I wouldn't have a problem with someone using Wolfram as a source for Mahalo, largely because Wolfram Alpha themselves cite their sources.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/20671413@N02/3546179945/

It seems useful, but for a very narrow form of searching. I could see this tool being built in to a larger search engine, but as a stand-alone site, it's very limited.
Permalink | Report

Wolfram Alpha is a "computational knowledge engine," NOT a search engine. This service was not designed to compete with Google, it's got entirely different applications. There is a facsinating article on Mashable about what exactly it can and can't do.

FTA:

"Here’s an example. If you want to find out detailed info on a planet in the solar system, in Google you’ll get the best results by entering one planet at a time: Earth, Saturn, Jupiter, and so on. In Wolfram Alpha, you can simply put all of them in one query and you’ll get both the data for every individual planet and several comparisons between them. You can go crazy; add stars, moons, nebulae into the mix; as long as the data is comparable, Wolfram Alpha will be able to give you a nice head-to-head comparison of all the entities you’ve fed it."
Source(s):
http://mashable.com/2009/05/19/wolfram-alpha-better-than-google/

Permalink | Report

Certainly it's a valid source but I agree with Tracebooks the query syntax is too rigid and it can be harder to figure out how to ask the question that to find the answer someplace else.
Permalink | Report