Slashdot Mirror
Wolfram|Alpha's Surprising Terms of Service
eldavojohn notes that Groklaw is highlighting the unexpected Wolfram|Alpha ToS — unexpected, that is, for those of us accustomed to Google's "just don't use it to break the law, please" terms. Nothing wrong with Wolfram setting any terms they like, of course. Just be aware. "We've seen people comparing Wolfram's Alpha to Google's Search from a technical standpoint but Groklaw outlined the legal differences in a post yesterday. Wolfram|Alpha's terms of use are completely different in that it is not a search engine; it's a computational service. The legalese says that they claim copyright on the each results page and require attribution. So for you academics out there, be careful. Groklaw notes this is interesting considering some of its results quote 2001: A Space Odyssey or Douglas Adams. Claiming copyright on that material may be a bold move. There's more: if you build a service that uses their service or deep-links to it, you may be facilitating your users to break their terms of use, and you may be held liable."
This is a British company (god save the Queen!) - aren't they talking about database rights? If so, I think they're not enforceable outside the EU.
"And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
Of course I can see them wanting to be attributed for calculations? But what's the problem with that? I *want* to see attribution when a blog, newspaper, or scientific report spits out a series of numbers anyway, especially if it involves something else than raw mathematics, like statistics. That's something I see as important as they can just as well demand it in my opinion. I consider it a service to me.
If there's something that annoy me, it's unsourced calculations. If it's attributed to WA, then I can at least use the same query on WA and in turn see what WA used as sources for that specific query (under the "source information" link at the bottom of each page)
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
I'm not sure how revolutionary Wolfram Alpha really is. But, if you've tried it, you'll have discovered that it's not a google alternative - It's not even trying to be. It's a completely different tool. It's kind of fun to tinker with, but I haven't decided yet how useful it will be.
And, just so that I can blatantly violate their TOS (which I've yet to read except for in TFS and I've not agreed to), here are the results for 2+2:
Input:
2+2
Result:
4
Number name:
four
Visual representation:
* * * *
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
I just tried a search for my hometown, Hickman, CA. It came up with a link to Hickman, Kentucky, and suggested I use Hickman Nebraska instead. Who wants Nebraska? Then I saw a link that just said "Hickman." I tried it, and it came up with a demographic breakdown, that didn't quite seem to match any place I've lived. Then I realized it was giving me the demographic breakdown for those with the last name of Hickman. Interesting, but not what I was looking for.
In fact, that's how I would characterize the entire system: interesting, but not what I was looking for.
Finally, I tried Hickman, CA again, and realized it had recognized California, but instead was comparing the location of Hickman Kentucky with California. So I now know how the lowest point in California compares to the lowest point of Hickman Kentucky. Except it didn't actually list the lowest point for Hickman Kentucky.
Then, a search for "Angelina Jolie nude" resulted in Wolfram|Alpha isn't sure what to do with your input. Hmmmmm.
Qxe4
Another cool thing, do a search for any website (here is slashdot for the click impaired). It comes up with an element hierarchy for the page. I'm not sure how useful it is, but it's pretty.
Qxe4
How is it reasonable to ask for attribution for having a computer perform a calculation on someone else's data? Wolfram Alpha has do nothing except code a turing machine, I do not cite HP when I do a calculation on my calculator and I see no reason why more complex but equally wrote calculations should be. I ask the computer a question and it gives an answer, is the question or code used to find the answer the insightful/citable part of the idea?
I typed: airspeed velocity of a swallow
Input Interpretation: estimated average cruising airspeed of an unladen African swallow
Result: there is unfortunately insufficient data to estimate the velocity of an African swallow
(even if you specified which of the 47 species of swallow found in Africa you meant)
(asked of a general swallow (but not answered) in Monty Python's Holy Grail.)
Of course, now I know there are 47 species of swallow in Africa.
I note that Wolfram|Alpha happily deep-links to Google Maps.
This seems to be a fail of Software As A Service. Legal precedent already says that the output of software is owned by the user (so long as the user owns the input). Until we see this tested in court, we can't know for sure if this can be upheld. © Apple Computer (generated this post).
The design of the system is that it intelligently scrapes quantifiable information that can be put into a defined knowledge base structure and inter-related. Length, weight, oribital period, age, population, molecular weight, wavelength, numeric series, calories... values that are measured in units or physical properties of the world around us. By fitting this information into a defined structure the system has the ability to now extrapolate from it to answer questions... hence the words 'computational engine'.
Why build another text search "library index"? It's been done out the ying-yang. This system is orders of magnitude more ambitious and complex and while still in it's infancy, it's a pretty spectacular achievement already IMO. Just allow yourself to think outside of the 'search engine' box. While it contains some facts about the world, it's not a search engine.
Play me online? Well you know that I'll beat you. If I ever meet you I'll "/sbin/shutdown -h now" you. -Weird Al, kinda.
From the terms of service:
If it didn't exist before I asked for it, and my asking for it was the only human action that caused it to come into existence, if there is an "author" for copyright purposes, it's me. The only way Wolfram could, therefore, claim copyright on it is if it was a work for hire, but since I'm not a Wolfram employee acting within the scope of my employment, and since there is no agreement signed by both parties designating it a work for hire, that doesn't work either.
Consequently, I'd say their own terms of service defeat their claim to copyright.
Could you give some examples? Not that I'm doubting you, I'm just curious.
I've been left without access to mathematica licenses on multiple occasions due to misunderstandings between Wolfram and my institution. Because Mathematica was my primary platform at the time, that meant days that I was unable to do or access my work.
The first time that happened, I decided to learn an open platform; the second time, I migrated. In my projects, I now absolutely avoid writing core functionality in Mathematica.
Another complaint: you can't discover how defaults work in some cases. As far as I can tell, setting things to "Automatic" means "proprietary and undescribed." I've asked Wolfram for details in one case, only to get a "we can't tell you" response.
Oh, and being told off for filing bug reports is pretty unimpressive. I separately reported different manifestations of the same bug, separated by some time. I'd actually forgotten about the first report, but if they'd fixed the bug, the situation wouldn't have arisen. When I've submitted a bug report to open source projects, they have usually been along the lines of "this line is wrong, and this seems to be an acceptable fix."
I think the arguments for open, modifiable, redistributable source code (that is guaranteed to retain those properties) are extremely strong. I.e. the GPL, probably v3. Once you know it well, Mathematica is a stunning programming language and library set, but I now don't care: as a whole, the platform has been unreliable for me.