Slashdot Log In
Test Driving the Wolfram Alpha
Posted by
kdawson
on Sun May 10, 2009 09:44 PM
from the know-what-i-know-if-you-know-what-i-mean dept.
from the know-what-i-know-if-you-know-what-i-mean dept.
SilverMind writes in to note a blog entry at Byte Size Biology describing in detail a few hours spent with Wolfram Alpha (which we have discussed before). "After playing around with Wolfram Alpha for a few hours, I can safely say the following: it's different, it's incomplete, it's idiosyncratic, and it's funky cool. And no, it will not dethrone Google, nor does it aim to do so."
Related Stories
[+]
Science: Wolfram Promises Computing That Answers Questions 369 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Computer scientist Stephen Wolfram feels that he has put together at least the initial version of a computer that actually answers factual questions, a la Star Trek's ship computers. His version will be found on their Web-based application, Wolfram Alpha. What does this mean? Well, instead of returning links to pages that may (or may not) contain the answer to your questions, Wolfram will respond with the actual answer. Just imagine typing in 'How many bones are in the human body?' and getting the answer." Right now, though the search entry field is in place, Alpha is not yet generally available -- only "to a few select individuals."
[+]
A Look At the Wolfram Alpha "Search Engine" 216 comments
An anonymous reader points out a ReadWriteWeb piece on an hour-long demo of Wolfram|Alpha (which we discussed at its announcement). Stephen Wolfram does not like to call it a "search engine," preferring instead the term "computational knowledge engine." It will open to the public in May. "The hype around Wolfram|Alpha, the next 'Google killer' from the makers of Mathematica, has been building over the last few weeks. Today, we were lucky enough to attend a one-hour web demo with Stephen Wolfram, and from what we've seen, it definitely looks like it can live up to the hype — though, because it is so different from traditional search engines, it will definitely not be a 'Google killer.' According to Stephen Wolfram, the goal of Alpha is to give everyone access to expert knowledge and the data that a specialist would be able to compute from this information."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Needs a better name (Score:5, Funny)
How the hell am I supposed to "Wolfram Alpha" something? No one will ever say that.
Re:Needs a better name (Score:4, Funny)
A suitable portmanteau may emerge. Wolfa? Walpha? Wralph?
Parent
Re:Needs a better name (Score:5, Insightful)
"Ralph."
E.g., "can you tell me the names of the original members of the Bay City Rollers?" "Ralph it for yourself."
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Surely "Wolf" would be better. Wou could even spell it with a "ph" to emphasise the "alpha" part.
Instead of a googlewhack, you'd get a Lone Wolf. Basically, everything you did on the internet would sound about eight times cooler.
Re:Needs a better name (Score:5, Insightful)
Can you say "Observables for the Analysis of Event Shapes in e+ e- Annihilation and Other Processes" without taking a breath? Mr. Wolfram can :)
Seriously, that is not a general search engine or even engine as we understand today. It is something else. It is the click happy IT media which compares it to Google and I am sure people at Wolfram research either laughs or cries because of it.
Parent
Re:Needs a better name (Score:4, Interesting)
Ah ffs, what the hell do you think a 'general search engine' is ? Google's algorithms are seriously complicated too. I'll pretty much guarantee you Google use, or at very least have experimented with an algorithm which does very very close approximation to 'analysis of event shapes in e+ and e- annihilation' except it was implemented to run in scalable way on finite hardware. Also, quite aside from all that, why the hell wouldn't one compare it to google when people would be using it for the exact same purpose.
Without *actual* AI, their goal is completely impossible and their results will include millions of weird artifacts [or 'bugs' as far as users are concerned], so I predict that even in their chosen sub-domain, people will soon get frustrated and confused and return to Google.
Parent
Re:Needs a better name (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, quite aside from all that, why the hell wouldn't one compare it to google when people would be using it for the exact same purpose.
People might use Wikipedia for the same purpose as Google, that doesn't mean we should compare them. The people who expect every Google search to work in Alpha are wrong. Those who expect genetic, scientific, or mathematical comparisons to work in Google as it is now are equally wrong. Hell, Alpha doesn't even search the internet, it has its own information database.
How are the two comparable again?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Video of Alpha in action (Score:5, Informative)
There is a video called A Sneak Preview of Wolfram|Alpha [youtube.com] on YouTube that seems to have been filmed at a talk Wolfram gave. After watching it I think I have a decent idea of what it's like to use, and just how very different it is from every other search out there. I can't wait to try it.
And to see what happens when you search for "Rick Astley".
I'd also like to see if it can convert things like 1 GB into Libraries of Congress. Google's unit conversion doesn't include the LOC, sadly.
Re:Video of Alpha in action (Score:5, Informative)
Like other singers, it lists his full name, date of birth, place of birth, and a timeline of his life. There are no events on the timeline, and it extends all the way until 2010, so apparently he's at least got one more year to try to top Never Gonna Give You Up.
By the way, here's [youtube.com] a screen capture video of me putting this search into Wolfram Alpha.
Parent
Re:Video of Alpha in action (Score:5, Interesting)
Is there a reason you restricted your screen capture video to certain countries?
Parent
Re:Video of Alpha in action (Score:4, Interesting)
Recently in the New York Times, there is an article about how YouTube is segmenting its reach, because it is expensive to stream their media to developing nations, that fail to return costs back to Yahoo in the form of advertising rates/revenue.
"In Developing Countries, Web Grows Without Profit"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/technology/start-ups/27global.html [nytimes.com]
Parent
CORRECTION: Google owns Youtube, not Yahoo (Score:2, Informative)
doh! (Happy Monday)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Video of Alpha in action (Score:4, Funny)
Use Qalculate!, and define your own units. :)
Oh, and remember to define "B" as byte and "b" as bit, or you might end up with somethingsomething megabarns of memory. ^^
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
How are they going to sell advertisements on this? How is this going to get funded?
Google makes money by selling search keywords and banners with random ads that their software thinks have something to do with the reason why you're viewing a page. I don't see this business model working for Wolfram; not unless a lot of people are interested in graphs and a statistical analysis on which TV set is the best value for money.
I'm not a marketing guy, maybe someone who is can think of something, anything?
The only
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If there are eyes on the page you can sell ads. If they're searching for TVs (your example) show them ads for TV. Show them ads for nearby stores that have offers on TVs. Show them ads for sites that have information about which TV is better and why. Show them ads for DVD rentals that they'll want to use with their new TV.
That's just the example you came up with... there is a lot of scope to advertising.
...but all these things are based on data that a search engine like Google would have, and Wolfram, if I understand it correctly, would not.
Trek (Score:2, Funny)
But does it do the Majel Barrett voice?
On the other hand, that would make looking for porn far too awkward. Nvm.
AI exercise? (Score:5, Informative)
Something that Wolfram might not directly telling you.
Re: (Score:2)
Understanding written sentences [...] Something that Wolfram might not directly telling you.
You forgot to adding word "incorrect".
Who came up with "Google Killer"? (Score:3, Insightful)
I am really getting sick of it. People who has no clue about what they write, adds cheap titles like "Google Killer" to every innovation in search, "iPhone killer" to mobile app/os/device etc.
It doesn't do any good to the service/device/software mentioned. It just guarantees the huge amount of people will be "free astroturfers" for Google/Apple etc. spreading jokes about the product no matter how good it is or how much potential it has.
No, you can't "kill" Google by simply inventing something and I don't believe a scientist run company has such stupid ideas in mind.
finally (Score:5, Interesting)
Ruby does this already... (Score:5, Funny)
Ruby can do this already:
$ echo 'printf("%d\n", (6*9).to_s(13));' | ruby
Parent
No-one makes jokes in base 13 ! (Score:3, Informative)
No-one makes jokes in base 13 !
Re: (Score:2)
forty-two
Which Wolfram Alpha (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Which Wolfram Alpha (Score:5, Funny)
I won't explain any more in case you have not seen the movie, though if you haven't, what are you doing in here? How did you get past security?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
KHHHHHAAAAANNNNNNNNN
Or, if we are going from the new movie.
SPOOOOOCCCCCCKKKKKKKK
Not A Search Engine (Score:5, Informative)
For those of you who aren't gonna RTFA, I would like to reiterate something that is stated in TFA, because it seems, from reading comments on previous articles about Wolfram|Alpha, that people think this is a search engine and is trying to compete with the likes of Google and whatnot. I also get this from a couple articles from various tech sites that I've read who search for... things... on W|A and compare the results to Google and claim that Google is superior. [slashdot.org]
People, W|A is not a search engine in the conventional sense. It is more of a knowledgebase. It is a computational engine. Rather than finding websites that tell you about what you're trying to learn about, W|A gives you the information you're looking for on their site, pulled from a large 20-someodd-year-old database of verified scientific facts that began with Wolfram Mathematica. If the info you're looking for isn't directly present in the database, W|A will compute it for you if it has the necessary data dependencies. W|A is not the same as Google and is not trying to compete with Google, so to those of please stop trying to pass off side-by-side comparisons between W|A and Google as journalism. That's not to say, though, that Google won't try to buy them out or even start up their own academic knowledgebase to compete with Wolfram... and yes, that would be Google entering Wolfram's domain, not the other way around. [/rant]
Anyways, I think W|A looks awesome and I will surely poke around when it launches on May 18 (I think... correct me if I'm wrong please).
Re:Not A Search Engine (Score:5, Funny)
For those of you who aren't gonna RTFA, I would like to...
tl;dr. ;)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They are working to provide a way to do things which people currently attempt to do (in Wolfram's eyes, with less success than they would with W|A) using Google (among other tools). It is, therefore, in any reasonable use of the words "compete" and "trying", trying to compete with Google in some part of the space in which Google is currently used.
What a giant viral marketing campain... (Score:2, Insightful)
...and you all are so completely falling for it.
It's just like with games. It's still half a century or something, until it is available to the general public, but already we get stuffed up to the nose with blablabla (for lack of a better term) about it. ^^
This alone is a reason for me to avoid it, and recommend you to do so too.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
According to wikipedia, its supposed to go public on the 18th. That's a bit more than a week and a lot less than half a century.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Methinks you dont know what a viral marketing campaign is.
A statement like that could break the Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
This alone is a reason for me to avoid it, and recommend you to do so too.
Dude, you forgot to rant about Wolframs ego. C'mon, if you're going to completely ignore the actual merits of the product at hand, at least do it proprely.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because I avoid companies that use crooked methods such as viral marketing -- which is nothing else than lying about who you are, to sneak under the radar of "this is advertisement" -- to get the news out. Why not do it in a normal fashion? Why not really let others test it, instead of paying an employee to act as if he were not affiliated, to trick us?
Sorry, but this is morally unacceptable behavior. Something only crooks and criminals do. Plain and simple.
What's the point? (Score:5, Interesting)
Until I can actual use it, I have exactly zero interest in this thing. Is there really any reason to propagate the marketing drivel?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The article got me interested, but when I wanted to try it out I got this page [wolframalpha.com]. It says "Launching May 2009," so I'll reserve my judgment.
It's not the calculations that make this interesting, it's the breadth of data available. Google is wildly popular because you can find information about nearly every obscure fact imaginable. If Wolfram can do the same with quantitative
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well, at least this reviewer understands what Alpaha is and presents it clearly, unlike the other 2 (or is it more?) stories Slashdot has run on it where the article writers (and most of Slashot readership!) seem to think it's a search engine.
And then, someone will make a mash-up with Google (Score:2, Interesting)
Alpha? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Alpha? (Score:4, Insightful)
When Google get their hands on this, it will be Wolfram Beta Forever.
But things with "Forever" in their name never ship!
Parent
What a bunch of BS (Score:2)
Gosh, it's like a list of words that a marketing company promises its client that it will use. God save me from 25-year-olds with marketing degrees.
True Knowledge (Score:2, Insightful)
Looks like a sophisticated content scraper. (Score:2)
Here's the big problem I see with Wolfram Alpha. I'm not very familiar with it, but from what it looks like, they are assimilating data over the internet and using it in their AI to answer users' questions.
What is the benefit people that create that information to allow Wolfram Alpha to index it? It doesn't look like it will drive traffic or revenue to their sites. If anything it will take away.
I have a feeling Wolfram Alpha crawlers will be blocked by many webmasters.
Update (Score:3, Interesting)