"At 7 years old, Gilad Elbaz [now a founder of a growing data mart, Factual] wrote, 'I want to be a rich mathematician and very smart.'" (NYT, Sunday Business, March 25th, 2012)
He now is. I am glad. What's next?
"The world is one big data problem," Mr. Elbaz says. And he wants to solve it.
The world is not a data problem; the problem with this invariably variable world is that there are no facts, there are no constants.
"The elder Mr. Elbaz recalls that when he tried to explain the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to [Gilad], the son replied that the hatred would end if the two sides could just agree on the facts."
Not quite so: the world is not a factual problem but an interpretational problem (not to be confused with data-analysis problem).
[When I proclaim above that the world is an interpretational problem, am I asserting an item of objectivity or a subjective attitude? The fact of this assertion is indisputable as evidenced by this blog yet the subjective veracity of this attitude, while beyond quantification, is only personally real but real nevertheless. My point is this: subjectivity is too objectivity, but unlike President's current body mass, subjectivity can't be quite plugged into statistical models.]
"Lately, [says Elbaz] I've been thinking that we [his company Factual] need to get more personal data... I want to figure out a way to get people to leave their data to science."
A case of Factual Hoarding, anyone?