W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > April 2015

Re: Test of Independent Invention: RDF

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 21:11:15 -0400
Message-ID: <CAE1ny+5NW-ER=8pq5-61FHH6MrtC6D9of8gbjmQSNfsCks5_YQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bob DuCharme <bob@snee.com>
Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Not convinced. From my conversations with engineers there like Mischa
Tuffield, I believe the answer is "yes" it could have been done
without the Semantic Web and *the part of the company Experian
bought*, i.e. the honeypot for identity fraud,  the main part of the
business was done out without RDF. Thus, Experian is not maintaining
the RDF infrastructure (at least 4store).

So, I still haven't seen RDF used in any start-ups that have succeeded
yet. I suspect there is probably some ones that *will* succeed in the
healthcare space. However, in general there are major flaws in the
entire Semantic Web concept ("follow your nose" URIs lead to
accidental denial of service attacks, basic CS tells us graphs will
always be slower than hash tables, etc.) that will likely prevent it
from ever occupying the place XML or JSON has IMHO. That being said,
it will likely to continue to be useful in niche markets involving
data merger with dynamic schemas

And as a source of academic papers :)


On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Bob DuCharme <bob@snee.com> wrote:
> I never said that they were purchased "due to RDF." Sampo asked about "a
> company or consortium out there which has made 1-10 million bucks applying
> technology, which couldn't have been without the Semantic Web." Garlik
> applied this technology and made a million bucks, so they were an obvious
> answer to Sampo's question.
>
> Could they have done it without RDF technology? See what their CTO Steve
> Harris said at
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9159168/triple-stores-vs-relational-databases.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> On 4/28/2015 5:51 PM, Harry Halpin wrote:
>
> On Apr 28, 2015 9:59 AM, "Bob DuCharme" <bob@snee.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 4/27/2015 5:08 PM, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
>>>
>>> All of this Semantic Web stuff has existed for a while now. One would
>>> expect that there is a company or consortium out there which has made 1-10
>>> million bucks applying technology, which couldn't have been without the
>>> Semantic Web.
>>
>>
>> If you're looking for a dramatic success story in which one company is
>> 100% about semantic web technology and then makes a million dollars, here's
>> one: http://www.dataversity.net/experian-acquires-garlik-ltd/
>>
>
> Bob, they were not purchased due to RDF. Their triplestore and use of RDF
> was at best support for their main project  They were purchased because they
> would use honeypots to identify identity fraud. It's possible they used RDF
> to help combat identity fraud, but they were not purchased because of RDF.
> That's like saying a social networking company was purchased because they
> were using this thing called a SQL database :)
>
> That being said, there's more investment in RDF than there used to be. Has
> the technology hit a home-run like XML and taken over the industry?
>
> The honest answer is "no, not yet." And XML is rapidly being eroded by JSON
> and Javascript. Who knows what will be next?
>
>    cheers,
>          harry
>
>
>
>> Companies such as TopQuadrant, Franz, and Cambridge Semantics are doing
>> just fine, and more importantly, their customers are doing quite well using
>> this technology. I think the more interesting thing to look at is the number
>> of well-known companies that while not devoting themselves 100% to this
>> technology, are still getting more and more work done with it:
>> http://www.snee.com/bobdc.blog/2014/05/experience-in-sparql-a-plus.html
>>
>> It's been interesting to see different divisions of Bloomberg joining
>> these ranks lately.
>>
>> Bob DuCharme
>> @bobdc
>> snee.com/bobdc.blog
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 29 April 2015 01:11:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:59 UTC