Just an ominous note here. It has to do with th property of the semantic web of only
having one schema and several id's for same things and then it is just a matter of how
to partition it again and distribute it to where people need the information and
establishing feedback in the opposite direction. Basically an implemented variation of
what Kingsley has been saying for years.
Waiting for your message.
On September 20, 2019 7:31:36 PM GMT+02:00, "Denny Vrandečić"
Yes, you're touching exactly on the problems I had
I couldn't even figure out what DBpedia is. Thanks, your help will be
very much appreciated.
OK, I will send a link the week after the next, and then we can start
working on it :) I am very much looking forward to it.
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:11 AM Sebastian Hellmann <
Na, I am quite open, albeit impulsive. The
information given was
good and some of my concerns regarding the
involvement of Google were
lifted or relativized. Mainly due to the fact
that there seems to be
sense of awareness.
I am just studying economic principles, which are very powerful. I
have the feeling that free and open stuff just
got a lot more
and I am still struggling with myself whether
this is good or not.
whether DBpedia should become frenemies with
BigTech. Or funny things
many funding agencies try to push for national
most of the time, they suggest to use the GitHub
be an option here.
I have to apologize for the Knowledge Graph Talk thing. I was a bit
grumpy, because I thought I wasted a lot of time on the Talk page
could have been invested in making the article
but now I think, it might have been my own
mistake. So apologies for
lashing out there.
(see comments below)
On 20.09.19 17:53, Denny Vrandečić wrote:
"I don't want to facilitate conspiracy theories, but ..."
"[I am] interested in what is the truth behind the truth"
I am sorry, I truly am, but this *is* the language I know from
theorists. And given that, I cannot imagine that
there is anything I
say that could convince you otherwise. Therefore
there is no real
me in engaging with this conversation on these
terms, I cannot see
would turn constructive.
The answers to many of your questions are public and on the record.
tried to point you to them (thanks), but you
dismiss them as not
So here's a suggestion, which I think might be much more constructive
I have been working on a comparison of DBpedia, Wikidata, and
(and since you've read my thesis, you know
that's a thing I know a
about). Simple evaluation, coverage, correctness,
fancy. But I am torn about publishing it,
because, d'oh, people may
good reasons) dismiss it as being biased. And
truth be told - the
fact that I don't know DBpedia as well as I
know Wikidata and
might indeed have lead to errors, mistakes, and
stuff I missed in the
evaluation. But you know what would help?
My suggestion is that I publish my current draft, and then you and me
together on it, publically, in the open, until we
reach a state we
consider correct enough for publication.
What do you think?
Sure, we are doing statistics at the moment as well. It is a bit hard
define what DBpedia is nowadays as we are
rebranding the remixed
now that we can pick up links and other data from
the Databus. It
even be a real dataset anymore, but glue between
datasets focusing on
speed of integration and ease of quality
improvement. Also still
the concrete Sync Targets for GlobalFactSync (
One question I have is whether Wikidata is effective/efficient or
is effective and where it could use improvement
as a chance for
So yes any time.
P.S.: I am travelling the next week, so I may ask for patience
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 8:11 AM Thad Guidry <thadguidry(a)gmail.com>
> Thank you for sharing your opinions, Sebastian.
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 9:43 AM Sebastian Hellmann <
> hellmann(a)informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
>> Hi Thad,
>> On 20.09.19 15:28, Thad Guidry wrote:
>> With my tech evangelist hat on...
>> Google's philanthropy is nearly boundless when it comes to the
>> of knowledge. Why? Because indeed
it's in their best interest
>> one can prosper without knowledge. They
aggregate knowledge for
>> benefit of mankind, and then make a
profit through advertising ...
>> while making that knowledge extremely
easy to be found for the
>> I am neither pro-Google or anti-Google per se. Maybe skeptical and
>> interested in what is the truth behind the truth. Google is not
>> philanthropy. Wikimedia is or at least I
think they are doing many
>> right. Google is a platform, so primarily
they "aggregate knowledge
>> their benefit" while creating enough
incentives in form of
>> for users to add the user's knowledge
to theirs. It is not about
>> Google offers, but what it takes in
return. 20% of employees time
>> an investment in the skill of the
employee, a Google asset called
>> Capital and also leads to me and Denny
from Google discussing
>> or knowledge (@Denny: no offense, legit
arguments, but no agenda to
>> the stalled discussion there). Except I
don't have 20% time to
>> the view into what I believe would be
neutral, so pushing it
>> resource issue.
>> I found the other replies much more realistic and the perspective
>> unclear. Maybe Mozilla wasn't so much
frenemy with Google and got
>> from the browser market for it. I am also
thinking about Linked
>> Decentralisation is quite weak,
individually. I guess spreading all
>> Wikibases around to super-nodes is
helpful unless it prevents the
>> of a stronger lobby of philanthropists or
competition to BigTech.
>> created some pressure on DBpedia as well
(also opportunities), but
>> fine since we can simply innovate. Others
might not withstand.
>> seems to favor OpenStreetMaps so I am
just asking to which degree
>> Source and Open Data is being
instrumentalised by BigTech.
>> Hence my question, whether it is compromise or be removed. (Note
>> states are also platforms, which measure
value in GDP and make laws
>> roads and take VAT on transactions.
Sometimes, they even don't
>> All the best,
>> Sebastian Hellmann
>> Director of Knowledge Integration and Linked Data Technologies
>> Competence Center
>> at the Institute for Applied Informatics (InfAI) at Leipzig
Wikidata mailing list
All the best,
Director of Knowledge Integration and Linked Data Technologies (KILT)
at the Institute for Applied Informatics (InfAI) at Leipzig
> Executive Director of the DBpedia Association
> Projects: http://dbpedia.org
> Homepage: http://aksw.org/SebastianHellmann
> Research Group: http://aksw.org
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.