On Tue, 15 Feb 2022, 20:42 Martynas Jusevičius, <martynas@atomgraph.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 8:46 PM Chris Mungall <cjmungall@lbl.gov> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 1:34 PM Martynas Jusevičius <
>> martynas@atomgraph.com> wrote:
>>
>>> When most developers only know decades old software development methods
>>> such as object-oriental and procedural programming languages and RDMBSs,
>>> then they use them as hammers and expect everything else to be dumbed down
>>> to become familiar nails.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry that has been your experience, that hasn't been mine, many
>> developers I know are keen (sometimes too keen) to apply new tools and
>> frameworks, but also exhibit a good practical sense of what tool is most
>> appropriate for the task at hand
>>
>>
>>> Imagine if this discussion happened not in the Knowledge Graph but in
>>> the AI community (EasierML?): "In our experience, developers do not like
>>> the machine learning stack (PyTorch, Tensorflow etc.), they vastly prefer
>>> JSON, TSVs, RDBMSs...". Said no one ever, because there would be no ML if
>>> this was the case.
>>>
>>
>> I don't follow the analogy here, I don't think JSON is an alternative to
>> Tensorflow. If anything this exemplifies my point, since modern ML tools
>> embrace the data stacks that developers were already familiar with (e.g
>> pandas) rather than replace them.
>>
>
> My point is that JSON is no more an alternative to Tensorflow than it is
> an alternative to RDF graphs. Both ML and KGs are rather complex
> technologies solving complex problems, with application spaces that are
> larger and/or different from what is usually done with JSON. So this
> EasierRDF debate is comparing apples to oranges from the start.
>
Just an opinion, not a fact.