W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Introducing the Knowledge Graph: things, not strings

From: Barry Norton <barry.norton@ontotext.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 15:06:34 +0100
Message-ID: <4FB505EA.7010903@ontotext.com>
To: public-lod@w3.org
On 16/05/2012 23:55, Bernard Vatant wrote:
>
> Kingsley says they have Freebase, yes but Freebase stores only 22 
> million entities according to their own stats, which makes less than 
> 5% of the overall figure, since Google claims 500 million nodes in the 
> Knowledge Graph, and growing.  So I guess they have also DBpedia and 
> VIAF and Geonames and you name it ... whatever open and structured 
> they can put their hands on. Linked data stuff whatever the format.

Hmmm, don't forget this claim from the same SVP earlier (thanks to Dan 
Brickley for pointing it out privately when the new story hit... via the 
Daily Mail!... a few days ago):

"In 2010, we acquired Freebase, an open-source knowledge graph, and in 
the time since we've grown it from 12 million interconnected entities 
and attributes to over 200 million."
https://plus.google.com/115744399689614835150/posts/3vLRVL7C4QS

I'm not so sure that the Knowledge Graph (tm) (keep out) (trespassers 
will be prosecuted) is so different from Freebase (yes, plus Geonames, etc.)

Barry
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2012 14:07:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:39 UTC