The problem with covering claims of changing paradigms is: who is qualified to evaluate such ambitious claims? Realistically, not many folks.

I think the best thing for a reporter to do is to connect the appropriate experts together to build a balanced story. Yes, spend time with Wolfram, take good notes etc.--but then find the right experts to respond to and evaluate what he said.

To me, this story reads a bit too credulous to be really useful in understanding what Wolfram is claiming. I read Wolfram's blog post already, and this story seems about the same in tone and content.

What I want to see is the equivalant of this [1] article: a cranky review by an expert in the field...with citations.

[1] http://vserver1.cscs.lsa.umich.edu/~crshalizi/reviews/wolfra...