Who cares about Wolfram

[Philip Weiss]

Has anyone tried the new overhyped Wolfram (www.wolframalpha.com)? I have been watching the video and I get the feeling that it is too clever for its own good and is getting far too much press. But then again I've been wrong before...

[Hugh Barton-Smith]

This DT article recounts how Wolfram fares against Google across a number of fairly sensible tests, but misses the point that is obvious to me: the two services are different and complementary.
More pertinent perhaps is how the new service will pay its way.

[Philip Weiss]

I am still exploring this wolfram story, although I was (and remain) sceptical. Yesterday in conversation with a client we were discussing the problem of information overload and the fact that the internet made it difficult to find relevance and quality in information. This also reflects the point of view of traditional journalism which has been about providing a 'filter' for information and opinons that could add value. Wolfram offers a potential way to filter and organise information in an intelligent way so the intention is good and makes sense. The practice however is limited as given the apparent lack of incoming data (mostly US, not clear where the data is coming from) results are often lacking. Another post on the subject written on the bbc blog (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2009/05/does_wolfram_work.html) shows that from the persective of different individuals testing the platform on different topics, the outcome is close to useless - or at least a good use of google of wikipedia would generate better more reliable information. So I guess the idea is good, execution is lacking - we probably need to wait for google to create something in that area and assume that they will be better at getting it right.