From xod@xxxx.xxxx Mon Aug 16 15:06:04 1999 X-Digest-Num: 213 Message-ID: <44114.213.1140.959273824@eGroups.com> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 18:06:04 -0400 (EDT) From: xod From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" > > At 04:49 PM 8/14/99 -0400, you wrote: > >From: xod > > > >Data: 5 > > > >Information, data in context: "5 is the square root of 25" > > > >Knowledge, info in context: the skill of finding square roots > > > > > > Then {datni} sounds more like information, if you look > > > at its x2 and x3 places. Maybe something using {selci} > > > for data? > > > >One option is to assume that the writers of the gismu list didn't quite > >understand the subtle difference between data and information/facts, and > >that datni really means data. Who is the "authority" on such issues? > > There is no authority, but I was the one who wrote the definition %^) > > Please clarify what "5" which you call "data" IS. I can see it either as > "namcu"/"kanli" > or as datni sinxa, or as "li mu" it can be described by "sumt", since all > sumti are in a sense "data without a bridi context". I will confirm that > my understanding/intent for datni is rather more like what you call > "information". "Knowledge" is Lojban somewhat orthogonal to "information", > being tied to epistemology. And "facts", well Jorge and I have agreed to > disagree %^) Data is mappable to numbers, and all data is easily reducible to numbers. The letters making up a word are data too, and they are often mapped to serieses of numbers. It doesn't really matter which encoding system is used. Information can be represented with data, but there is more to information than data. For the data of a sentence to become information, you (or some machine) has to be able to read the language, thus adding context. "5" is data, but I'm not referring to the symbol/character, so sinxe isn't appropriate. The only relationship between data and facts/information is that facts are represented using data. Of course, I am not using "information" in the information-theory sense! A serious philosophical effort might be able to riddle this poor attempt at an explanation full of holes. The gismu definition reflects either conflation on this issue, or a broad coverage: datni: x1 (du'u) [fact/measurement] is data/information/statistic(s) data and statistic(s) are "data", but information is not. Thus, I suggest that in the context of this jvoste we are creating, "datni" be taken as data, and something else, like "fatci", as information (The problem with datni selci is that, if datni means "facts", then datni selci means the smallest facts possible, because I am assuming that "X selci" must have the same properties as "X". Thus, a cakla selci is a small drop of cakla, and not a quark!) ----- ...about one pound of coal to create, package, store, and move two megabytes of data.