Re: Test of Independent Invention: RDF

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 
> <mailto: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 <http://snee.com/bobdc.blog>
>
>
>