I expected to see a graph, but I'm just getting search results. How did you access it?
Google can be used as a graphic calculator
41–50 of 79 posts
Re: Google can be used as a graphic calculator
#42Re: Google can be used as a graphic calculator
#43Sadly, google's cannot be used to calculate 3D plots, though wolfram's can: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x%5E2%2By%5E2
Re: Google can be used as a graphic calculator
#44Anyone know how to denote 'log base 2'? This: "log (x)" assumes base 10.
Re: Google can be used as a graphic calculator
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know you're on hacker news when the most upvoted comment is a link to a bunch of stuff about paraboloids.
You know you're on hacker news when a repetitious meme gets voted down to oblivion. Oh, wait... Edit: Phew, -2 and dropping. I was worried there for a second.
Re: Google can be used as a graphic calculator
#46Re: Google can be used as a graphic calculator
#47Sadly, google's cannot be used to calculate 3D plots, though wolfram's can: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x%5E2%2By%5E2
Read their TOS: http://www.wolframalpha.com/termsofuse.html, specifically their Attribution and Licensing section.
If you incorporate results from Wolfram Alpha in any work without attribution meeting their standards you will have breached your TOS and they suggest you also will have committed copyright violations and academic plagiarism. If your work is not personal (unshared?) or academic, then they demand you negotiate a license.
Google seems happy to let you know sin(x) is wiggly and send you on your way.
Re: Google can be used as a graphic calculator
#48Re: Google can be used as a graphic calculator
#49Offtopic observation: when Wolframalpha first appeared everyone on sites like Reddit and HN were falling over eachother to explain, in detail, what kind of an arrogant d*ck & loser Stephen Wolfram really is. Ignoring the Wolframalpha product features and going directly for the person behind it and his book and so on. Now seems like everyone loves his product and, subsequently, never mentions the guy behind it anymore…
I believe you are remembering wrong: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=611656 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=607532 Not to say it is uncommon to call Stephen Wolfram egotistic, I swear there was a thread about Wolfram remembering Turing and people counting how many times Wolfram mentioned himself but it may have been killed as I can't find it.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3080470 (Wolfram on Steve Jobs)