Your pet peeve, technical or otherwise.

[Fixpoint]

Yes, I use, "This data is..." even though I'm fully aware that grammarian and scientist pedants will use, endorse, and cajole the use of, "These data are...".

However, imagine this situation:

1. A scientist collects a large volume of data points into a spreadsheet.
2. At this point is it referred to as "This data is..." or as "These data are..."?
3. The spreadsheet is encrypted using a very secure algorithm.
4. At this point is it referred to as "This data is..." or as "These data are..."?
5. Somewhere in the middle of the file one byte is changed. Now the spreadsheet can't be decrypted.
6. At this point is it referred to as "This data is..." or as "These data are..."? No data points are available, as all the data points were formed into a unitary item.
7. Working backwards, apply the same reasoning to all versions of the spreadsheet.

Using the term, "These data are..." carries an implication that some aspect of the data could be removed, yielding much the same result.

For instance, I poll 1000 people about the use of, "These data are..." compared to "This data is...". The results are collected into a spreadsheet, and sorted by response with the first 500 endorsing "This data is...", and the second 500 endorsing "These data are...". The spreadsheet gets corrupted, losing the second half. A statistical review of the spreadsheet would then reveal that 100% of respondents endorsed, "This data is...".

The point being that the data set is a unitary collection, otherwise one is corrupting the data set. Therefore, "This data is...".

This analogy isn't right. The fact that you can take a whole set of records and view it as a single record has nothing to do with the discussion because then you are talking about a different data set than before -- a data set with only one record.

Put differently: You are using many words just for saying that you can change perspective, i.e. just declare something else to be the data that interest you. Of course you can do that, but it has nothing to do with the grammatical/linguistical question.

[TimFox]

I maintain the distinction between the singular datum (for one element of the set) and the plural data (for the complete set).  If the words were native English, and not Latin, would one say “The datums shows...”?

[Labrat101]

Data is . Just a word that Humans use for the jumble of info.
That we have no idea where exactly where to put it . 
Stick it into a Graph it looks impressive and no one has the courage to say  is it .
A computer will convert it to Binary . 
 etc etc.   
There is insignificant data to complete this task !!

[TimFox]

This all relates to my prime peeve about the evolution of language.
1.  Neologism, e.g., coining the word "transistor" to describe something new, is a sign of progress.
2.  Laziness, e.g., neglecting the difference between "infer" and "imply", is pernicious, since thereafter one cannot choose one of the two words carefully to make a distinction.

[Labrat101]

I have another peeve that always make me laugh .
 Waze GPS . while driving  . A female voice saying .
" Police spotted a  Head " 
I always say to the wife Look out there's a head  on the road . 

[TimFox]

I once knew a rabbit who wanted to get ahead, so he traded his head for a head of lettuce.  However, he ate the head of lettuce, so he really didn't get ahead, did he?

[KL27x]

It's = "it is"

From that direction it seems easy.
But when you actually need the word "its" is where I got hung up when I learned this in school.

"The bear scratched at its paw."

"Its" is a plainly weird word to me to this day. It sounds like a possessive. "It" being the bear.

"The bear scratched the bear's paw."
"The bear scratched it's paw."

5 yr old me found "its" to be strange. I still find it strange.

Its -->  It's

 

I thought of an even better example.

Person 1: How's the kitten you rescued?

Person 2: It's drinking its/it's milk.

If "it" has milk, can "it" not drink "it's" milk, as in the milk that belongs to "it?"

[JohnnyMalaria]

Data is . Just a word that Humans use for the jumble of info.
That we have no idea where exactly where to put it . 
Stick it into a Graph it looks impressive and no one has the courage to say  is it .
A computer will convert it to Binary . 
 etc etc.   
There is insignificant data to complete this task !!

It's only mass ignorance that has led "data" to become a "mass noun". I am pedantic and I am a scientist. But it isn't the combination of the two that leads me to use "data" exclusively as a plural noun and "datum" as the singular. It's because it is the right thing to do scientifically. So, I will correct people in a scientific setting. Outside of that, I just accept people are ignorant and play along.

"Resistor, transistor. Whatever. I'm just a hobbyist so I'll just start using the wrong terms. One day, at least one dictionary will give in."

[eugenenine]

Then there are those who pronounce it data instead of data.

[Non-Abelian]

I maintain the distinction between the singular datum (for one element of the set) and the plural data (for the complete set).  If the words were native English, and not Latin, would one say “The datums shows...”?

Actually, as the old joke goes, the singular of data is anecdote.

[PlainName]

However, imagine this situation:

1. A scientist collects a large volume of data points into a spreadsheet.
2. At this point is it referred to as "This data is..." or as "These data are..."?
3. The spreadsheet is encrypted using a very secure algorithm.
4. At this point is it referred to as "This data is..." or as "These data are..."?
5. Somewhere in the middle of the file one byte is changed. Now the spreadsheet can't be decrypted.
6. At this point is it referred to as "This data is..." or as "These data are..."? No data points are available, as all the data points were formed into a unitary item.
7. Working backwards, apply the same reasoning to all versions of the spreadsheet.

Good examples of relevant questions. I would suggest that data is treated as singular or plural depending on context. If you are talking many individual points, for instance, then 'are' would be appropriate. But if you're talking a bunch of points en bloc then 'is' would make more sense. Which is how mass nouns are normally dealt with: we might catch a fish or land a whole load of fish, for example. The fish is, and the fish are.

[Tomorokoshi]

However, imagine this situation:

1. A scientist collects a large volume of data points into a spreadsheet.
2. At this point is it referred to as "This data is..." or as "These data are..."?
3. The spreadsheet is encrypted using a very secure algorithm.
4. At this point is it referred to as "This data is..." or as "These data are..."?
5. Somewhere in the middle of the file one byte is changed. Now the spreadsheet can't be decrypted.
6. At this point is it referred to as "This data is..." or as "These data are..."? No data points are available, as all the data points were formed into a unitary item.
7. Working backwards, apply the same reasoning to all versions of the spreadsheet.

Good examples of relevant questions. I would suggest that data is treated as singular or plural depending on context. If you are talking many individual points, for instance, then 'are' would be appropriate. But if you're talking a bunch of points en bloc then 'is' would make more sense. Which is how mass nouns are normally dealt with: we might catch a fish or land a whole load of fish, for example. The fish is, and the fish are.

Recently, on a television report regarding Covid, the reporter said something like, "The amount of people with Covid has increased dramatically...", as opposed to, "The number of people with Covid has increased dramatically...".

[PlainName]

Yeah, like confusing fewer with less and similar. I'd forgive a live TV interviewer though - thinking about what they're saying probably comes quite a way down the list of attention grabbers

[Fixpoint]

However, imagine this situation:
[...]

Good examples of relevant questions. I would suggest that data is treated as singular or plural depending on context. If you are talking many individual points, for instance, then 'are' would be appropriate. But if you're talking a bunch of points en bloc then 'is' would make more sense.

Well, you draw the right conclusion from a wrong premise. (See also my earlier reply above).

Tomorokoshi presented a wrong argument that stems from a logical fallacy. I shall present it in a more formal way so that it is clearer.

Let D = {d_1, ... d_n} be the data set we are talking about. Tomorokoshi's argument first talks about the individual d_i's and concludes that it is ok to say "these data are" because there are many of them (items 1 and 2 of the argument). So far, so good.

Then, in item 3, his argument shifts the subject of discussion from the individual d_i's to the set D. D is, of course, distinct from the individual d_i's; this follows from the mathematical definition of sets. Now, the error follows: The argument implies that it is ok to call the individual d_i's "this data is" because there is only exactly one D. That conclusion is wrong.

Because not all people are interested in mathematical arguments, let me use a non-mathematical analogy (but please note that it is only an analogy for illustration): I cannot say "there is 100 apple on this tree" just because there is only one tree. I have to say "there are 100 apples on this tree". Of course, it would be correct to say "there is a tree", it would be wrong to say "there are tree". You see, we just have to be clear what we are talking about: either the individual apples or the tree itself. The rest follows from that.

It's the same with data: Are we talking about D (the data set itself) or the individual records, the d_i's? It's that simple. The rest follows from that decision -- at least logically. Of course, you may choose to think non-logical.

In item 5 and item 6, complete and utter confusion follows. What is stated there has nothing to do whatsoever with the subject matter.

There is no clarity in the argument, everything gets mixed up. The fact that it is wrong is actually not the problem, but it throws multiple smoke grenades, and *that* is a problem. Talking about encryption using "a very secure algorithm", polls and losing half of a spreadsheet has nothing to do with the subject, it only obscures the matter and bedazzles the reader. If the argument had used plain logic instead of talking about spreadsheets, polls, and fancy encryption, everything would have been in plain sight and maybe the error would have not even be made because it would have been so simple to see it.

[DrG]

Dictionary dumfukery.

The word peruse means to examine carefully, to study, to read thoroughly. It was decided (by whom I do not know) that we should have a secondary meaning; to browse, to look over in a cursory manner. Clearly, chronic misuse, no matter how ridiculous, leads to an acceptable new definition.

We then invent a new class of word, a contronym, a word having two meanings that contradict one another. This to legitimize the madness.

Therefore, dumfukery also means brilliance.

[TimFox]

And, as a result, when a careful writer intends one of those meanings and not the other, he cannot  use the single word and is forced to use the whole definition, e.g. “I carefully studied the data sheet”, to make his meaning clear.  Whereafter, we may as well delete the simpler word from our vocabulary.

[eugenenine]

I'm on calls with people from the .uk so I get to hear about dater all the time.

[SilverSolder]

Dictionary dumfukery.

The word peruse means to examine carefully, to study, to read thoroughly. It was decided (by whom I do not know) that we should have a secondary meaning; to browse, to look over in a cursory manner. Clearly, chronic misuse, no matter how ridiculous, leads to an acceptable new definition.

We then invent a new class of word, a contronym, a word having two meanings that contradict one another. This to legitimize the madness.

Therefore, dumfukery also means brilliance.

Doublethink -  embrace it, be happy!

[Ed.Kloonk]

The silly season.

No, really.
 

[DrG]

Holiday Music.

They start in November and by now I am even sick of substituting the lyrics with pornographic versions. I think the Victorian Era folks had the right idea.



Bah Humbug 

[jfitzgerald]

When your computer time zone  is set to UTC, and the web site displays the time with AM and PM.   I am looking at you EEVBlog!

[Nominal Animal]

When your computer time zone  is set to UTC, and the web site displays the time with AM and PM.   I am looking at you EEVBlog!

Hey, it's only a default.  Use Profile > Summary, then Modify Profile > Look and Layout, and pick your preferred Time Format there.

[PlainName]

Nowt like that for me.

[DrG]

Nowt like that for me.

It's there. Modify Profile - pull down menu - Look and Feel Layout

[james_s]

I was reminded of another peeve recently, entry forms that put every country on the planet in alphabetical order instead of guessing my location by my IP address and defaulting to where it thinks I am, or at least letting me type US in a search.