3 ms·
Not quite: if you have no data, you get new hires and news systems to collect and track it. You may be ignorant, but you know it, and can deal with it. Let's c
by ineedasername 5y ago
Not quite: if you have no data, you get new hires and news systems to collect and track it.
You may be ignorant, but you know it, and can deal with it. Let's call is starting from 0.
When you have bad data, you frequently don't know that you have bad data until things go very very wrong. You aren't starting from 0. 0 would be an improvement.
- dredmorbius 5y agoThis seems like extending the "known knowns" concept to an additional dimension, involving truth. In the known-knowns model, you have knowledge and metaknowledge (what you know, what you know you know): K U -- What you know K KK KU U UK UU \ What you know you know If we add truth to that, you end up with a four-dimensional array with dimensions of knowledge, knowledge of knowledge, truth-value, and knowledge-of-truth-value. Rather than four states, there are now 16: TT TF FT FF (Truth & belief of truth) ---- ---- ---- ---- KK | KKTT KKTF KKFT KKFF KU | KUTT KUTF KKFT KKFF UK | UKTT UKTF UKFT UKFF UU | UUTT UUTF UUFT UUFF False information is the FT and FF columns. In both the TF and FT columns, belief of the truth-value of data is incorrect. In both the KU and UU columns, there is a lack of knowledge (e.g., ignorance), either known or unknown. (I'm still thinking through what the implications of this are. Mapping it out helps structure the situation.)
- ineedasername 5y agoReminds me of epistemology, where this is a distinction between certainty and truth.
- dredmorbius 5y agoYes, there's an element of that in this.