Vernacular shifts as society and technology change. As evidence, it doesn't seem like you or GP misunderstood the journalist's meaning. This is pedantry.
Applying wrong definitions results in confusion and contradictions.
If "digital" means "by means of communication rather than delivering physical objects", then a digital camera held in your hand is not "digital". (But operating someone else's camera over the Internet would be a "digital camera".) Conversely, receiving music over analog FM radio would be "digital" because the information came from far away.
If "digital" means electronic, then printing a black-and-white QR Code (which is clearly made of discrete squares) onto paper makes that paper image not "digital". DNA with its 4 possible base pairs would not be digital. Doing accounting with pen and paper, involving discrete numbers, would not be digital. Moreover, an electronic computer made of analog capacitors, resistors, transistors, and op-amps - and with a continuous range of input and output values - would be classified as "digital" under this definition. On the other hand, sending 0s and 1s as photons in a fiber-optic cable would not be considered digital as the signal is not electrical or electronic in nature.
If "digital" means high-tech, then inventing an analog computer chip in the year 2026 would be considered more "digital" than conventional digital computer chips invented in the 1970s. (This isn't theoretical; there are researchers working on analog computers for neural networks to save die area and power consumption.)
By misusing definitions for "digital", things that are not digital get misclassified as digital, while things that are digital get misclassified as non-digital.
The only correct definition of digital with respect to information technology is the involvement of numerical digits. Everything else are qualities associated with popular digital systems, but are not fundamental definitions of digital systems.
Pure pedantry. The meaning in context was clear to a reasonable fluent reader such as yourself. Instead of focusing on pedantic form, I suggest focusing on the intent and content of TFA: Is physical media cool again and if so, why.
nayuki|6 months ago
If "digital" means "by means of communication rather than delivering physical objects", then a digital camera held in your hand is not "digital". (But operating someone else's camera over the Internet would be a "digital camera".) Conversely, receiving music over analog FM radio would be "digital" because the information came from far away.
If "digital" means electronic, then printing a black-and-white QR Code (which is clearly made of discrete squares) onto paper makes that paper image not "digital". DNA with its 4 possible base pairs would not be digital. Doing accounting with pen and paper, involving discrete numbers, would not be digital. Moreover, an electronic computer made of analog capacitors, resistors, transistors, and op-amps - and with a continuous range of input and output values - would be classified as "digital" under this definition. On the other hand, sending 0s and 1s as photons in a fiber-optic cable would not be considered digital as the signal is not electrical or electronic in nature.
If "digital" means high-tech, then inventing an analog computer chip in the year 2026 would be considered more "digital" than conventional digital computer chips invented in the 1970s. (This isn't theoretical; there are researchers working on analog computers for neural networks to save die area and power consumption.)
By misusing definitions for "digital", things that are not digital get misclassified as digital, while things that are digital get misclassified as non-digital.
The only correct definition of digital with respect to information technology is the involvement of numerical digits. Everything else are qualities associated with popular digital systems, but are not fundamental definitions of digital systems.
idorosen|6 months ago