<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_05_28_146246</id>
	<title>Mozilla Jetpack and the Battle For the Web</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1243526760000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.infoworld.com/" rel="nofollow">snydeq</a> writes <i>"Mozilla Jetpack makes it so easy to filter, modify, and mash up pages that it might end up pitting <a href="http://infoworld.com/d/developer-world/mozilla-jetpack-and-battle-web-022">developers and users against content producers in a battle for the Web</a>, writes Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister. By allowing users to modify the behavior, presentation, and output of Web apps and pages to their liking, <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/05/21/1845245/Mozilla-Jetpack-an-API-For-Standards-Based-Add-Ons?art\_pos=1">Jetpack</a> gives users the ability to 'patch the server, in a sense,' McAllister writes, bringing us one step closer to a more democratic Web. Good news for developers and users; not so good for SaaS providers and media companies that have a vested interest in controlling the function, presentation, and distribution of Web-based content and apps. In other words, as Jetpack produces fruit, expect more producers to call for '<a href="//slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/26/1223224&amp;tid=95">guardrails for the Internet</a>.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>snydeq writes " Mozilla Jetpack makes it so easy to filter , modify , and mash up pages that it might end up pitting developers and users against content producers in a battle for the Web , writes Fatal Exception 's Neil McAllister .
By allowing users to modify the behavior , presentation , and output of Web apps and pages to their liking , Jetpack gives users the ability to 'patch the server , in a sense, ' McAllister writes , bringing us one step closer to a more democratic Web .
Good news for developers and users ; not so good for SaaS providers and media companies that have a vested interest in controlling the function , presentation , and distribution of Web-based content and apps .
In other words , as Jetpack produces fruit , expect more producers to call for 'guardrails for the Internet .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>snydeq writes "Mozilla Jetpack makes it so easy to filter, modify, and mash up pages that it might end up pitting developers and users against content producers in a battle for the Web, writes Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister.
By allowing users to modify the behavior, presentation, and output of Web apps and pages to their liking, Jetpack gives users the ability to 'patch the server, in a sense,' McAllister writes, bringing us one step closer to a more democratic Web.
Good news for developers and users; not so good for SaaS providers and media companies that have a vested interest in controlling the function, presentation, and distribution of Web-based content and apps.
In other words, as Jetpack produces fruit, expect more producers to call for 'guardrails for the Internet.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125655</id>
	<title>I remember that too...</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1243533840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared. complete failure</i></p><p><i>why?</i></p><p>Because it was really badly implemented. It required an unreliable plugin, didn't stay up to date, and had a lousy user interface. Oh, and it had a really weird name that had nothing to do with the product (something like 'don't trust in TV').</p><p>There were a couple of better versions, college projects, that worked a lot better, without the need for browser plugins, and providing a uniform experience for their users... but the product you're referring to got the mindspace... because it was all dotcom-ish and this was in the dotcom boom of the late '90s.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared .
complete failurewhy ? Because it was really badly implemented .
It required an unreliable plugin , did n't stay up to date , and had a lousy user interface .
Oh , and it had a really weird name that had nothing to do with the product ( something like 'do n't trust in TV ' ) .There were a couple of better versions , college projects , that worked a lot better , without the need for browser plugins , and providing a uniform experience for their users... but the product you 're referring to got the mindspace... because it was all dotcom-ish and this was in the dotcom boom of the late '90s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared.
complete failurewhy?Because it was really badly implemented.
It required an unreliable plugin, didn't stay up to date, and had a lousy user interface.
Oh, and it had a really weird name that had nothing to do with the product (something like 'don't trust in TV').There were a couple of better versions, college projects, that worked a lot better, without the need for browser plugins, and providing a uniform experience for their users... but the product you're referring to got the mindspace... because it was all dotcom-ish and this was in the dotcom boom of the late '90s.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126839</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>kungfugleek</author>
	<datestamp>1243537800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's like that guy that buys a house near an airport and then complains the planes are loud. </p></div><p>
I see it as more like the guy that buys a house near an airport, then insulates his house against the noise, then finds the airport's lawyers at his front door demanding that he remove the noise insulation and listen to airplanes whether he wants to or not, due to the "privilege" of living so close to the airport.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like that guy that buys a house near an airport and then complains the planes are loud .
I see it as more like the guy that buys a house near an airport , then insulates his house against the noise , then finds the airport 's lawyers at his front door demanding that he remove the noise insulation and listen to airplanes whether he wants to or not , due to the " privilege " of living so close to the airport .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like that guy that buys a house near an airport and then complains the planes are loud.
I see it as more like the guy that buys a house near an airport, then insulates his house against the noise, then finds the airport's lawyers at his front door demanding that he remove the noise insulation and listen to airplanes whether he wants to or not, due to the "privilege" of living so close to the airport.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125127</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124917</id>
	<title>2010 News Headlines</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243530720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WIPO Calls for Criminalization of Open-source Software.</p><p>Mozilla Jetpack Developers Sent to Federal Prison</p><p>New US Law Makes Receiving Content from Independent Providers Illegal</p><p>Web Surfers Must Use Government-Licensed Web Browsers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WIPO Calls for Criminalization of Open-source Software.Mozilla Jetpack Developers Sent to Federal PrisonNew US Law Makes Receiving Content from Independent Providers IllegalWeb Surfers Must Use Government-Licensed Web Browsers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WIPO Calls for Criminalization of Open-source Software.Mozilla Jetpack Developers Sent to Federal PrisonNew US Law Makes Receiving Content from Independent Providers IllegalWeb Surfers Must Use Government-Licensed Web Browsers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126499</id>
	<title>Re:Arms Race</title>
	<author>ifrag</author>
	<datestamp>1243536780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In theory that might work, however a more fool-proof method is already available.<br> <br>

I think it's more likely content providers will just start packing their entire site into flash.  Stream everything through a flash viewer.  There are already a few sites that are like this, although many still offer a "flash free" version as well.  Enough content goes this route and the options are going to be : 1) disable flash and drastically limit viewable sites or 2) enable flash and deal with it.<br> <br>

Filtering a raw byte-stream for add content will be almost impossible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In theory that might work , however a more fool-proof method is already available .
I think it 's more likely content providers will just start packing their entire site into flash .
Stream everything through a flash viewer .
There are already a few sites that are like this , although many still offer a " flash free " version as well .
Enough content goes this route and the options are going to be : 1 ) disable flash and drastically limit viewable sites or 2 ) enable flash and deal with it .
Filtering a raw byte-stream for add content will be almost impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In theory that might work, however a more fool-proof method is already available.
I think it's more likely content providers will just start packing their entire site into flash.
Stream everything through a flash viewer.
There are already a few sites that are like this, although many still offer a "flash free" version as well.
Enough content goes this route and the options are going to be : 1) disable flash and drastically limit viewable sites or 2) enable flash and deal with it.
Filtering a raw byte-stream for add content will be almost impossible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125501</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1243533240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who've spent their free time running websites that are expensive, using their bandwidth to do so? How is this democratic? A democracy is about having a say in how a country (the web) is run, not having your say over individuals (websites).</i></p><p>So PVRs that skip commercials are undemocratic because the viewer is altering the content before they view it?</p><p>Interesting...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who 've spent their free time running websites that are expensive , using their bandwidth to do so ?
How is this democratic ?
A democracy is about having a say in how a country ( the web ) is run , not having your say over individuals ( websites ) .So PVRs that skip commercials are undemocratic because the viewer is altering the content before they view it ? Interesting.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who've spent their free time running websites that are expensive, using their bandwidth to do so?
How is this democratic?
A democracy is about having a say in how a country (the web) is run, not having your say over individuals (websites).So PVRs that skip commercials are undemocratic because the viewer is altering the content before they view it?Interesting...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125999</id>
	<title>Re:That's why I stopped using a browser</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243535040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't even see the code anymore. All I see is blonde, brunette, redhead...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't even see the code anymore .
All I see is blonde , brunette , redhead.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't even see the code anymore.
All I see is blonde, brunette, redhead...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125523</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>TheModelEskimo</author>
	<datestamp>1243533360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, allowing people to manipulate what they see on their computer screen is a major blow to democracy. We shouldn't innovate or give them new tools if it threatens a profit model that is so easily broken. Protect the profit model so we can stay where we're at. I AM FINE WHERE I AM AT RIGHT NOW thank you. ~</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , allowing people to manipulate what they see on their computer screen is a major blow to democracy .
We should n't innovate or give them new tools if it threatens a profit model that is so easily broken .
Protect the profit model so we can stay where we 're at .
I AM FINE WHERE I AM AT RIGHT NOW thank you .
~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, allowing people to manipulate what they see on their computer screen is a major blow to democracy.
We shouldn't innovate or give them new tools if it threatens a profit model that is so easily broken.
Protect the profit model so we can stay where we're at.
I AM FINE WHERE I AM AT RIGHT NOW thank you.
~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125201</id>
	<title>Re:Already available</title>
	<author>Allicorn</author>
	<datestamp>1243531980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And to a some degree <a href="http://userstyles.org/" title="userstyles.org">Stylish</a> [userstyles.org] too, yeah. Like how I use it to kill of the pointless and ugly tagging system here. Yay for Stylish!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And to a some degree Stylish [ userstyles.org ] too , yeah .
Like how I use it to kill of the pointless and ugly tagging system here .
Yay for Stylish !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And to a some degree Stylish [userstyles.org] too, yeah.
Like how I use it to kill of the pointless and ugly tagging system here.
Yay for Stylish!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125647</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>Shoe Puppet</author>
	<datestamp>1243533780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads.</p></div><p>I doubt there will be more people killing ads via Jetpack than there are people killing ads via tools and addons like Adblock Plus. Unless doing  it with Jetpack is easier, which I doubt is even possible.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads.I doubt there will be more people killing ads via Jetpack than there are people killing ads via tools and addons like Adblock Plus .
Unless doing it with Jetpack is easier , which I doubt is even possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads.I doubt there will be more people killing ads via Jetpack than there are people killing ads via tools and addons like Adblock Plus.
Unless doing  it with Jetpack is easier, which I doubt is even possible.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125127</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1243531740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So?<br>The internet is designed to allow the user to control how they view content. That is what it does. Don't come whining becasue some people chose to work in that medium.</p><p>It's like that guy that buys a house near an airport and then complains the planes are loud. Maybe you should ahve chosen a different medium.</p><p>Just becasue some one writes a book, doesn't man I can rearrange the words in the copy I bought, and just becasue you create a website doesn't mean I can change how I want to view it,</p><p>It's like complaining becasue someone can change the tint on their TV and ruin the  artistic vision of the director.<br>It is democratic becasue it gives the power to the people. More specifically, it's a Direct Democracy where the people make the decisions. In this case, the decision how they wish to view something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So ? The internet is designed to allow the user to control how they view content .
That is what it does .
Do n't come whining becasue some people chose to work in that medium.It 's like that guy that buys a house near an airport and then complains the planes are loud .
Maybe you should ahve chosen a different medium.Just becasue some one writes a book , does n't man I can rearrange the words in the copy I bought , and just becasue you create a website does n't mean I can change how I want to view it,It 's like complaining becasue someone can change the tint on their TV and ruin the artistic vision of the director.It is democratic becasue it gives the power to the people .
More specifically , it 's a Direct Democracy where the people make the decisions .
In this case , the decision how they wish to view something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So?The internet is designed to allow the user to control how they view content.
That is what it does.
Don't come whining becasue some people chose to work in that medium.It's like that guy that buys a house near an airport and then complains the planes are loud.
Maybe you should ahve chosen a different medium.Just becasue some one writes a book, doesn't man I can rearrange the words in the copy I bought, and just becasue you create a website doesn't mean I can change how I want to view it,It's like complaining becasue someone can change the tint on their TV and ruin the  artistic vision of the director.It is democratic becasue it gives the power to the people.
More specifically, it's a Direct Democracy where the people make the decisions.
In this case, the decision how they wish to view something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125103</id>
	<title>Jetpack?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243531680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I said "This is 2009, where the fuck is my jetpack?", that's not what I meant.</p><p>Crappiest. Name. Ever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I said " This is 2009 , where the fuck is my jetpack ?
" , that 's not what I meant.Crappiest .
Name. Ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I said "This is 2009, where the fuck is my jetpack?
", that's not what I meant.Crappiest.
Name. Ever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</id>
	<title>"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>abigsmurf</author>
	<datestamp>1243530900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who've spent their free time running websites that are expensive, using their bandwidth to do so? How is this democratic? A democracy is about having a say in how a country (the web) is run, not having your say over individuals (websites). It's easy to spin it as "giving the user control back from the big bad corporations" but there are scores of good websites producing quality content that do struggle to even cover costs, let alone make a profit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who 've spent their free time running websites that are expensive , using their bandwidth to do so ?
How is this democratic ?
A democracy is about having a say in how a country ( the web ) is run , not having your say over individuals ( websites ) .
It 's easy to spin it as " giving the user control back from the big bad corporations " but there are scores of good websites producing quality content that do struggle to even cover costs , let alone make a profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who've spent their free time running websites that are expensive, using their bandwidth to do so?
How is this democratic?
A democracy is about having a say in how a country (the web) is run, not having your say over individuals (websites).
It's easy to spin it as "giving the user control back from the big bad corporations" but there are scores of good websites producing quality content that do struggle to even cover costs, let alone make a profit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125719</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1243534080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If your ads are annoying enough that people are willing to <b>write code</b> to block them, your business model sucks. Give me tasteful ads, or I'll remove them.</p><p>The real question is, would you rather have me view your page without ads, or not view your page at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If your ads are annoying enough that people are willing to write code to block them , your business model sucks .
Give me tasteful ads , or I 'll remove them.The real question is , would you rather have me view your page without ads , or not view your page at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your ads are annoying enough that people are willing to write code to block them, your business model sucks.
Give me tasteful ads, or I'll remove them.The real question is, would you rather have me view your page without ads, or not view your page at all?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124885</id>
	<title>Already available</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243530600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or am I mistaken. I use greasemonkey to already accomplish this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or am I mistaken .
I use greasemonkey to already accomplish this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or am I mistaken.
I use greasemonkey to already accomplish this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126079</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>Spatial</author>
	<datestamp>1243535340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not like everyone on the planet is going to do it.  Look at Slashdot, a geek-fest where nearly all of the users are at least aware of ad blocking tools.  Yet the site continues to exist.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not like everyone on the planet is going to do it .
Look at Slashdot , a geek-fest where nearly all of the users are at least aware of ad blocking tools .
Yet the site continues to exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not like everyone on the planet is going to do it.
Look at Slashdot, a geek-fest where nearly all of the users are at least aware of ad blocking tools.
Yet the site continues to exist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28128183</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243541640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You need to check out the fundamental idea of how a markup language works.  That's what the "ML" in HTML stands for.  You know that, right?</p><p>Someone serving content on the internet via standard markup never had the ability to enforce how anyone chooses to view or render their content.  Sure, as a developer we strive to make websites look nice and be useful with the most common markup viewers (browsers) but nothing prevents a user from using something different, even something as raw as wget, to see our content.</p><p>Again, content providers on the internet never had a right to enforce a standard consumption of their content.  If you choose to send it to someone, it's out of your hands at that moment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You need to check out the fundamental idea of how a markup language works .
That 's what the " ML " in HTML stands for .
You know that , right ? Someone serving content on the internet via standard markup never had the ability to enforce how anyone chooses to view or render their content .
Sure , as a developer we strive to make websites look nice and be useful with the most common markup viewers ( browsers ) but nothing prevents a user from using something different , even something as raw as wget , to see our content.Again , content providers on the internet never had a right to enforce a standard consumption of their content .
If you choose to send it to someone , it 's out of your hands at that moment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need to check out the fundamental idea of how a markup language works.
That's what the "ML" in HTML stands for.
You know that, right?Someone serving content on the internet via standard markup never had the ability to enforce how anyone chooses to view or render their content.
Sure, as a developer we strive to make websites look nice and be useful with the most common markup viewers (browsers) but nothing prevents a user from using something different, even something as raw as wget, to see our content.Again, content providers on the internet never had a right to enforce a standard consumption of their content.
If you choose to send it to someone, it's out of your hands at that moment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125621</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1243533720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A democracy is about having a say in how a country (the web) is run, not having your say over individuals (websites).</p></div><p>The web server provides you with numerous tools to control how the user receives your content. How they view it after that is not up to you, and never has been.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A democracy is about having a say in how a country ( the web ) is run , not having your say over individuals ( websites ) .The web server provides you with numerous tools to control how the user receives your content .
How they view it after that is not up to you , and never has been .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A democracy is about having a say in how a country (the web) is run, not having your say over individuals (websites).The web server provides you with numerous tools to control how the user receives your content.
How they view it after that is not up to you, and never has been.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915</id>
	<title>Revolution</title>
	<author>trifish</author>
	<datestamp>1243530720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The guy forgot just one important thing: Most people don't use Firefox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The guy forgot just one important thing : Most people do n't use Firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The guy forgot just one important thing: Most people don't use Firefox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132927</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1243518360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it all comes down to rights. Magazines have a right to print ads in their pages if they want. But I have a right to rip out those pages. NPR has a right to advertise their sponsors, but I have a right to turn it off and listen to a podcast instead. And websites have a right to put as many ads as they like on their layout, but I have the right to block them in my browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it all comes down to rights .
Magazines have a right to print ads in their pages if they want .
But I have a right to rip out those pages .
NPR has a right to advertise their sponsors , but I have a right to turn it off and listen to a podcast instead .
And websites have a right to put as many ads as they like on their layout , but I have the right to block them in my browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it all comes down to rights.
Magazines have a right to print ads in their pages if they want.
But I have a right to rip out those pages.
NPR has a right to advertise their sponsors, but I have a right to turn it off and listen to a podcast instead.
And websites have a right to put as many ads as they like on their layout, but I have the right to block them in my browser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126827</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132417</id>
	<title>Arms Race with ALL the bots, not just us</title>
	<author>Sloppy</author>
	<datestamp>1243515600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Let's say you use Flash to make it so that my user-agent can't separate the wheat from the chaff.  You want to deliver raw pixels, rather than text, to my eyes, so that my visual cortex (known for being buggy and subject to subtle manipulation<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-) has to see both the ads and the content and figure out what's what.
</p><p>
Here's your problem: if my user-agent can't make sense of it, then neither can the spiders.  Your website has no referrals from Google.  Your website has no <em>meaning as</em> a website, because it's not one; it's just a pointer to an applet.  Personally, I think it's fine to be in the software business, but don't pretend it has something to do with the web.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's say you use Flash to make it so that my user-agent ca n't separate the wheat from the chaff .
You want to deliver raw pixels , rather than text , to my eyes , so that my visual cortex ( known for being buggy and subject to subtle manipulation ; - ) has to see both the ads and the content and figure out what 's what .
Here 's your problem : if my user-agent ca n't make sense of it , then neither can the spiders .
Your website has no referrals from Google .
Your website has no meaning as a website , because it 's not one ; it 's just a pointer to an applet .
Personally , I think it 's fine to be in the software business , but do n't pretend it has something to do with the web .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Let's say you use Flash to make it so that my user-agent can't separate the wheat from the chaff.
You want to deliver raw pixels, rather than text, to my eyes, so that my visual cortex (known for being buggy and subject to subtle manipulation ;-) has to see both the ads and the content and figure out what's what.
Here's your problem: if my user-agent can't make sense of it, then neither can the spiders.
Your website has no referrals from Google.
Your website has no meaning as a website, because it's not one; it's just a pointer to an applet.
Personally, I think it's fine to be in the software business, but don't pretend it has something to do with the web.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129635</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>LordMyren</author>
	<datestamp>1243502880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People have already voted with their feet &amp; said that they have the right to access the content you send us in whatever form we want.  If your business model revolves around force feeding us bullshit we dont want to see, you've been outvoted.  It sucks that it hurts small indie sites, but its more important that we have 2.0 Voltaire: "I may not agree with how you view your content, but I will defend to the death your right to view as you choose."  And that, brother, is liberty.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People have already voted with their feet &amp; said that they have the right to access the content you send us in whatever form we want .
If your business model revolves around force feeding us bullshit we dont want to see , you 've been outvoted .
It sucks that it hurts small indie sites , but its more important that we have 2.0 Voltaire : " I may not agree with how you view your content , but I will defend to the death your right to view as you choose .
" And that , brother , is liberty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have already voted with their feet &amp; said that they have the right to access the content you send us in whatever form we want.
If your business model revolves around force feeding us bullshit we dont want to see, you've been outvoted.
It sucks that it hurts small indie sites, but its more important that we have 2.0 Voltaire: "I may not agree with how you view your content, but I will defend to the death your right to view as you choose.
"  And that, brother, is liberty.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</id>
	<title>Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243531800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not democratic. It's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads.
I was onboard for trying to make information free. Well, now a large part of the information is and I'm not about to hurt the companies who embraced the "alternative business models" I supported.
I like their services, and would like them to be able to pay for the server.

Keep in mind if people can't pay via their advertising, they'll likely start charging again. Major step backwards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not democratic .
It 's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads .
I was onboard for trying to make information free .
Well , now a large part of the information is and I 'm not about to hurt the companies who embraced the " alternative business models " I supported .
I like their services , and would like them to be able to pay for the server .
Keep in mind if people ca n't pay via their advertising , they 'll likely start charging again .
Major step backwards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not democratic.
It's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads.
I was onboard for trying to make information free.
Well, now a large part of the information is and I'm not about to hurt the companies who embraced the "alternative business models" I supported.
I like their services, and would like them to be able to pay for the server.
Keep in mind if people can't pay via their advertising, they'll likely start charging again.
Major step backwards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125945</id>
	<title>Re:failure to read what the average webuser wants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243534800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dude, how low IS that budget for your horror film?  You've been "making" it for... what, the last four years?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , how low IS that budget for your horror film ?
You 've been " making " it for... what , the last four years ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, how low IS that budget for your horror film?
You've been "making" it for... what, the last four years?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125727</id>
	<title>Don't like open standards?</title>
	<author>MikeUW</author>
	<datestamp>1243534080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then don't use them.  Seriously, if producers don't like people utilizing open standards to integrate and mashup products delivered using HTML/XML/JavaScript/etc., then don't use those standards.  Junk all your wares into a DRM-laden flash applet, sit back and relax - and leave the rest of us to range freely on the other side of the guard rails.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then do n't use them .
Seriously , if producers do n't like people utilizing open standards to integrate and mashup products delivered using HTML/XML/JavaScript/etc. , then do n't use those standards .
Junk all your wares into a DRM-laden flash applet , sit back and relax - and leave the rest of us to range freely on the other side of the guard rails .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then don't use them.
Seriously, if producers don't like people utilizing open standards to integrate and mashup products delivered using HTML/XML/JavaScript/etc., then don't use those standards.
Junk all your wares into a DRM-laden flash applet, sit back and relax - and leave the rest of us to range freely on the other side of the guard rails.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126779</id>
	<title>Re:Ad blocking is stealing</title>
	<author>petgiraffe</author>
	<datestamp>1243537680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right.
<br>
Just like not watching TV commercials.
<br>
Going to the bathroom is stealing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right .
Just like not watching TV commercials .
Going to the bathroom is stealing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right.
Just like not watching TV commercials.
Going to the bathroom is stealing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125499</id>
	<title>Re:Revolution</title>
	<author>just\_another\_sean</author>
	<datestamp>1243533240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, just like with Linux if this *Revolution* allows me to do more, be more flexible, generally control how my experience works then it will be a success. As far as I'm concerned the minute an open source app makes the author(s) and even one other person more productive or happy is a success.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , just like with Linux if this * Revolution * allows me to do more , be more flexible , generally control how my experience works then it will be a success .
As far as I 'm concerned the minute an open source app makes the author ( s ) and even one other person more productive or happy is a success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, just like with Linux if this *Revolution* allows me to do more, be more flexible, generally control how my experience works then it will be a success.
As far as I'm concerned the minute an open source app makes the author(s) and even one other person more productive or happy is a success.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126665</id>
	<title>Re:Revolution</title>
	<author>ObsessiveMathsFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1243537260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And let's not forget the fact that those who do <a href="http://blog.blacknight.com/fi.html" title="blacknight.com">won't be able to add most encrypted pages</a> [blacknight.com] on the web to their jetpack mashups.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And let 's not forget the fact that those who do wo n't be able to add most encrypted pages [ blacknight.com ] on the web to their jetpack mashups .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And let's not forget the fact that those who do won't be able to add most encrypted pages [blacknight.com] on the web to their jetpack mashups.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129919</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>civilizedINTENSITY</author>
	<datestamp>1243504140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No one is saying I should have the right to deface your website.  Rather, what you serve is up to you. However, once I receive that content and I am displaying it locally, I have the right to tweak the suggestions your server are supplying my browser.  Furthermore, I have the right to distribute my tweaks, since they don't effect what your server transmits (just what a friend's browser does with what you transmit <b>after its recieved and being displayed locally</b>).</htmltext>
<tokenext>No one is saying I should have the right to deface your website .
Rather , what you serve is up to you .
However , once I receive that content and I am displaying it locally , I have the right to tweak the suggestions your server are supplying my browser .
Furthermore , I have the right to distribute my tweaks , since they do n't effect what your server transmits ( just what a friend 's browser does with what you transmit after its recieved and being displayed locally ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one is saying I should have the right to deface your website.
Rather, what you serve is up to you.
However, once I receive that content and I am displaying it locally, I have the right to tweak the suggestions your server are supplying my browser.
Furthermore, I have the right to distribute my tweaks, since they don't effect what your server transmits (just what a friend's browser does with what you transmit after its recieved and being displayed locally).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125511</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>JesseMcDonald</author>
	<datestamp>1243533300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you really wanted to support someone it would be far more effective to cut out the middlemen and just send them a check.</p><p>Pay-via-advertising is unreliable at best, annoyingly disruptive to readers, and has a tendency to alienate those who would otherwise support you. It only exists due to the lack of an economical micro-payment system. Direct-charge with automatic negotiation would be far superior, but the overhead of handling many small payments is just too high--for now. The incredible degree of regulatory interference regarding anything to do with finances is a big part of the problem; everyone who comes close to implementing a viable electronic cash-equivalent gets charged with "money laundering", or some other such catch-all offense--never mind that ordinary cash can be used the same way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you really wanted to support someone it would be far more effective to cut out the middlemen and just send them a check.Pay-via-advertising is unreliable at best , annoyingly disruptive to readers , and has a tendency to alienate those who would otherwise support you .
It only exists due to the lack of an economical micro-payment system .
Direct-charge with automatic negotiation would be far superior , but the overhead of handling many small payments is just too high--for now .
The incredible degree of regulatory interference regarding anything to do with finances is a big part of the problem ; everyone who comes close to implementing a viable electronic cash-equivalent gets charged with " money laundering " , or some other such catch-all offense--never mind that ordinary cash can be used the same way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you really wanted to support someone it would be far more effective to cut out the middlemen and just send them a check.Pay-via-advertising is unreliable at best, annoyingly disruptive to readers, and has a tendency to alienate those who would otherwise support you.
It only exists due to the lack of an economical micro-payment system.
Direct-charge with automatic negotiation would be far superior, but the overhead of handling many small payments is just too high--for now.
The incredible degree of regulatory interference regarding anything to do with finances is a big part of the problem; everyone who comes close to implementing a viable electronic cash-equivalent gets charged with "money laundering", or some other such catch-all offense--never mind that ordinary cash can be used the same way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125139</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243531740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Boo.  Fucking.  Hoo.</p><p>Content producers need to get over the idea that they have the right to control what users view or how they view it.</p><p>Visually impaired users that have text pages read to them won't likely be exposed to ads.</p><p>Users that are aurally-impaired won't hear their annoying flash ads with some person talking about how they can save on a mortgage.</p><p>The web was not created as some vehicle for guaranteed commercial enterprise.</p><p>If their broken business model depends on shoving undesirable content down the throats of web users to sustain themselves, they deserve to go out of business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Boo .
Fucking. Hoo.Content producers need to get over the idea that they have the right to control what users view or how they view it.Visually impaired users that have text pages read to them wo n't likely be exposed to ads.Users that are aurally-impaired wo n't hear their annoying flash ads with some person talking about how they can save on a mortgage.The web was not created as some vehicle for guaranteed commercial enterprise.If their broken business model depends on shoving undesirable content down the throats of web users to sustain themselves , they deserve to go out of business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Boo.
Fucking.  Hoo.Content producers need to get over the idea that they have the right to control what users view or how they view it.Visually impaired users that have text pages read to them won't likely be exposed to ads.Users that are aurally-impaired won't hear their annoying flash ads with some person talking about how they can save on a mortgage.The web was not created as some vehicle for guaranteed commercial enterprise.If their broken business model depends on shoving undesirable content down the throats of web users to sustain themselves, they deserve to go out of business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125301</id>
	<title>Re:Already available</title>
	<author>dblackshell</author>
	<datestamp>1243532400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>this addon (project) is redundant.
<br> <br>
It's like the other one in which they want to incorporate command line in Firefox, instead of having it as a addon under the name of Ubiquity.
<br> <br>
With Jetpack they want to replace Greasemonkey and also make easier addon development...
<br> <br>
I say to you, it's wasted time... Improve Gecko, XulRunner, but not this...</htmltext>
<tokenext>this addon ( project ) is redundant .
It 's like the other one in which they want to incorporate command line in Firefox , instead of having it as a addon under the name of Ubiquity .
With Jetpack they want to replace Greasemonkey and also make easier addon development.. . I say to you , it 's wasted time... Improve Gecko , XulRunner , but not this.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this addon (project) is redundant.
It's like the other one in which they want to incorporate command line in Firefox, instead of having it as a addon under the name of Ubiquity.
With Jetpack they want to replace Greasemonkey and also make easier addon development...
 
I say to you, it's wasted time... Improve Gecko, XulRunner, but not this...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124883</id>
	<title>FIST SPORT</title>
	<author>ringbarer</author>
	<datestamp>1243530600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, yeah, more extend-the-browser bullshit.  When all people want is a lightweight app that JUST VIEWS FUCKING WEB PAGES.</p><p>It's not hard, really, but the Mozilla team are aroused by the thought of repeating the same mistakes Netscape made.  But let's throw in some fightin' plugins while we're at it.</p><p>Chrome beats them all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , yeah , more extend-the-browser bullshit .
When all people want is a lightweight app that JUST VIEWS FUCKING WEB PAGES.It 's not hard , really , but the Mozilla team are aroused by the thought of repeating the same mistakes Netscape made .
But let 's throw in some fightin ' plugins while we 're at it.Chrome beats them all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, yeah, more extend-the-browser bullshit.
When all people want is a lightweight app that JUST VIEWS FUCKING WEB PAGES.It's not hard, really, but the Mozilla team are aroused by the thought of repeating the same mistakes Netscape made.
But let's throw in some fightin' plugins while we're at it.Chrome beats them all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126635</id>
	<title>Re:Ad blocking is stealing</title>
	<author>rel4x</author>
	<datestamp>1243537140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thank you!

Plus there's still fledgling services(like Hulu) which rely on contracts that require advertising, and cannot be easily replaced. These are services that I personally want to see succeed so other places follow their model.

I can't believe people are really arrogant enough to think it's ok to deny even the smallest benefit to someone giving them something for free, even if it costs them nothing. It's a slap in the face.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you !
Plus there 's still fledgling services ( like Hulu ) which rely on contracts that require advertising , and can not be easily replaced .
These are services that I personally want to see succeed so other places follow their model .
I ca n't believe people are really arrogant enough to think it 's ok to deny even the smallest benefit to someone giving them something for free , even if it costs them nothing .
It 's a slap in the face .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you!
Plus there's still fledgling services(like Hulu) which rely on contracts that require advertising, and cannot be easily replaced.
These are services that I personally want to see succeed so other places follow their model.
I can't believe people are really arrogant enough to think it's ok to deny even the smallest benefit to someone giving them something for free, even if it costs them nothing.
It's a slap in the face.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125641</id>
	<title>Arms Race</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243533780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They will start serving up ads off their own sites rather than third party sites to defeat your ad blocker. They will come in plain HTML and JPGs and be indistinguishable from normal content. They will revise code so that you can't get the content without getting the ads too.</p><p>They will keep fighting you and your attempts to block their revenue stream, because they have to. And they will fight you on your own turf, with clever code, not legislation.</p><p>And they will win. Because they have to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They will start serving up ads off their own sites rather than third party sites to defeat your ad blocker .
They will come in plain HTML and JPGs and be indistinguishable from normal content .
They will revise code so that you ca n't get the content without getting the ads too.They will keep fighting you and your attempts to block their revenue stream , because they have to .
And they will fight you on your own turf , with clever code , not legislation.And they will win .
Because they have to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will start serving up ads off their own sites rather than third party sites to defeat your ad blocker.
They will come in plain HTML and JPGs and be indistinguishable from normal content.
They will revise code so that you can't get the content without getting the ads too.They will keep fighting you and your attempts to block their revenue stream, because they have to.
And they will fight you on your own turf, with clever code, not legislation.And they will win.
Because they have to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126611</id>
	<title>Re:failure to read what the average webuser wants</title>
	<author>Sloppy</author>
	<datestamp>1243537080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared. complete failure</p></div></blockquote><p>
Sounds like you're talking about <a href="http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2001/04/42803" title="wired.com">Third Voice</a> [wired.com], which IMHO was one of the most brilliant ideas for improving the web, since<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. uh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. the invention of the web.  (I have to say "idea" because I never got to try out their actual implementation, so I don't know if it sucked or not.  But some day I hope to take a shot at implementing my own take on something vaguely like that.)
</p><blockquote><div><p>most users not only want to do nothing, they want to make sure they are seeing exactly what everyone else sees</p></div></blockquote><p>
What "most users" think they want is important if you're trying to create a commercial product, but it's not relevant if you're trying to solve other problems.  And I think that while people do seem happy with their horses and buggies, they only need to see an automobile in action once, before some start to wonder, "Hey, can I have one of those?"</p><blockquote><div><p>its a basic human desire for commonality of culture: sharing anything on the web is all about being part of contributing to a group, and consuming what is the same for everyone else. this is a basic human social drive. that if they had content that was "special" and only visible to them in a certain way, even if in just cosmetic appearance, you are driving a wedge between the user and that sense of shared commonality.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Wow.  Well, here's what I think: If changing the presentation of the content takes away all commonality, then there never was any content.
</p><p>
I am probably using a slightly different size browser window to read slashdot than you are.  Maybe even a different browser.  But here we are, talking on slashdot.  <em>Something</em> survives transformation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared .
complete failure Sounds like you 're talking about Third Voice [ wired.com ] , which IMHO was one of the most brilliant ideas for improving the web , since .. uh .. the invention of the web .
( I have to say " idea " because I never got to try out their actual implementation , so I do n't know if it sucked or not .
But some day I hope to take a shot at implementing my own take on something vaguely like that .
) most users not only want to do nothing , they want to make sure they are seeing exactly what everyone else sees What " most users " think they want is important if you 're trying to create a commercial product , but it 's not relevant if you 're trying to solve other problems .
And I think that while people do seem happy with their horses and buggies , they only need to see an automobile in action once , before some start to wonder , " Hey , can I have one of those ?
" its a basic human desire for commonality of culture : sharing anything on the web is all about being part of contributing to a group , and consuming what is the same for everyone else .
this is a basic human social drive .
that if they had content that was " special " and only visible to them in a certain way , even if in just cosmetic appearance , you are driving a wedge between the user and that sense of shared commonality .
Wow. Well , here 's what I think : If changing the presentation of the content takes away all commonality , then there never was any content .
I am probably using a slightly different size browser window to read slashdot than you are .
Maybe even a different browser .
But here we are , talking on slashdot .
Something survives transformation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared.
complete failure
Sounds like you're talking about Third Voice [wired.com], which IMHO was one of the most brilliant ideas for improving the web, since .. uh .. the invention of the web.
(I have to say "idea" because I never got to try out their actual implementation, so I don't know if it sucked or not.
But some day I hope to take a shot at implementing my own take on something vaguely like that.
)
most users not only want to do nothing, they want to make sure they are seeing exactly what everyone else sees
What "most users" think they want is important if you're trying to create a commercial product, but it's not relevant if you're trying to solve other problems.
And I think that while people do seem happy with their horses and buggies, they only need to see an automobile in action once, before some start to wonder, "Hey, can I have one of those?
"its a basic human desire for commonality of culture: sharing anything on the web is all about being part of contributing to a group, and consuming what is the same for everyone else.
this is a basic human social drive.
that if they had content that was "special" and only visible to them in a certain way, even if in just cosmetic appearance, you are driving a wedge between the user and that sense of shared commonality.
Wow.  Well, here's what I think: If changing the presentation of the content takes away all commonality, then there never was any content.
I am probably using a slightly different size browser window to read slashdot than you are.
Maybe even a different browser.
But here we are, talking on slashdot.
Something survives transformation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126701</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243537380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>there are scores of good websites producing quality content that do struggle to even cover costs, let alone make a profit.</p></div></blockquote><p>Those websites don't have any inherent right to cover costs or make a profit.</p><p>No matter how insightful your blog is, if you connect it to the internet you give everyone the right to read it without giving you anything in return.</p><p>I'm sick of people thinking they deserve to blog full-time and expect the rest of us to provide them of income. Get a job, sheesh.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>there are scores of good websites producing quality content that do struggle to even cover costs , let alone make a profit.Those websites do n't have any inherent right to cover costs or make a profit.No matter how insightful your blog is , if you connect it to the internet you give everyone the right to read it without giving you anything in return.I 'm sick of people thinking they deserve to blog full-time and expect the rest of us to provide them of income .
Get a job , sheesh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there are scores of good websites producing quality content that do struggle to even cover costs, let alone make a profit.Those websites don't have any inherent right to cover costs or make a profit.No matter how insightful your blog is, if you connect it to the internet you give everyone the right to read it without giving you anything in return.I'm sick of people thinking they deserve to blog full-time and expect the rest of us to provide them of income.
Get a job, sheesh.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126783</id>
	<title>Prior art, sorta: Proxomitron</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1243537680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People have been using the HTTP filtering proxy Proxomitron for many years to rewrite the Web to their liking, including both removing AND adding content, like floting personal menus and all sorts of things.  It might have started out with the primary goal of removing ads, but it evolved to be able to virtually rewrite entire pages according to the user's wishes.  I doubt that it's as user-friendly as JetPack will be, but then that's in part because Proxomitron's suthor Scott Lemmon died some years ago and further improvements never happened.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People have been using the HTTP filtering proxy Proxomitron for many years to rewrite the Web to their liking , including both removing AND adding content , like floting personal menus and all sorts of things .
It might have started out with the primary goal of removing ads , but it evolved to be able to virtually rewrite entire pages according to the user 's wishes .
I doubt that it 's as user-friendly as JetPack will be , but then that 's in part because Proxomitron 's suthor Scott Lemmon died some years ago and further improvements never happened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have been using the HTTP filtering proxy Proxomitron for many years to rewrite the Web to their liking, including both removing AND adding content, like floting personal menus and all sorts of things.
It might have started out with the primary goal of removing ads, but it evolved to be able to virtually rewrite entire pages according to the user's wishes.
I doubt that it's as user-friendly as JetPack will be, but then that's in part because Proxomitron's suthor Scott Lemmon died some years ago and further improvements never happened.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129769</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>Auxbuss</author>
	<datestamp>1243503420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's not democratic. It's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads.
I was onboard for trying to make information free. Well, now a large part of the information is and I'm not about to hurt the companies who embraced the "alternative business models" I supported.
I like their services, and would like them to be able to pay for the server.

Keep in mind if people can't pay via their advertising, they'll likely start charging again. Major step backwards.</p></div><p>Big, big assumption.

</p><p>What is actually means is that a new model will emerge. If we're going to stretch the meaning of democracy in this thread, then I'm going to stretch evolution,

</p><p>But that's what we have here: variation; struggle for existence; natural selection; origin of species.

</p><p>Of course, the dogmatic, conservative business droids remain wedded to their belief in "intelligent design".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not democratic .
It 's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads .
I was onboard for trying to make information free .
Well , now a large part of the information is and I 'm not about to hurt the companies who embraced the " alternative business models " I supported .
I like their services , and would like them to be able to pay for the server .
Keep in mind if people ca n't pay via their advertising , they 'll likely start charging again .
Major step backwards.Big , big assumption .
What is actually means is that a new model will emerge .
If we 're going to stretch the meaning of democracy in this thread , then I 'm going to stretch evolution , But that 's what we have here : variation ; struggle for existence ; natural selection ; origin of species .
Of course , the dogmatic , conservative business droids remain wedded to their belief in " intelligent design " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not democratic.
It's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads.
I was onboard for trying to make information free.
Well, now a large part of the information is and I'm not about to hurt the companies who embraced the "alternative business models" I supported.
I like their services, and would like them to be able to pay for the server.
Keep in mind if people can't pay via their advertising, they'll likely start charging again.
Major step backwards.Big, big assumption.
What is actually means is that a new model will emerge.
If we're going to stretch the meaning of democracy in this thread, then I'm going to stretch evolution,

But that's what we have here: variation; struggle for existence; natural selection; origin of species.
Of course, the dogmatic, conservative business droids remain wedded to their belief in "intelligent design".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28131015</id>
	<title>Re:I guess</title>
	<author>Lehk228</author>
	<datestamp>1243508700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>wat?</htmltext>
<tokenext>wat ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wat?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124925</id>
	<title>Attn: CmdrTaco</title>
	<author>harryandthehenderson</author>
	<datestamp>1243530780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>CmdrTaco, you posted this dupe to early as the <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/21/1845245" title="slashdot.org">last one</a> [slashdot.org] was only posted 8 days ago.  You are supposed to wait at least a month before duping.  Thank you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>CmdrTaco , you posted this dupe to early as the last one [ slashdot.org ] was only posted 8 days ago .
You are supposed to wait at least a month before duping .
Thank you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CmdrTaco, you posted this dupe to early as the last one [slashdot.org] was only posted 8 days ago.
You are supposed to wait at least a month before duping.
Thank you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125159</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>RetroGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1243531800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am not responsible for adhering to someone else's idea of a business model.</p><p>IOW, just because someone has an idea of a layout/content they want to flog on the Internet, it does not follow that I agree with that idea. If they were to provide layout/content with which I agree, then I would not want to modify it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not responsible for adhering to someone else 's idea of a business model.IOW , just because someone has an idea of a layout/content they want to flog on the Internet , it does not follow that I agree with that idea .
If they were to provide layout/content with which I agree , then I would not want to modify it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not responsible for adhering to someone else's idea of a business model.IOW, just because someone has an idea of a layout/content they want to flog on the Internet, it does not follow that I agree with that idea.
If they were to provide layout/content with which I agree, then I would not want to modify it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127443</id>
	<title>Re:Ad blocking is stealing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243539600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And you can point out the legal requirement to view a web page as the creator intended?</htmltext>
<tokenext>And you can point out the legal requirement to view a web page as the creator intended ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you can point out the legal requirement to view a web page as the creator intended?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125965</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125299</id>
	<title>Awesome More Scenarios to Test For</title>
	<author>WebmasterNeal</author>
	<datestamp>1243532400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>With users getting all sorts of funky output of our websites, now we get to test for the infinite +1 scenarios they can dream up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>With users getting all sorts of funky output of our websites , now we get to test for the infinite + 1 scenarios they can dream up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With users getting all sorts of funky output of our websites, now we get to test for the infinite +1 scenarios they can dream up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125267</id>
	<title>2 not-necessarily mutually exclusive perspectives</title>
	<author>asemisldkfj</author>
	<datestamp>1243532280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a web developer/designer, things like this irk me. When I design a website it is standards-compliant and looks how I intend it to, for what I think are good reasons. Empowering users to further mess with my presentation of my website is bothersome.
<br> <br>
As a web user, things like this make me glad. I will be glad if I am given more control of the presentation of poorly-designed websites, because I really don't have any sympathy for someone who designs a site that hinders me from obtaining the information that the site is supposed to be giving me.
<br> <br>
Tools like this are not inherently good or bad. People may use them to the detriment of their experience on the web (if they somehow degrade a site's visual appeal or function [not that the two things go hand-in-hand]), or people may use them to make their experiences on the web more efficient, productive, and enjoyable. I say more power to tools like this, because people should be able to have a say about how content is presented on their computers. And perhaps once poor web design dies (as if this will ever happen), the web developer/designer views the web in a different way, or the browser changes the way it presents websites, tools like this will either go out of fashion or become more integral to our idea of what the web is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a web developer/designer , things like this irk me .
When I design a website it is standards-compliant and looks how I intend it to , for what I think are good reasons .
Empowering users to further mess with my presentation of my website is bothersome .
As a web user , things like this make me glad .
I will be glad if I am given more control of the presentation of poorly-designed websites , because I really do n't have any sympathy for someone who designs a site that hinders me from obtaining the information that the site is supposed to be giving me .
Tools like this are not inherently good or bad .
People may use them to the detriment of their experience on the web ( if they somehow degrade a site 's visual appeal or function [ not that the two things go hand-in-hand ] ) , or people may use them to make their experiences on the web more efficient , productive , and enjoyable .
I say more power to tools like this , because people should be able to have a say about how content is presented on their computers .
And perhaps once poor web design dies ( as if this will ever happen ) , the web developer/designer views the web in a different way , or the browser changes the way it presents websites , tools like this will either go out of fashion or become more integral to our idea of what the web is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a web developer/designer, things like this irk me.
When I design a website it is standards-compliant and looks how I intend it to, for what I think are good reasons.
Empowering users to further mess with my presentation of my website is bothersome.
As a web user, things like this make me glad.
I will be glad if I am given more control of the presentation of poorly-designed websites, because I really don't have any sympathy for someone who designs a site that hinders me from obtaining the information that the site is supposed to be giving me.
Tools like this are not inherently good or bad.
People may use them to the detriment of their experience on the web (if they somehow degrade a site's visual appeal or function [not that the two things go hand-in-hand]), or people may use them to make their experiences on the web more efficient, productive, and enjoyable.
I say more power to tools like this, because people should be able to have a say about how content is presented on their computers.
And perhaps once poor web design dies (as if this will ever happen), the web developer/designer views the web in a different way, or the browser changes the way it presents websites, tools like this will either go out of fashion or become more integral to our idea of what the web is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126051</id>
	<title>Greasemonkey</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1243535280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds just like greasemonkey. Maybe greasemonkey + platypus? Mozilla ripping off its own addons now?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P I've been using modified internet for a year or so now. Its neat to be able to set the internet to match your theme... or remove annoying buttons you never use. (Examples...I have no sidebar in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. and when i click my name it redirects to my comments to check for replies rather than the annoying feed.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds just like greasemonkey .
Maybe greasemonkey + platypus ?
Mozilla ripping off its own addons now ?
: P I 've been using modified internet for a year or so now .
Its neat to be able to set the internet to match your theme... or remove annoying buttons you never use .
( Examples...I have no sidebar in / .
and when i click my name it redirects to my comments to check for replies rather than the annoying feed .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds just like greasemonkey.
Maybe greasemonkey + platypus?
Mozilla ripping off its own addons now?
:P I've been using modified internet for a year or so now.
Its neat to be able to set the internet to match your theme... or remove annoying buttons you never use.
(Examples...I have no sidebar in /.
and when i click my name it redirects to my comments to check for replies rather than the annoying feed.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124911</id>
	<title>that explains it!</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1243530720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>By allowing users to modify the behavior, presentation, and output of Web apps and pages to their liking, Jetpack gives users the ability to 'patch the server, in a sense,' McAllister writes</p></div></blockquote><p>And so the new slashdot layout is finally explained in full.<br> <br>I keed, I keed.  But seriously...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>By allowing users to modify the behavior , presentation , and output of Web apps and pages to their liking , Jetpack gives users the ability to 'patch the server , in a sense, ' McAllister writesAnd so the new slashdot layout is finally explained in full .
I keed , I keed .
But seriously.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By allowing users to modify the behavior, presentation, and output of Web apps and pages to their liking, Jetpack gives users the ability to 'patch the server, in a sense,' McAllister writesAnd so the new slashdot layout is finally explained in full.
I keed, I keed.
But seriously...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125365</id>
	<title>Re:That's why I stopped using a browser</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243532700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I doubt your brain adheres to XHTML and CSS standards. Your point is now irrelevant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt your brain adheres to XHTML and CSS standards .
Your point is now irrelevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt your brain adheres to XHTML and CSS standards.
Your point is now irrelevant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126137</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1243535520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Better yet, it is a way to rebrand web sites.  Your content with my brand.  Now, if only I can get other people's browsers to view it that way it means I own the Internet.</p><p>If as part of the ISP "connection package" Cox can deliver this it means that Cox owns all the web content there is and can use it however they see fit.  I'll bet Cox thinks this is a <b>wonderful</b> idea.  And Time-Warner, and Comcast.  And anyone else in the big-ISP business.</p><p>How come so much stuff gets figured out for the Internet without ever considering how it might be exploited?  Either by hackers or for commercial gain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Better yet , it is a way to rebrand web sites .
Your content with my brand .
Now , if only I can get other people 's browsers to view it that way it means I own the Internet.If as part of the ISP " connection package " Cox can deliver this it means that Cox owns all the web content there is and can use it however they see fit .
I 'll bet Cox thinks this is a wonderful idea .
And Time-Warner , and Comcast .
And anyone else in the big-ISP business.How come so much stuff gets figured out for the Internet without ever considering how it might be exploited ?
Either by hackers or for commercial gain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better yet, it is a way to rebrand web sites.
Your content with my brand.
Now, if only I can get other people's browsers to view it that way it means I own the Internet.If as part of the ISP "connection package" Cox can deliver this it means that Cox owns all the web content there is and can use it however they see fit.
I'll bet Cox thinks this is a wonderful idea.
And Time-Warner, and Comcast.
And anyone else in the big-ISP business.How come so much stuff gets figured out for the Internet without ever considering how it might be exploited?
Either by hackers or for commercial gain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127555</id>
	<title>Re:failure to read what the average webuser wants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243539840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a load of crap.</p><p>The sheeple may take comfort in same-ness.</p><p>The entrepreneurial spirited ones and geeky ones, could care less what the sheeple want.</p><p>I like the "Burger King" form of the web where I can "have it my way"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a load of crap.The sheeple may take comfort in same-ness.The entrepreneurial spirited ones and geeky ones , could care less what the sheeple want.I like the " Burger King " form of the web where I can " have it my way "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a load of crap.The sheeple may take comfort in same-ness.The entrepreneurial spirited ones and geeky ones, could care less what the sheeple want.I like the "Burger King" form of the web where I can "have it my way"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124947</id>
	<title>Sorry Dudes...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1243530840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dear "Content Providers",<br> <br>
However much you might dislike this fact, the internet is not actually television, nor can web pages be designed as though it is(put down the flash and back away slowly).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear " Content Providers " , However much you might dislike this fact , the internet is not actually television , nor can web pages be designed as though it is ( put down the flash and back away slowly ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear "Content Providers", 
However much you might dislike this fact, the internet is not actually television, nor can web pages be designed as though it is(put down the flash and back away slowly).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126721</id>
	<title>Re:that explains it! - Why Slashdot is so slow</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1243537500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I am not all that optimistic that the ad people are capable of learning, I use adblopck to 'punish' bad behavior. Dancing and flashing ads get blocked. Slow ad servers that hold up the page load for too long get blocked. Scam ads and other junk that insult the reader's intelligence get blocked. The rest may stay. Want your ad to be seen by me? Make it tasteful and non-obnoxious.</p><p>If enough people do that, they'll have to learn or become irrelevant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I am not all that optimistic that the ad people are capable of learning , I use adblopck to 'punish ' bad behavior .
Dancing and flashing ads get blocked .
Slow ad servers that hold up the page load for too long get blocked .
Scam ads and other junk that insult the reader 's intelligence get blocked .
The rest may stay .
Want your ad to be seen by me ?
Make it tasteful and non-obnoxious.If enough people do that , they 'll have to learn or become irrelevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I am not all that optimistic that the ad people are capable of learning, I use adblopck to 'punish' bad behavior.
Dancing and flashing ads get blocked.
Slow ad servers that hold up the page load for too long get blocked.
Scam ads and other junk that insult the reader's intelligence get blocked.
The rest may stay.
Want your ad to be seen by me?
Make it tasteful and non-obnoxious.If enough people do that, they'll have to learn or become irrelevant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127703</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>Have Brain Will Rent</author>
	<datestamp>1243540260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe I have the right to decide what images enter my eye and what don't. If I buy a magazine I feel perfectly entitled to <i>not</i> look at the ads. Some magazines I feel perfectly entitled not to look at anything but the pictures.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D If the magazine is free I don't feel that negates these rights. I don't wee why the web should be any different.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe I have the right to decide what images enter my eye and what do n't .
If I buy a magazine I feel perfectly entitled to not look at the ads .
Some magazines I feel perfectly entitled not to look at anything but the pictures .
: D If the magazine is free I do n't feel that negates these rights .
I do n't wee why the web should be any different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe I have the right to decide what images enter my eye and what don't.
If I buy a magazine I feel perfectly entitled to not look at the ads.
Some magazines I feel perfectly entitled not to look at anything but the pictures.
:D If the magazine is free I don't feel that negates these rights.
I don't wee why the web should be any different.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125087</id>
	<title>power to the people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243531620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who've spent their free time running websites that are expensive, using their bandwidth to do so? How is this democratic?</p></div><p>Don't make websites that suck and the People won't have to jetpack the suck out of it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who 've spent their free time running websites that are expensive , using their bandwidth to do so ?
How is this democratic ? Do n't make websites that suck and the People wo n't have to jetpack the suck out of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who've spent their free time running websites that are expensive, using their bandwidth to do so?
How is this democratic?Don't make websites that suck and the People won't have to jetpack the suck out of it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126379</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>2short</author>
	<datestamp>1243536360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It has jack to do with democracy, one way or the other.<br>It is a way for people to have their browser perform in ways they like.<br>If you put information up where anyone who wants to can access it with their own software, and your business model depends on their software acting how you want, and not how they want, you have a poor business model.<br>If you think software should stop doing what users want it to in order to support a particular business model, I respectfully disagree.  If you think there is any chance in the world it will happen, I not so respectfully question your intelligence.  There are many browsers supporting many plugins.  If people want a piece of simple functionality, one of them will provide it.<br>If people want content, a way to pay for it will be found.  That way will not depend on rolling back existing technological progress.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It has jack to do with democracy , one way or the other.It is a way for people to have their browser perform in ways they like.If you put information up where anyone who wants to can access it with their own software , and your business model depends on their software acting how you want , and not how they want , you have a poor business model.If you think software should stop doing what users want it to in order to support a particular business model , I respectfully disagree .
If you think there is any chance in the world it will happen , I not so respectfully question your intelligence .
There are many browsers supporting many plugins .
If people want a piece of simple functionality , one of them will provide it.If people want content , a way to pay for it will be found .
That way will not depend on rolling back existing technological progress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has jack to do with democracy, one way or the other.It is a way for people to have their browser perform in ways they like.If you put information up where anyone who wants to can access it with their own software, and your business model depends on their software acting how you want, and not how they want, you have a poor business model.If you think software should stop doing what users want it to in order to support a particular business model, I respectfully disagree.
If you think there is any chance in the world it will happen, I not so respectfully question your intelligence.
There are many browsers supporting many plugins.
If people want a piece of simple functionality, one of them will provide it.If people want content, a way to pay for it will be found.
That way will not depend on rolling back existing technological progress.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28134241</id>
	<title>Re:Sorry Dudes...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243527360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"They'd love the right to strap us down and give us the Clockwork Orange treatment, but that's not something they can have."</p><p>The goal is not to captivate all of us, but only enough of us for them to make a continuous profit.  The minority of objectors, however greatly annoyed they become at the inane tactics to which they are exposed, are inconsequential in the overall scheme.</p><p>In other words, there will always exist a sufficient level of gullibility for them to succeed, and the objections of the wise will always remain unheeded.</p><p>In yet other words, the users of Jetpack cannot make a difference against those who do not/will not use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" They 'd love the right to strap us down and give us the Clockwork Orange treatment , but that 's not something they can have .
" The goal is not to captivate all of us , but only enough of us for them to make a continuous profit .
The minority of objectors , however greatly annoyed they become at the inane tactics to which they are exposed , are inconsequential in the overall scheme.In other words , there will always exist a sufficient level of gullibility for them to succeed , and the objections of the wise will always remain unheeded.In yet other words , the users of Jetpack can not make a difference against those who do not/will not use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"They'd love the right to strap us down and give us the Clockwork Orange treatment, but that's not something they can have.
"The goal is not to captivate all of us, but only enough of us for them to make a continuous profit.
The minority of objectors, however greatly annoyed they become at the inane tactics to which they are exposed, are inconsequential in the overall scheme.In other words, there will always exist a sufficient level of gullibility for them to succeed, and the objections of the wise will always remain unheeded.In yet other words, the users of Jetpack cannot make a difference against those who do not/will not use it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125539</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1243533420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads"</p><p>Giving people a way to do that is democratic.</p><p>Step 1: "..start charging again. "<br>Step 2: Dry up and go away<br>Step 3: No profit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads " Giving people a way to do that is democratic.Step 1 : " ..start charging again .
" Step 2 : Dry up and go awayStep 3 : No profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads"Giving people a way to do that is democratic.Step 1: "..start charging again.
"Step 2: Dry up and go awayStep 3: No profit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127047</id>
	<title>Re:failure to read what the average webuser wants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243538460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared. complete failure</em></p><p>"What a ridiculous idea," he thought, and posted as a reply in the comments section.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared .
complete failure " What a ridiculous idea , " he thought , and posted as a reply in the comments section .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared.
complete failure"What a ridiculous idea," he thought, and posted as a reply in the comments section.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125215</id>
	<title>Re:Sorry Dudes...</title>
	<author>EdZ</author>
	<datestamp>1243532040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dear "Customers"
<br> <br>For too long have you created and shared content amongst yourselves without it passing through our hands first, thus depriving us of our entitled revenue. Luckily we have more lobbying money than you, so this state of affairs will not continue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear " Customers " For too long have you created and shared content amongst yourselves without it passing through our hands first , thus depriving us of our entitled revenue .
Luckily we have more lobbying money than you , so this state of affairs will not continue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear "Customers"
 For too long have you created and shared content amongst yourselves without it passing through our hands first, thus depriving us of our entitled revenue.
Luckily we have more lobbying money than you, so this state of affairs will not continue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126045</id>
	<title>I guess</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1243535220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would seem that if I want to reformat, rebrand and (obviously) republish content found on the web, I should be able to do so, right?</p><p>I guess a further step is putting out a plug-in for any user's browser that automatically reformats and rebrands content found on the web as mine.  That way no matter if they go to my site or CNN, they are always seeing content as if I published it, right?</p><p>Now, if I can make this happen to users automatically once they visit my pages once, all the better.</p><p>Maybe it is just a matter of putting a little box on each and every page the user visits that says "Hank says..." with a link.  Or, "Hank's view on this is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."</p><p>Far fetched?  Wouldn't Google, CNN or Sony really, really like to be able to do this?  Well, so would I.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would seem that if I want to reformat , rebrand and ( obviously ) republish content found on the web , I should be able to do so , right ? I guess a further step is putting out a plug-in for any user 's browser that automatically reformats and rebrands content found on the web as mine .
That way no matter if they go to my site or CNN , they are always seeing content as if I published it , right ? Now , if I can make this happen to users automatically once they visit my pages once , all the better.Maybe it is just a matter of putting a little box on each and every page the user visits that says " Hank says... " with a link .
Or , " Hank 's view on this is ... " Far fetched ?
Would n't Google , CNN or Sony really , really like to be able to do this ?
Well , so would I .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would seem that if I want to reformat, rebrand and (obviously) republish content found on the web, I should be able to do so, right?I guess a further step is putting out a plug-in for any user's browser that automatically reformats and rebrands content found on the web as mine.
That way no matter if they go to my site or CNN, they are always seeing content as if I published it, right?Now, if I can make this happen to users automatically once they visit my pages once, all the better.Maybe it is just a matter of putting a little box on each and every page the user visits that says "Hank says..." with a link.
Or, "Hank's view on this is ..."Far fetched?
Wouldn't Google, CNN or Sony really, really like to be able to do this?
Well, so would I.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125685</id>
	<title>Re:Revolution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243533960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most people also don't use ad-blocking.</p><p>And most people, when they try Firefox with Adblock installed, never go back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people also do n't use ad-blocking.And most people , when they try Firefox with Adblock installed , never go back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people also don't use ad-blocking.And most people, when they try Firefox with Adblock installed, never go back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127367</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1243539360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have a right to put as many ads on your website as you desire, and introduce technological measures that would make filtering out ads harder. This is called "freedom".</p><p>I have a right to avoid looking at your ads by any means at my disposal, including automated ad blockers. This is also called "freedom".</p><p>Let's respect each others' freedoms, shall we?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have a right to put as many ads on your website as you desire , and introduce technological measures that would make filtering out ads harder .
This is called " freedom " .I have a right to avoid looking at your ads by any means at my disposal , including automated ad blockers .
This is also called " freedom " .Let 's respect each others ' freedoms , shall we ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have a right to put as many ads on your website as you desire, and introduce technological measures that would make filtering out ads harder.
This is called "freedom".I have a right to avoid looking at your ads by any means at my disposal, including automated ad blockers.
This is also called "freedom".Let's respect each others' freedoms, shall we?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125615</id>
	<title>Re:failure to read what the average webuser wants</title>
	<author>Jah-Wren Ryel</author>
	<datestamp>1243533720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>this observation of mine applies most especially to subcultures: small splinter groups that are outside the mainstream and proudly so. their desire to see the same thing the rest of the subculture sees is accelerated due to the fact that it takes more effort to be part of a subculture than be part of the mainstream,</p></div><p>And you think that installing an additional set of subculture-specific page transforming filters won't take effort?  That subculture members won't pride themselves on their ability to tweak the way those filters work for that subculture and that the other members of that subculture won't reward them with attention and accolades for helping to further delineate their subculture from the mainstream?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>this observation of mine applies most especially to subcultures : small splinter groups that are outside the mainstream and proudly so .
their desire to see the same thing the rest of the subculture sees is accelerated due to the fact that it takes more effort to be part of a subculture than be part of the mainstream,And you think that installing an additional set of subculture-specific page transforming filters wo n't take effort ?
That subculture members wo n't pride themselves on their ability to tweak the way those filters work for that subculture and that the other members of that subculture wo n't reward them with attention and accolades for helping to further delineate their subculture from the mainstream ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this observation of mine applies most especially to subcultures: small splinter groups that are outside the mainstream and proudly so.
their desire to see the same thing the rest of the subculture sees is accelerated due to the fact that it takes more effort to be part of a subculture than be part of the mainstream,And you think that installing an additional set of subculture-specific page transforming filters won't take effort?
That subculture members won't pride themselves on their ability to tweak the way those filters work for that subculture and that the other members of that subculture won't reward them with attention and accolades for helping to further delineate their subculture from the mainstream?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132445</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1243515840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who've spent their free time running websites that are expensive, using their bandwidth to do so? How is this democratic? A democracy is about having a say in how a country (the web) is run, not having your say over individuals (websites). It's easy to spin it as "giving the user control back from the big bad corporations" but there are scores of good websites producing quality content that do struggle to even cover costs, let alone make a profit.</p></div></blockquote><p>Even though you clearly wouldn't agree, I believe that I have the right to filter, block, store, mangle, encrypt, decrypt, decompile, disassemble, sort, munge, rearrange, repurpose, or otherwise process any traffic that flows onto my network regardless of whether or not such traffic has advertisements on it or not.</p><p>Just because you buy a web hosting account and put up a site does not mean you are automatically entitled by law or moral code to make some tiny amount of money every time someone visits it. If you want your little corner of the Internet to be a toll booth, then make it a paysite or figure out a <i>real</i> business model instead. It is simply <b>not</b> my job to make sure that somebody out there in the world gets revenue every time I pull up a web page in my browser.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who 've spent their free time running websites that are expensive , using their bandwidth to do so ?
How is this democratic ?
A democracy is about having a say in how a country ( the web ) is run , not having your say over individuals ( websites ) .
It 's easy to spin it as " giving the user control back from the big bad corporations " but there are scores of good websites producing quality content that do struggle to even cover costs , let alone make a profit.Even though you clearly would n't agree , I believe that I have the right to filter , block , store , mangle , encrypt , decrypt , decompile , disassemble , sort , munge , rearrange , repurpose , or otherwise process any traffic that flows onto my network regardless of whether or not such traffic has advertisements on it or not.Just because you buy a web hosting account and put up a site does not mean you are automatically entitled by law or moral code to make some tiny amount of money every time someone visits it .
If you want your little corner of the Internet to be a toll booth , then make it a paysite or figure out a real business model instead .
It is simply not my job to make sure that somebody out there in the world gets revenue every time I pull up a web page in my browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So... Tools that make it even easier to strip the content from people who've spent their free time running websites that are expensive, using their bandwidth to do so?
How is this democratic?
A democracy is about having a say in how a country (the web) is run, not having your say over individuals (websites).
It's easy to spin it as "giving the user control back from the big bad corporations" but there are scores of good websites producing quality content that do struggle to even cover costs, let alone make a profit.Even though you clearly wouldn't agree, I believe that I have the right to filter, block, store, mangle, encrypt, decrypt, decompile, disassemble, sort, munge, rearrange, repurpose, or otherwise process any traffic that flows onto my network regardless of whether or not such traffic has advertisements on it or not.Just because you buy a web hosting account and put up a site does not mean you are automatically entitled by law or moral code to make some tiny amount of money every time someone visits it.
If you want your little corner of the Internet to be a toll booth, then make it a paysite or figure out a real business model instead.
It is simply not my job to make sure that somebody out there in the world gets revenue every time I pull up a web page in my browser.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126131</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243535520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmmm, yes we do seem to keep coming up with this battle. Those who want things for free and those who want to make a living doing what interests them. Use to be with physical goods there was a one to one relationship between the customers satisfaction and the creators lively hood. Now we have an apathetic public that despite protests to the contrary, evidence shows a disconnect between those who spend long hours and years of education engaging in the art of creation and those who want to be gratified NOW. Bolstered by cheap technology that makes it easy to not only break the one to one, but tilt it overwhelmingly in favor of an entity that's consumer in the voracious appetite sense. In the face of those who see you as a free buffet the alternatives are few.* Stop putting anything on the table, or adopting the "walled garden" approach were one's monthly fee discourages the "food I'm paying for wants to be free" mentality.</p><p>*Of course those who see themselves as "patrons" can do the honorable thing and become cooks themselves. It would be interesting to see what happens when the role's are reversed. Bon apatite.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm , yes we do seem to keep coming up with this battle .
Those who want things for free and those who want to make a living doing what interests them .
Use to be with physical goods there was a one to one relationship between the customers satisfaction and the creators lively hood .
Now we have an apathetic public that despite protests to the contrary , evidence shows a disconnect between those who spend long hours and years of education engaging in the art of creation and those who want to be gratified NOW .
Bolstered by cheap technology that makes it easy to not only break the one to one , but tilt it overwhelmingly in favor of an entity that 's consumer in the voracious appetite sense .
In the face of those who see you as a free buffet the alternatives are few .
* Stop putting anything on the table , or adopting the " walled garden " approach were one 's monthly fee discourages the " food I 'm paying for wants to be free " mentality .
* Of course those who see themselves as " patrons " can do the honorable thing and become cooks themselves .
It would be interesting to see what happens when the role 's are reversed .
Bon apatite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm, yes we do seem to keep coming up with this battle.
Those who want things for free and those who want to make a living doing what interests them.
Use to be with physical goods there was a one to one relationship between the customers satisfaction and the creators lively hood.
Now we have an apathetic public that despite protests to the contrary, evidence shows a disconnect between those who spend long hours and years of education engaging in the art of creation and those who want to be gratified NOW.
Bolstered by cheap technology that makes it easy to not only break the one to one, but tilt it overwhelmingly in favor of an entity that's consumer in the voracious appetite sense.
In the face of those who see you as a free buffet the alternatives are few.
* Stop putting anything on the table, or adopting the "walled garden" approach were one's monthly fee discourages the "food I'm paying for wants to be free" mentality.
*Of course those who see themselves as "patrons" can do the honorable thing and become cooks themselves.
It would be interesting to see what happens when the role's are reversed.
Bon apatite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124965</id>
	<title>Information wants to be free</title>
	<author>bzzfzz</author>
	<datestamp>1243530960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I'm not going to let powerful third parties control how my computer works and what I can see and do.</p><p>More power to Jetpack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I 'm not going to let powerful third parties control how my computer works and what I can see and do.More power to Jetpack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I'm not going to let powerful third parties control how my computer works and what I can see and do.More power to Jetpack.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125965</id>
	<title>Ad blocking is stealing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243534860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads"</p><p>And they say they don't like flashing ads and stuff, that's why they remove it with adblocker.</p><p>That's stealing. If you don't like the ads on a site then don't visit the site. If enough people do this then companies will change their ad model when they realize it drives away visitors.</p><p>So people shouldn't rationalize their stealing by saying it's their right to remove ads and view others' content without them.</p><p>The ethical way is to stop going there, not stealing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads " And they say they do n't like flashing ads and stuff , that 's why they remove it with adblocker.That 's stealing .
If you do n't like the ads on a site then do n't visit the site .
If enough people do this then companies will change their ad model when they realize it drives away visitors.So people should n't rationalize their stealing by saying it 's their right to remove ads and view others ' content without them.The ethical way is to stop going there , not stealing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's another way for people who want something for nothing to remove ads"And they say they don't like flashing ads and stuff, that's why they remove it with adblocker.That's stealing.
If you don't like the ads on a site then don't visit the site.
If enough people do this then companies will change their ad model when they realize it drives away visitors.So people shouldn't rationalize their stealing by saying it's their right to remove ads and view others' content without them.The ethical way is to stop going there, not stealing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28136465</id>
	<title>Re:Sorry Dudes...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243595820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You've never heard of this thing called "proprietary technology", have you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've never heard of this thing called " proprietary technology " , have you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've never heard of this thing called "proprietary technology", have you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129807</id>
	<title>Re:that explains it! - Why Slashdot is so slow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243503600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Yes. There's so much crap running on Slashdot's pages now that Firefox sometimes reports that a script is running too long.</p><p>There's already a fix for this. I use NoScript to turn off all of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.'s JavaScript, then use GreaseMonkey to inject my own script into the page. My script strips all of the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. CSS and some of the HTML elements (*cough* tags *cough*), then injects a CSS of my own that restyles the page the way I like it.</p><p>I also use AdBlock to strip the non-flash ads from the pages.</p><p>This wasn't trivial to set up, I admit, but it wasn't more than few hours of effort either. And the result is that I actually want to read<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. again, since I like the way the page looks. Oh yeah, it also loads very, very fast.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Yes .
There 's so much crap running on Slashdot 's pages now that Firefox sometimes reports that a script is running too long.There 's already a fix for this .
I use NoScript to turn off all of / .
's JavaScript , then use GreaseMonkey to inject my own script into the page .
My script strips all of the / .
CSS and some of the HTML elements ( * cough * tags * cough * ) , then injects a CSS of my own that restyles the page the way I like it.I also use AdBlock to strip the non-flash ads from the pages.This was n't trivial to set up , I admit , but it was n't more than few hours of effort either .
And the result is that I actually want to read / .
again , since I like the way the page looks .
Oh yeah , it also loads very , very fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Yes.
There's so much crap running on Slashdot's pages now that Firefox sometimes reports that a script is running too long.There's already a fix for this.
I use NoScript to turn off all of /.
's JavaScript, then use GreaseMonkey to inject my own script into the page.
My script strips all of the /.
CSS and some of the HTML elements (*cough* tags *cough*), then injects a CSS of my own that restyles the page the way I like it.I also use AdBlock to strip the non-flash ads from the pages.This wasn't trivial to set up, I admit, but it wasn't more than few hours of effort either.
And the result is that I actually want to read /.
again, since I like the way the page looks.
Oh yeah, it also loads very, very fast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125199</id>
	<title>Re:that explains it! - Why Slashdot is so slow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243531980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
<i>And so the new slashdot layout is finally explained in full.</i>
</p><p>
Yes. There's so much crap running on Slashdot's pages now that Firefox sometimes reports that a script is running too long.   Pages load slowly because the five or so different ad servers all need time to respond.  The page code has "document.write()" calls which load more Javascript, forcing operations which ought to be in parallel to wait for the previous step to complete.
I just had a Slashdot page load wait 9 seconds for "bs.serving-sys.com".  That's a 9 second delay for a useless site that's trying to load a "tracking cookie".  A Jetpack add-on to block all that stuff will be a huge win.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And so the new slashdot layout is finally explained in full .
Yes. There 's so much crap running on Slashdot 's pages now that Firefox sometimes reports that a script is running too long .
Pages load slowly because the five or so different ad servers all need time to respond .
The page code has " document.write ( ) " calls which load more Javascript , forcing operations which ought to be in parallel to wait for the previous step to complete .
I just had a Slashdot page load wait 9 seconds for " bs.serving-sys.com " .
That 's a 9 second delay for a useless site that 's trying to load a " tracking cookie " .
A Jetpack add-on to block all that stuff will be a huge win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
And so the new slashdot layout is finally explained in full.
Yes. There's so much crap running on Slashdot's pages now that Firefox sometimes reports that a script is running too long.
Pages load slowly because the five or so different ad servers all need time to respond.
The page code has "document.write()" calls which load more Javascript, forcing operations which ought to be in parallel to wait for the previous step to complete.
I just had a Slashdot page load wait 9 seconds for "bs.serving-sys.com".
That's a 9 second delay for a useless site that's trying to load a "tracking cookie".
A Jetpack add-on to block all that stuff will be a huge win.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124911</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125161</id>
	<title>Re:power to the people</title>
	<author>Improv</author>
	<datestamp>1243531800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We will still, of course, strip out the adverts, because adverts suck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We will still , of course , strip out the adverts , because adverts suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We will still, of course, strip out the adverts, because adverts suck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28137631</id>
	<title>My backpack's got jets.</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1243606320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I'm Boba the Fett.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I 'm Boba the Fett .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I'm Boba the Fett.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28130303</id>
	<title>Re:failure to read what the average webuser wants</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1243505520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect there were a few problems with the website annotation (whose name escapes me as well). First, the threats to sue if they allowed derogatory annotations. Second, in order to pull them up, you necessarily had to tell people you have no reason to trust where you're surfing. Browser support for scripting was very spotty, so the only way to make it work well would be for them to fetch the page, munge it and send it to the client, very bandwidth intensive and performance limiting to say the least.</p><p>Finally, too many 13 year olds who still thought publishing a 4 letter word for all to see was funny. That's just a subset of the problem that there's no room to publish the comments of every id10t who happens to visit a website and few would have anything all that interesting to say.</p><p>Perhaps if it had decent performance and didn't depend on telling strangers about your surfing habits, AND you could see only the comments from your circle of friends, then it might have worked exactly because it would have let you see what your peers in the subculture see and it would have been different from what the outsiders saw. Of course, to be cool, it would have had to NOT have a bunch of marketers telling you how cool you should think it is while salivating over the marketing data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect there were a few problems with the website annotation ( whose name escapes me as well ) .
First , the threats to sue if they allowed derogatory annotations .
Second , in order to pull them up , you necessarily had to tell people you have no reason to trust where you 're surfing .
Browser support for scripting was very spotty , so the only way to make it work well would be for them to fetch the page , munge it and send it to the client , very bandwidth intensive and performance limiting to say the least.Finally , too many 13 year olds who still thought publishing a 4 letter word for all to see was funny .
That 's just a subset of the problem that there 's no room to publish the comments of every id10t who happens to visit a website and few would have anything all that interesting to say.Perhaps if it had decent performance and did n't depend on telling strangers about your surfing habits , AND you could see only the comments from your circle of friends , then it might have worked exactly because it would have let you see what your peers in the subculture see and it would have been different from what the outsiders saw .
Of course , to be cool , it would have had to NOT have a bunch of marketers telling you how cool you should think it is while salivating over the marketing data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect there were a few problems with the website annotation (whose name escapes me as well).
First, the threats to sue if they allowed derogatory annotations.
Second, in order to pull them up, you necessarily had to tell people you have no reason to trust where you're surfing.
Browser support for scripting was very spotty, so the only way to make it work well would be for them to fetch the page, munge it and send it to the client, very bandwidth intensive and performance limiting to say the least.Finally, too many 13 year olds who still thought publishing a 4 letter word for all to see was funny.
That's just a subset of the problem that there's no room to publish the comments of every id10t who happens to visit a website and few would have anything all that interesting to say.Perhaps if it had decent performance and didn't depend on telling strangers about your surfing habits, AND you could see only the comments from your circle of friends, then it might have worked exactly because it would have let you see what your peers in the subculture see and it would have been different from what the outsiders saw.
Of course, to be cool, it would have had to NOT have a bunch of marketers telling you how cool you should think it is while salivating over the marketing data.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126827</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>ljw1004</author>
	<datestamp>1243537800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>God I hate advertising. I hate the American attitude that advertising is acceptable (indeed inevitable) in all areas of life. Billboards everywhere, sportscasters interrupting their coverage to promote products, ads read by the presenters on NPR, advertising of prescription medication...</p><p>These things don't happen anywhere else. It's only in America that you've been persuaded by the advertisers that their hold on your psyche and paycheck is normal.</p><p>The figures I have are from 2000, when the total amount spent on advertising worked out to about $5000 per inhabitant of the US per year.</p><p>What a stupid tax for us all to be paying! It doesn't go to anything we particularly want. It lines the pocketbooks of advertising agencies and irritates us when we're trying to browse the web or watch television or listen to the radio or see the countryside from our cars.</p><p>As a way of funding anything, it's hugely inefficient. I bet it's even more inefficient than taxes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>God I hate advertising .
I hate the American attitude that advertising is acceptable ( indeed inevitable ) in all areas of life .
Billboards everywhere , sportscasters interrupting their coverage to promote products , ads read by the presenters on NPR , advertising of prescription medication...These things do n't happen anywhere else .
It 's only in America that you 've been persuaded by the advertisers that their hold on your psyche and paycheck is normal.The figures I have are from 2000 , when the total amount spent on advertising worked out to about $ 5000 per inhabitant of the US per year.What a stupid tax for us all to be paying !
It does n't go to anything we particularly want .
It lines the pocketbooks of advertising agencies and irritates us when we 're trying to browse the web or watch television or listen to the radio or see the countryside from our cars.As a way of funding anything , it 's hugely inefficient .
I bet it 's even more inefficient than taxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God I hate advertising.
I hate the American attitude that advertising is acceptable (indeed inevitable) in all areas of life.
Billboards everywhere, sportscasters interrupting their coverage to promote products, ads read by the presenters on NPR, advertising of prescription medication...These things don't happen anywhere else.
It's only in America that you've been persuaded by the advertisers that their hold on your psyche and paycheck is normal.The figures I have are from 2000, when the total amount spent on advertising worked out to about $5000 per inhabitant of the US per year.What a stupid tax for us all to be paying!
It doesn't go to anything we particularly want.
It lines the pocketbooks of advertising agencies and irritates us when we're trying to browse the web or watch television or listen to the radio or see the countryside from our cars.As a way of funding anything, it's hugely inefficient.
I bet it's even more inefficient than taxes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283</id>
	<title>failure to read what the average webuser wants</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1243532340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared. complete failure</p><p>why? no one wants to exert the extra effort. what's the benefit? the summary makes it sound like some sort of revolutionary anticorporate antimind control movement. guess what: most users not only want to do nothing, they want to make sure they are seeing exactly what everyone else sees</p><p>its a basic human desire for commonality of culture: sharing anything on the web is all about being part of contributing to a group, and consuming what is the same for everyone else. this is a basic human social drive. that if they had content that was "special" and only visible to them in a certain way, even if in just cosmetic appearance, you are driving a wedge between the user and that sense of shared commonality. what is the whole point of the internet? what is the driving force behind its popularity and adoption?</p><p>this project flies directly in the face of that basic human social impulse and drive</p><p>ps: this observation of mine applies most especially to subcultures: small splinter groups that are outside the mainstream and proudly so. their desire to see the same thing the rest of the subculture sees is accelerated due to the fact that it takes more effort to be part of a subculture than be part of the mainstream, they need to "work harder" to remain synchronized in bona fides with the rest of the members of their subculture. suggest to them that they aren't seeing quite what everyone else sees in that subculture and it will disturb to them, that they aren't fully part of the group yet</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared .
complete failurewhy ?
no one wants to exert the extra effort .
what 's the benefit ?
the summary makes it sound like some sort of revolutionary anticorporate antimind control movement .
guess what : most users not only want to do nothing , they want to make sure they are seeing exactly what everyone else seesits a basic human desire for commonality of culture : sharing anything on the web is all about being part of contributing to a group , and consuming what is the same for everyone else .
this is a basic human social drive .
that if they had content that was " special " and only visible to them in a certain way , even if in just cosmetic appearance , you are driving a wedge between the user and that sense of shared commonality .
what is the whole point of the internet ?
what is the driving force behind its popularity and adoption ? this project flies directly in the face of that basic human social impulse and driveps : this observation of mine applies most especially to subcultures : small splinter groups that are outside the mainstream and proudly so .
their desire to see the same thing the rest of the subculture sees is accelerated due to the fact that it takes more effort to be part of a subculture than be part of the mainstream , they need to " work harder " to remain synchronized in bona fides with the rest of the members of their subculture .
suggest to them that they are n't seeing quite what everyone else sees in that subculture and it will disturb to them , that they are n't fully part of the group yet</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i remember reading about a startup in the dotcom days that allows users to annotate webpages in ways that can be shared.
complete failurewhy?
no one wants to exert the extra effort.
what's the benefit?
the summary makes it sound like some sort of revolutionary anticorporate antimind control movement.
guess what: most users not only want to do nothing, they want to make sure they are seeing exactly what everyone else seesits a basic human desire for commonality of culture: sharing anything on the web is all about being part of contributing to a group, and consuming what is the same for everyone else.
this is a basic human social drive.
that if they had content that was "special" and only visible to them in a certain way, even if in just cosmetic appearance, you are driving a wedge between the user and that sense of shared commonality.
what is the whole point of the internet?
what is the driving force behind its popularity and adoption?this project flies directly in the face of that basic human social impulse and driveps: this observation of mine applies most especially to subcultures: small splinter groups that are outside the mainstream and proudly so.
their desire to see the same thing the rest of the subculture sees is accelerated due to the fact that it takes more effort to be part of a subculture than be part of the mainstream, they need to "work harder" to remain synchronized in bona fides with the rest of the members of their subculture.
suggest to them that they aren't seeing quite what everyone else sees in that subculture and it will disturb to them, that they aren't fully part of the group yet</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129171</id>
	<title>Revolution=Chrome</title>
	<author>LordMyren</author>
	<datestamp>1243501320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The guy forgot just one important thing: Most people don't use Firefox.</p></div><p>Jetpack is just a weekend knock off of the much better done <a href="http://dev.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/extensions" title="chromium.org">Chrome Extensions</a> [chromium.org], true story.  Compare their couple month old API v. Jetpack's API and its blatantly obvious where Jetpack came from.</p><p>I'm hoping Safari and Opera adopt the Chrome Extensions model.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The guy forgot just one important thing : Most people do n't use Firefox.Jetpack is just a weekend knock off of the much better done Chrome Extensions [ chromium.org ] , true story .
Compare their couple month old API v. Jetpack 's API and its blatantly obvious where Jetpack came from.I 'm hoping Safari and Opera adopt the Chrome Extensions model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The guy forgot just one important thing: Most people don't use Firefox.Jetpack is just a weekend knock off of the much better done Chrome Extensions [chromium.org], true story.
Compare their couple month old API v. Jetpack's API and its blatantly obvious where Jetpack came from.I'm hoping Safari and Opera adopt the Chrome Extensions model.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126479</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243536720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's like that guy that buys a house near an airport and then complains the planes are loud.</p> </div><p>Very offtopic, but it's actually the people who have their houses a little further away from the airport that complain about the planes. I live literally over the road from London Heathrow. I can't hear the planes at all from my house.</p><p>At work, 8 miles away, if the wind is right the planes are loud enough to drown out a conversation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like that guy that buys a house near an airport and then complains the planes are loud .
Very offtopic , but it 's actually the people who have their houses a little further away from the airport that complain about the planes .
I live literally over the road from London Heathrow .
I ca n't hear the planes at all from my house.At work , 8 miles away , if the wind is right the planes are loud enough to drown out a conversation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like that guy that buys a house near an airport and then complains the planes are loud.
Very offtopic, but it's actually the people who have their houses a little further away from the airport that complain about the planes.
I live literally over the road from London Heathrow.
I can't hear the planes at all from my house.At work, 8 miles away, if the wind is right the planes are loud enough to drown out a conversation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125127</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127157</id>
	<title>Re:Sorry Dudes...</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1243538760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From day one, the actual rendering (or not) of HTML was intended to be user configurable. HTML was intended to be semantic tagging, not some sort of paste-up specification. A P tag specifies a paragraph, but does not specify what the browser does with a paragraph. The default is a reasonably sane rendering, but if the user wants something else, that's their call. All of the stuff like font, etc and CSS are strong suggestions which most browsers happen to accept and follow by default.</p><p>'Content Providers' in print media cannot stop me from drawing Hitler mustaches or horns on the ads in magazines I buy and they can't stop me from wearing tinted glasses when I read them. </p><p>Television 'Content providers' cannot stop me from hitting mute, modifying my TV to display the picture upside down, or creating funny commercial mash-ups by changing channels right after the voiceover asks a question.</p><p>They'd love the right to strap us down and give us the Clockwork Orange treatment, but that's not something they can have.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From day one , the actual rendering ( or not ) of HTML was intended to be user configurable .
HTML was intended to be semantic tagging , not some sort of paste-up specification .
A P tag specifies a paragraph , but does not specify what the browser does with a paragraph .
The default is a reasonably sane rendering , but if the user wants something else , that 's their call .
All of the stuff like font , etc and CSS are strong suggestions which most browsers happen to accept and follow by default .
'Content Providers ' in print media can not stop me from drawing Hitler mustaches or horns on the ads in magazines I buy and they ca n't stop me from wearing tinted glasses when I read them .
Television 'Content providers ' can not stop me from hitting mute , modifying my TV to display the picture upside down , or creating funny commercial mash-ups by changing channels right after the voiceover asks a question.They 'd love the right to strap us down and give us the Clockwork Orange treatment , but that 's not something they can have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From day one, the actual rendering (or not) of HTML was intended to be user configurable.
HTML was intended to be semantic tagging, not some sort of paste-up specification.
A P tag specifies a paragraph, but does not specify what the browser does with a paragraph.
The default is a reasonably sane rendering, but if the user wants something else, that's their call.
All of the stuff like font, etc and CSS are strong suggestions which most browsers happen to accept and follow by default.
'Content Providers' in print media cannot stop me from drawing Hitler mustaches or horns on the ads in magazines I buy and they can't stop me from wearing tinted glasses when I read them.
Television 'Content providers' cannot stop me from hitting mute, modifying my TV to display the picture upside down, or creating funny commercial mash-ups by changing channels right after the voiceover asks a question.They'd love the right to strap us down and give us the Clockwork Orange treatment, but that's not something they can have.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125239</id>
	<title>Re:Revolution</title>
	<author>RudeIota</author>
	<datestamp>1243532100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The guy forgot just one important thing: Most people don't use Firefox.</p></div><p>Regardless of whether or not it is not more than half of web surfers, <a href="http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers\_stats.asp" title="w3schools.com">plenty of people</a> [w3schools.com] use it. In fact, the percentage is so large, 'most' is moot. Most surveys show at least 30\% market share.<br> <br>Also, the number of FF users isn't worth bringing up anyhow - This article in no way says, "Teh Interwebs as we know it are ovur!". TFA simply says that this is a good STEP toward a more democratic web, although the TFS certainly sensationalized it quite a bit.<br> <br>Numbers really don't matter here. What *does* matter though, is the idea that Jetpack has indirectly brought with it -- more control over web content. This will undoubtedly spread to other browsers in the form of plugins and such, making browser market share irrelevant.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The guy forgot just one important thing : Most people do n't use Firefox.Regardless of whether or not it is not more than half of web surfers , plenty of people [ w3schools.com ] use it .
In fact , the percentage is so large , 'most ' is moot .
Most surveys show at least 30 \ % market share .
Also , the number of FF users is n't worth bringing up anyhow - This article in no way says , " Teh Interwebs as we know it are ovur ! " .
TFA simply says that this is a good STEP toward a more democratic web , although the TFS certainly sensationalized it quite a bit .
Numbers really do n't matter here .
What * does * matter though , is the idea that Jetpack has indirectly brought with it -- more control over web content .
This will undoubtedly spread to other browsers in the form of plugins and such , making browser market share irrelevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The guy forgot just one important thing: Most people don't use Firefox.Regardless of whether or not it is not more than half of web surfers, plenty of people [w3schools.com] use it.
In fact, the percentage is so large, 'most' is moot.
Most surveys show at least 30\% market share.
Also, the number of FF users isn't worth bringing up anyhow - This article in no way says, "Teh Interwebs as we know it are ovur!".
TFA simply says that this is a good STEP toward a more democratic web, although the TFS certainly sensationalized it quite a bit.
Numbers really don't matter here.
What *does* matter though, is the idea that Jetpack has indirectly brought with it -- more control over web content.
This will undoubtedly spread to other browsers in the form of plugins and such, making browser market share irrelevant.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125203</id>
	<title>Ad Injections</title>
	<author>moon3</author>
	<datestamp>1243531980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The critical question here is whether JetPack also plugs or replaces <b>ads</b> in the steered websites.
<br> <br>
Once you take the route of deliberately modifying content, this is just next logical step. I hope that is not the case.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The critical question here is whether JetPack also plugs or replaces ads in the steered websites .
Once you take the route of deliberately modifying content , this is just next logical step .
I hope that is not the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The critical question here is whether JetPack also plugs or replaces ads in the steered websites.
Once you take the route of deliberately modifying content, this is just next logical step.
I hope that is not the case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125361</id>
	<title>Dear Internet</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1243532700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>it is my computer, and i am going to control the content that is viewed, sincerely the nerdyUser</htmltext>
<tokenext>it is my computer , and i am going to control the content that is viewed , sincerely the nerdyUser</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it is my computer, and i am going to control the content that is viewed, sincerely the nerdyUser</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129579</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Sorry Guys.</title>
	<author>csartanis</author>
	<datestamp>1243502700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you!  I hate advertising too but everyone I know looks at me funny when I complain about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you !
I hate advertising too but everyone I know looks at me funny when I complain about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you!
I hate advertising too but everyone I know looks at me funny when I complain about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126827</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132957</id>
	<title>Re:power to the people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243518420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So we blow out the adverts that suck, and in the end we are left with atmospheric pressure?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So we blow out the adverts that suck , and in the end we are left with atmospheric pressure ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So we blow out the adverts that suck, and in the end we are left with atmospheric pressure?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124853</id>
	<title>That's why I stopped using a browser</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243530480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read the raw HTML and compose the pages in my imagination, just like the novel readers of the past used to do.</p><p>That really sticks it to the man.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read the raw HTML and compose the pages in my imagination , just like the novel readers of the past used to do.That really sticks it to the man .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read the raw HTML and compose the pages in my imagination, just like the novel readers of the past used to do.That really sticks it to the man.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126033</id>
	<title>Tivo for the web</title>
	<author>twoDigitIq</author>
	<datestamp>1243535160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why is no one complaining about their DVRs allowing them to skip over annoying television advertisements? I guess the majority of the slashdot audience doesn't have a stake in TV advertising revenue so they are perfectly fine with that handy little piece of tech.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is no one complaining about their DVRs allowing them to skip over annoying television advertisements ?
I guess the majority of the slashdot audience does n't have a stake in TV advertising revenue so they are perfectly fine with that handy little piece of tech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is no one complaining about their DVRs allowing them to skip over annoying television advertisements?
I guess the majority of the slashdot audience doesn't have a stake in TV advertising revenue so they are perfectly fine with that handy little piece of tech.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28128681</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243542900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's democratic as in "vote with your jetpack".</p><p>You go ahead and patronize whatever advertisers your favourite site has, if you want, and I'll buy whatever the fuck I need and in the mean time block all the ads I can.</p><p>Or maybe we should force feed users with ads ala Clockwork Orange.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's democratic as in " vote with your jetpack " .You go ahead and patronize whatever advertisers your favourite site has , if you want , and I 'll buy whatever the fuck I need and in the mean time block all the ads I can.Or maybe we should force feed users with ads ala Clockwork Orange .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's democratic as in "vote with your jetpack".You go ahead and patronize whatever advertisers your favourite site has, if you want, and I'll buy whatever the fuck I need and in the mean time block all the ads I can.Or maybe we should force feed users with ads ala Clockwork Orange.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28133619</id>
	<title>Re:failure to read what the average webuser wants</title>
	<author>myrikhan</author>
	<datestamp>1243522860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>what is the whole point of the internet? what is the driving force behind its popularity and adoption?</p></div><p>pornography?

I imagine one of the first uses of jetpack will be to put up random pictures in the background web page.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>what is the whole point of the internet ?
what is the driving force behind its popularity and adoption ? pornography ?
I imagine one of the first uses of jetpack will be to put up random pictures in the background web page .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what is the whole point of the internet?
what is the driving force behind its popularity and adoption?pornography?
I imagine one of the first uses of jetpack will be to put up random pictures in the background web page.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126205</id>
	<title>free market, not democracy</title>
	<author>SafeMode</author>
	<datestamp>1243535820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure why people bring up democracy when the comparison is nonsense.  It's not the people making a new law.  It's an example of a free market, that's all.</p><p>People want to pay nothing, but they want stuff.   Producers have the stuff, and they want something for it.  Compromise ensues.  The world doesn't collapse, it simple re-structures.   If what they have is actually in demand, they will find a way for their consumers to pay for it.  Otherwise, too bad.</p><p>This type of economy is best, because it benefits both the consumer and the producer equally.  The problem is, no producer wants this type of economy, as it's no where near as profitable and secure as any that put the balance on their side (just about all of them that allow businesses to exist).</p><p>As a member of the "people", there is justified worry about leaving the ad-revenue powered internet behind for something new.   New is always scary.   The devil you know is much safer feeling than the one you dont.  I think everyone realizes this all doesn't run on hopes and dreams, and they haven't really thought of what kind of evil crap those evil companies they are stopping ads from are going to think of if ads aren't working anymore.   The train has started already though, and it's not going to stop so it'll be interesting to see what schemes those are in the near future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure why people bring up democracy when the comparison is nonsense .
It 's not the people making a new law .
It 's an example of a free market , that 's all.People want to pay nothing , but they want stuff .
Producers have the stuff , and they want something for it .
Compromise ensues .
The world does n't collapse , it simple re-structures .
If what they have is actually in demand , they will find a way for their consumers to pay for it .
Otherwise , too bad.This type of economy is best , because it benefits both the consumer and the producer equally .
The problem is , no producer wants this type of economy , as it 's no where near as profitable and secure as any that put the balance on their side ( just about all of them that allow businesses to exist ) .As a member of the " people " , there is justified worry about leaving the ad-revenue powered internet behind for something new .
New is always scary .
The devil you know is much safer feeling than the one you dont .
I think everyone realizes this all does n't run on hopes and dreams , and they have n't really thought of what kind of evil crap those evil companies they are stopping ads from are going to think of if ads are n't working anymore .
The train has started already though , and it 's not going to stop so it 'll be interesting to see what schemes those are in the near future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure why people bring up democracy when the comparison is nonsense.
It's not the people making a new law.
It's an example of a free market, that's all.People want to pay nothing, but they want stuff.
Producers have the stuff, and they want something for it.
Compromise ensues.
The world doesn't collapse, it simple re-structures.
If what they have is actually in demand, they will find a way for their consumers to pay for it.
Otherwise, too bad.This type of economy is best, because it benefits both the consumer and the producer equally.
The problem is, no producer wants this type of economy, as it's no where near as profitable and secure as any that put the balance on their side (just about all of them that allow businesses to exist).As a member of the "people", there is justified worry about leaving the ad-revenue powered internet behind for something new.
New is always scary.
The devil you know is much safer feeling than the one you dont.
I think everyone realizes this all doesn't run on hopes and dreams, and they haven't really thought of what kind of evil crap those evil companies they are stopping ads from are going to think of if ads aren't working anymore.
The train has started already though, and it's not going to stop so it'll be interesting to see what schemes those are in the near future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126523</id>
	<title>Re:"one step closer to a more democratic Web"</title>
	<author>Thaelon</author>
	<datestamp>1243536840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's actually more like UI mods for games.</p><p>You can either attempt to fight it (an arms race you'll lose) or embrace it and get users to do hard stuff for you for free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's actually more like UI mods for games.You can either attempt to fight it ( an arms race you 'll lose ) or embrace it and get users to do hard stuff for you for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's actually more like UI mods for games.You can either attempt to fight it (an arms race you'll lose) or embrace it and get users to do hard stuff for you for free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28131015
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126045
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125999
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28128183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126779
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125215
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124947
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28130303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132417
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125641
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28133619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125365
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28134241
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124947
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125685
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28136465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124947
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125647
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28128681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_146246_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125283
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125945
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28133619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127047
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127555
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28130303
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126051
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126499
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132417
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125199
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129807
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126721
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126523
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125501
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28128681
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126131
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125621
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125087
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125161
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132445
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28128183
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129919
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125127
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126479
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126839
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126701
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125149
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129769
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126079
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126827
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129579
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28132927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125523
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126379
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127703
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125647
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125965
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126779
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127443
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126137
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124883
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126033
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124925
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124853
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125999
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125365
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124915
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28129171
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125239
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125685
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125301
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125267
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28124947
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28127157
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28136465
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28134241
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28125215
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_146246.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28126045
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_146246.28131015
</commentlist>
</conversation>
