Sorry for the negativity Kendall but the semweb didn't return the love that I gave it. I did hundreds of sales calls that went nowhere, but my phone kept ringing for people who wanted me to work on neural nets.
That’s tough. Not sure what that has to do with Stardog. Biggest companies in the world rely on it daily and you say it’s trash. I couldn’t find an email from you using it since 2013. I guess we figured something out. NNs are cool too; at last count we use half a dozen different ones including GNNs… NeSy is hot and I can hardly read a paper these days that doesn’t talk about triples.
(1) I'll grant it was a long time ago. Things could have changed a lot.
(2) It's generic that a new database comes out, gets hyped, but turns out to be "trash" when you try to use it. If a new database was actually good that would be exceptional. (Probably in 2013 it satisfied somebody's requirements but the hype for Stardog in 2013 seemed to be entirely out of line with what I needed for the project I was doing at the time)
I thought Postgres was trash in 2001 and called it CrashGreSlow, now I swear by it. Early on people were making big claims for it that were not substantiated but people did the hard work over a long time to make it great.
I thought mongodb was trash when it came out, then I worked for a place that used it despite the engineers believing it was trash and begging me not to use it for a spike prototype. It never got better. Now it is common knowledge that mongodb is trash.
(3) Maybe it's not fair but I was hurt by the experience, my wife was furious at the balance I'd run up on the HELOC chasing my Moby Dick. As an applications programmer who was accustomed to getting things right I had a terrible opinion of most of the luminaries in the semantic web field at the time many of whom were shipping code that was academic quality at best.
