Comments on: Reviewing Wolfram|Alpha http://www.researchgoddess.com/2009/05/reviewing-wolframalpha/ Remember where you came from... and always reach back. Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:12:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Ryan Leary http://www.researchgoddess.com/2009/05/reviewing-wolframalpha/comment-page-1/#comment-654 Ryan Leary Fri, 22 May 2009 20:34:09 +0000 http://researchgoddess.wordpress.com/?p=928#comment-654 Ditto to everything you wrote here. The tool itself is very impressive, but the information is not at the right level for our profession. At least not yet. Wolfram from an educational standpoint is the standard and is embedded in nearly all academics. I’m not too sure alpha will make the cut. 30 years in development. Amazing. I can’t hold my attention long enough to write another line. Great stuff and very detailed work here. I posted an interview I had with there BD guy a while back if you are interested:<a href="http://www.cruitertalk.com/?p=816" rel="nofollow"> Computational Knowledge</a> Ditto to everything you wrote here. The tool itself is very impressive, but the information is not at the right level for our profession. At least not yet. Wolfram from an educational standpoint is the standard and is embedded in nearly all academics. I’m not too sure alpha will make the cut. 30 years in development. Amazing. I can’t hold my attention long enough to write another line. Great stuff and very detailed work here.

I posted an interview I had with there BD guy a while back if you are interested: Computational Knowledge

]]> By: Tamia http://www.researchgoddess.com/2009/05/reviewing-wolframalpha/comment-page-1/#comment-653 Tamia Thu, 21 May 2009 14:16:49 +0000 http://researchgoddess.wordpress.com/?p=928#comment-653 Wolfram Alpha is awfully fun to play around with, but I don't think it can truly be regarded as a "search engine" because that's not what it does--I don't think search is its purpose. As far as I can tell, it takes your input, retrieves what it deems to be relevant data, and performs calculations. I like to think of it as "solve" as opposed to "search." Wolfram Alpha is awfully fun to play around with, but I don’t think it can truly be regarded as a “search engine” because that’s not what it does–I don’t think search is its purpose.

As far as I can tell, it takes your input, retrieves what it deems to be relevant data, and performs calculations. I like to think of it as “solve” as opposed to “search.”

]]> By: Daily News About Wikipedia : A few links about Wikipedia - Wednesday, 20 May 2009 06:47 http://www.researchgoddess.com/2009/05/reviewing-wolframalpha/comment-page-1/#comment-652 Daily News About Wikipedia : A few links about Wikipedia - Wednesday, 20 May 2009 06:47 Wed, 20 May 2009 14:16:35 +0000 http://researchgoddess.wordpress.com/?p=928#comment-652 [...] Reviewing Wolfram|Alpha [...] [...] Reviewing Wolfram|Alpha [...]

]]> By: Daniel http://www.researchgoddess.com/2009/05/reviewing-wolframalpha/comment-page-1/#comment-651 Daniel Wed, 20 May 2009 13:44:44 +0000 http://researchgoddess.wordpress.com/?p=928#comment-651 Another complaint I've heard is that some are unsure of how reliable its information is. Where is it coming from? One example I heard was from Newsy, saying, “Data on my search result page indicated that, in 2003, global human activity led to 27 Gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions. But it also indicated that, in 2000, the US produced 40 Gigatons during cement production alone. One of these has got to be wrong, and Alpha gives you absolutely no way of finding out which …” (originally from Ars Technica) Another complaint I’ve heard is that some are unsure of how reliable its information is. Where is it coming from? One example I heard was from Newsy, saying, “Data on my search result page indicated that, in 2003, global human activity led to 27 Gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions. But it also indicated that, in 2000, the US produced 40 Gigatons during cement production alone. One of these has got to be wrong, and Alpha gives you absolutely no way of finding out which …” (originally from Ars Technica)

]]>