and smell. The machine receives data from all the senses and stores it away in its memory. But that’s it. That’s all the machine does. It senses but does not act (because it cannot). Call this machine-D, as in “might-as-well-be-Dead.”
Conceive now a similar machine, with similar capabilities. Nature has determined that this machine, in addition to receiving data, is capable of trying to make sense of the data it receives, and if it feels the need to do so, is able to act on what it learns. Call this one machine-L, as in Living.
Now imagine that both machines receive some data which when properly analyzed tells them that a great rock teeters above their heads and threatens to fall and destroy them. Which machine has the better chance to survive the crash? Of course, machine-L, the one that's free. (All human beings are of this type, some with more power to act than others.)
If machine-L were of a philosophical bent, it might feel itself absolutely free because it would recognize in itself more power to survive than it would notice in machine-D. That mistake is understandable; it’s based on observation. Remove the words “absolutely free” and substitute “free within the limits of the laws of nature,” and you have the truth.
After much analysis of these model machines, we see that machine-L transforms "data" into "information." We can now understand these two words more perfectly, with all that "more perfectly" implies. Data is unbiased. Information is personal.
Data has no meaning. Information has only meaning. But meaning is always personal.
Imagine a machine capable of receiving all the types of inputs human beings are capable of receiving. The laws of nature determine that the machine can hear, see, feel, and smell. The machine receives data from all the senses and stores it away in its memory. But that’s it. That’s all the machine does. It senses but does not act (because it cannot). Call this machine-D, as in “might-as-well-be-Dead.”
Conceive now a similar machine, with similar capabilities. Nature has determined that this machine, in addition to receiving data, is capable of trying to make sense of the data it receives, and if it feels the need to do so, is able to act on what it learns. Call this one machine-L, as in Living.
Now imagine that both machines receive some data which when properly analyzed tells them that a great rock teeters above their heads and threatens to fall and destroy them. Which machine has the better chance to survive the crash? Of course, machine-L, the one that's free. (All human beings are of this type, some with more power to act than others.)
If machine-L were of a philosophical bent, it might feel itself absolutely free because it would recognize in itself more power to survive than it would notice in machine-D. That mistake is understandable; it’s based on observation. Remove the words “absolutely free” and substitute “free within the limits of the laws of nature,” and you have the truth.
After much analysis of these model machines, we see that machine-L transforms "data" into "information." We can now understand these two words more perfectly, with all that "more perfectly" implies. Data is unbiased. Information is personal.
Data has no meaning. Information has only meaning. But meaning is always personal.
posted by Benedict S. at 6:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home