Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yes, surely a random internet commenter is in a better position to understand what is useful than someone who actually works in ER.


It wasn't a comment on the ER doctor's ability to extract value out of wikipedia. It was a comment on the fact that Wikipedia is the wild west. Far as I can tell, most erroneous edits on popular subjects are quickly caught. But I wonder how vigilant those wikipedia editors are on obscure medical topics that require an expensive medical education to truly understand.

I'd feel better about it if Wikipedia was innovating above and beyond the implementation of a wiki ... even if the solution is still crowdsourced. For example I would love to see the application of machine learning to the process of moderation, not unlike what Stackexchange is working on these days (http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/08/stack-exchange-machine...).

Circling back to the topic at hand, I would actually love it if "Watson" eventually has all of the data currently available in wikipedia. But with each fact cross-checked for validity against everything else he already knows.


You mean like Cyc? Its not an easy project as facts are not as tidy as you might hope http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyc




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: