A long time ago the Encyclopedia Britannica was THE source of information or official high-level summary of human knowledge. I never had a copy of that, $$$, I had the Funk & Wagnalls encyclopedia and only half of the books at that. I did love looking at them reading articles and looking at the pictures. Now Wikipedia and other related web pages are the collective "formal" sets of human knowledge. Of course, I'm talking about general knowledge here. Businesses and people individually have their own specific pieces of knowledge documented in different ways some of which are only in their brains.
I love Wikipedia!! Sometimes I'll get on one article but will start branching out with the embedded links to learn more about related topics. It’s a lot of fun. Wikipedia certainly has brought the masses into providing knowledge to the world. In the past, the Encyclopedia Britannica and other similar books, had only a small set of people (editors/experts) adding to this knowledge of the world. Much debate has/had occurred in terms of the quality/accuracy of Wikipedia vs. Encyclopedia Britannica and the masses vs specific experts. In the end, the community I believe gets it right. The masses/community tends to police itself fairly well providing accurate information. As with any information you hear or read about, in the end, you need to always think about its accuracy.
One key aspect of Wikipedia is the ability to allow so many more people to add to it and thus human knowledge. It’s so much better and in the open, for all to see. As electronic-based information, of course, allows for any topic to be documented as well. This is important as the Encyclopedia Britannica editors had to limit what was allowed in their book due to the physical limits.
Access to Wikipedia information has expanded recently in a Star Trekian way via Amazon Echo Alexa, Google Home, and Siri. These assistants respond to voice questions by commonly regurgitating Wikipedia content in small auditory pieces for people. That has made access to Wikipedia via the web-page less needed because it's readily available through the voice. It’s awesome!
Our product and I'm confident other voice systems Alexa, Siri, Google, Cortana etc. will, and frankly must, allow a great deal of their new information not just from Wikipedia, web etc... but DIRECTLY from people using voice.
Wikipedia is a computer/mechanical-overlord!
It’s much better than Encyclopedia Britannica for adding human knowledge to it but still, you must do the computer-overlords dance in order to put information into it. While infinitely easier than adding to the Encyclopedia Britannica almost no one knows how to add to Wikipedia. That’s sad!
While our product doesn't compete with Amazon Echo (and friends) we want to make the input of information directly to the device using voice is possible. If someone wants to define something e.g "A cat is a small furry animal that is cute”, they can USE THEIR VOICE. This would be true for almost all knowledge including private or public information. Businesses/people may define their own terms or rules that have limited access but they are still done with voice. Wikipedia, because of its architecture limits who can add/edit/create information. That is bad. Voice, through our product or ones like it, using natural language processing will literally allow for adding to the pool of human knowledge.
Why? Because it’s easy, ANYONE CAN DO IT by talking. This system will then be everyone's BRAIN.
Natural language processing rocks. You the BRAIN.