<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_05_29_1534236</id>
	<title>Hulu Testing Client App; Boxee Dispute Explained</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1243612860000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>N!NJA sends in word of <a href="http://www.macworld.com/article/140839/2009/05/hulu\_releases\_desktop\_client\_for\_mac\_and\_pc.html">Hulu's new beta section</a>, Hulu Labs, which is now showcasing Hulu Desktop, a client that runs on both Windows and Mac. The author believes that Hulu Desktop explains why Hulu has been <a href="//slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/19/140220&amp;tid=188">so</a> <a href="//hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/07/2251233&amp;tid=188">touchy</a> about <a href="//slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/27/1218227&amp;tid=129">Boxee</a>. <i>"This clearly explains why Hulu has been so persistent in blocking  Boxee &mdash; an open-source media-center application for Macs, Apple TVs, and other devices &mdash; from including its content. Since Hulu provides free, ad-based mainstream content from the largest studios and networks in the business, they are under tight constraints imposed by these major players. We have already seen good examples of where Hulu is heading with integrated advertising inside the browser. A desktop client produced in-house will be much more conducive to monetizing Hulu using these kinds of campaigns."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>N ! NJA sends in word of Hulu 's new beta section , Hulu Labs , which is now showcasing Hulu Desktop , a client that runs on both Windows and Mac .
The author believes that Hulu Desktop explains why Hulu has been so touchy about Boxee .
" This clearly explains why Hulu has been so persistent in blocking Boxee    an open-source media-center application for Macs , Apple TVs , and other devices    from including its content .
Since Hulu provides free , ad-based mainstream content from the largest studios and networks in the business , they are under tight constraints imposed by these major players .
We have already seen good examples of where Hulu is heading with integrated advertising inside the browser .
A desktop client produced in-house will be much more conducive to monetizing Hulu using these kinds of campaigns .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>N!NJA sends in word of Hulu's new beta section, Hulu Labs, which is now showcasing Hulu Desktop, a client that runs on both Windows and Mac.
The author believes that Hulu Desktop explains why Hulu has been so touchy about Boxee.
"This clearly explains why Hulu has been so persistent in blocking  Boxee — an open-source media-center application for Macs, Apple TVs, and other devices — from including its content.
Since Hulu provides free, ad-based mainstream content from the largest studios and networks in the business, they are under tight constraints imposed by these major players.
We have already seen good examples of where Hulu is heading with integrated advertising inside the browser.
A desktop client produced in-house will be much more conducive to monetizing Hulu using these kinds of campaigns.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140041</id>
	<title>Re:Adobe Flash. It Hurts.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243618200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is time and adoption. Flash (as much as I hate it) is available now. Hulu is growing at the rate that needs to run on technology available, not invest in under-developed OSS alternatives that could take a long time to reach a critical mass of adoption. There edge is that they are faster and more available than bit-torrent and a bit easier to use. If you add esoteric plugins to the mix you're going to adjitate the users, and you're going to rely on whatever viewer the client happens to use to process/view the video (VLC, WMP, QT, etc...) which introduces another issue in configurability for the masses. Unfortunately, Flash is the path of least-resistance that works for the vast majority of their customers (even though it runs poorly on non-Windows platforms.)
<br> <br>They are not a technology company... and operate more like a cable/satellite provider that just so happens to use HTTP and a browser to show the lineup rather than a set-top box/media center on game console (though that may change), and probably will.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is time and adoption .
Flash ( as much as I hate it ) is available now .
Hulu is growing at the rate that needs to run on technology available , not invest in under-developed OSS alternatives that could take a long time to reach a critical mass of adoption .
There edge is that they are faster and more available than bit-torrent and a bit easier to use .
If you add esoteric plugins to the mix you 're going to adjitate the users , and you 're going to rely on whatever viewer the client happens to use to process/view the video ( VLC , WMP , QT , etc... ) which introduces another issue in configurability for the masses .
Unfortunately , Flash is the path of least-resistance that works for the vast majority of their customers ( even though it runs poorly on non-Windows platforms .
) They are not a technology company... and operate more like a cable/satellite provider that just so happens to use HTTP and a browser to show the lineup rather than a set-top box/media center on game console ( though that may change ) , and probably will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is time and adoption.
Flash (as much as I hate it) is available now.
Hulu is growing at the rate that needs to run on technology available, not invest in under-developed OSS alternatives that could take a long time to reach a critical mass of adoption.
There edge is that they are faster and more available than bit-torrent and a bit easier to use.
If you add esoteric plugins to the mix you're going to adjitate the users, and you're going to rely on whatever viewer the client happens to use to process/view the video (VLC, WMP, QT, etc...) which introduces another issue in configurability for the masses.
Unfortunately, Flash is the path of least-resistance that works for the vast majority of their customers (even though it runs poorly on non-Windows platforms.
)
 They are not a technology company... and operate more like a cable/satellite provider that just so happens to use HTTP and a browser to show the lineup rather than a set-top box/media center on game console (though that may change), and probably will.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28146309</id>
	<title>Re:Adobe Flash. It Hurts.</title>
	<author>ion.simon.c</author>
	<datestamp>1243608180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem is time and adoption.</p></div><p>Time? Sure thing. Hulu probably knows their way around Flash and can develop a standalone app in a week.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Adoption? Fuck no. They're writing a standalone client. They can bundle *anything* *they* *want* with it to get it to work!<br>Hell, they could package mplayer and pipe commands to it to decode the video, and redirect the output to their app.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is time and adoption.Time ?
Sure thing .
Hulu probably knows their way around Flash and can develop a standalone app in a week .
; ) Adoption ? Fuck no .
They 're writing a standalone client .
They can bundle * anything * * they * * want * with it to get it to work ! Hell , they could package mplayer and pipe commands to it to decode the video , and redirect the output to their app .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is time and adoption.Time?
Sure thing.
Hulu probably knows their way around Flash and can develop a standalone app in a week.
;)Adoption? Fuck no.
They're writing a standalone client.
They can bundle *anything* *they* *want* with it to get it to work!Hell, they could package mplayer and pipe commands to it to decode the video, and redirect the output to their app.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140041</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140055</id>
	<title>Let me RTFA that for you</title>
	<author>whiledo</author>
	<datestamp>1243618320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hulu Desktop is wrapped with a media-center-like bow, with a customized "lean-back" UI that can run full screen and even respond to Apple Remotes and Windows Media Center remotes.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hulu Desktop is wrapped with a media-center-like bow , with a customized " lean-back " UI that can run full screen and even respond to Apple Remotes and Windows Media Center remotes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hulu Desktop is wrapped with a media-center-like bow, with a customized "lean-back" UI that can run full screen and even respond to Apple Remotes and Windows Media Center remotes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140091</id>
	<title>Why not just work with Boxee</title>
	<author>docbrody</author>
	<datestamp>1243618440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Call me naive, but I wonder why Hulu would not just embrace Boxee and try to work with them.  It would save them all the development time and expense, and still allow them to stream their ads.  Why should Hulu care how their content is distributed AS LONG AS they get the ad revenue.  And they can still develop their own app if they like.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Call me naive , but I wonder why Hulu would not just embrace Boxee and try to work with them .
It would save them all the development time and expense , and still allow them to stream their ads .
Why should Hulu care how their content is distributed AS LONG AS they get the ad revenue .
And they can still develop their own app if they like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Call me naive, but I wonder why Hulu would not just embrace Boxee and try to work with them.
It would save them all the development time and expense, and still allow them to stream their ads.
Why should Hulu care how their content is distributed AS LONG AS they get the ad revenue.
And they can still develop their own app if they like.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140855</id>
	<title>Re:The real reason for blocking Media Centers</title>
	<author>EllisDees</author>
	<datestamp>1243622340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;This post (Q's 7 &amp; 8) I think explains why Hulu has been forced to block media center apps</p><p>They're doing such a bang up job of it that I've been watching Hulu on my Boxee box for the past couple of weeks.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; This post ( Q 's 7 &amp; 8 ) I think explains why Hulu has been forced to block media center appsThey 're doing such a bang up job of it that I 've been watching Hulu on my Boxee box for the past couple of weeks .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;This post (Q's 7 &amp; 8) I think explains why Hulu has been forced to block media center appsThey're doing such a bang up job of it that I've been watching Hulu on my Boxee box for the past couple of weeks.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141253</id>
	<title>Bah - who cares</title>
	<author>colinnwn</author>
	<datestamp>1243623960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Until Hulu releases a Linux version of their app, or Boxee releases a 64 bit Linux version with the Hulu hack, I don't care.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Until Hulu releases a Linux version of their app , or Boxee releases a 64 bit Linux version with the Hulu hack , I do n't care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until Hulu releases a Linux version of their app, or Boxee releases a 64 bit Linux version with the Hulu hack, I don't care.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139785</id>
	<title>WTB HULU outside of the US</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243616880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Title says it all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Title says it all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Title says it all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140203</id>
	<title>Conclusion: Slower than bathtub gin in Canadia</title>
	<author>datapharmer</author>
	<datestamp>1243618980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My conclusions: They get a star sticker for making a universal binary and not locking out the many mac users that still love and use their PowerPC based Macs.  Beyond that though, it is crap. The menus are EXTREMELY slow to respond (even on a 2.4 Ghz core 2 duo with 2 GB ram) and unpredictable. The main interface isn't full screen and doesn't even have a full screen option. The shows seem to revert to clips even when you specifically go though seasons to the latest season, and the whole thing feels clunky.  I really don't understand the motivation for this.  I was just remarking to my girlfriend the other day how I don't mind the commercials, I just want to watch on my own schedule.  Why doesn't hulu just embrace boxee and understudy or even make their own frontrow plugin?  This would be far more useful than this crapola desktop app... I understand this is still beta, but it acts more like alpha since performance-wise it is jumpy and unwatchable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My conclusions : They get a star sticker for making a universal binary and not locking out the many mac users that still love and use their PowerPC based Macs .
Beyond that though , it is crap .
The menus are EXTREMELY slow to respond ( even on a 2.4 Ghz core 2 duo with 2 GB ram ) and unpredictable .
The main interface is n't full screen and does n't even have a full screen option .
The shows seem to revert to clips even when you specifically go though seasons to the latest season , and the whole thing feels clunky .
I really do n't understand the motivation for this .
I was just remarking to my girlfriend the other day how I do n't mind the commercials , I just want to watch on my own schedule .
Why does n't hulu just embrace boxee and understudy or even make their own frontrow plugin ?
This would be far more useful than this crapola desktop app... I understand this is still beta , but it acts more like alpha since performance-wise it is jumpy and unwatchable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My conclusions: They get a star sticker for making a universal binary and not locking out the many mac users that still love and use their PowerPC based Macs.
Beyond that though, it is crap.
The menus are EXTREMELY slow to respond (even on a 2.4 Ghz core 2 duo with 2 GB ram) and unpredictable.
The main interface isn't full screen and doesn't even have a full screen option.
The shows seem to revert to clips even when you specifically go though seasons to the latest season, and the whole thing feels clunky.
I really don't understand the motivation for this.
I was just remarking to my girlfriend the other day how I don't mind the commercials, I just want to watch on my own schedule.
Why doesn't hulu just embrace boxee and understudy or even make their own frontrow plugin?
This would be far more useful than this crapola desktop app... I understand this is still beta, but it acts more like alpha since performance-wise it is jumpy and unwatchable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761</id>
	<title>No love for the Penguin?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243616760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This has been asked before, but... where's the Linux version?  And will we need a liquid cooled Phenom x4 processor to render the Adobe video in full screen?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This has been asked before , but... where 's the Linux version ?
And will we need a liquid cooled Phenom x4 processor to render the Adobe video in full screen ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has been asked before, but... where's the Linux version?
And will we need a liquid cooled Phenom x4 processor to render the Adobe video in full screen?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141665</id>
	<title>I don't want integration on the desktop</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243625580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't want integration with the desktop.  I want to be able to download the video as a stand-alone file and play it on my big screen via a media center box, and not on my dinky 17" monitor in my office.  If I could get the video directly from a provider I'd even put up with 1 commercial per break period (like Hulu is doing now) embedded in it.  As it is, my option now is to bit-torrent the shows that I like for immediate gratification, and then get the DVD's as they are released, so as to promote future seasons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't want integration with the desktop .
I want to be able to download the video as a stand-alone file and play it on my big screen via a media center box , and not on my dinky 17 " monitor in my office .
If I could get the video directly from a provider I 'd even put up with 1 commercial per break period ( like Hulu is doing now ) embedded in it .
As it is , my option now is to bit-torrent the shows that I like for immediate gratification , and then get the DVD 's as they are released , so as to promote future seasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't want integration with the desktop.
I want to be able to download the video as a stand-alone file and play it on my big screen via a media center box, and not on my dinky 17" monitor in my office.
If I could get the video directly from a provider I'd even put up with 1 commercial per break period (like Hulu is doing now) embedded in it.
As it is, my option now is to bit-torrent the shows that I like for immediate gratification, and then get the DVD's as they are released, so as to promote future seasons.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28145597</id>
	<title>Hulu Desktop is Good</title>
	<author>cartavio</author>
	<datestamp>1243601520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I downloaded it and am trying it now.  Very pleased to say that it is very light weight, uses the less evil Adobe Flash player (as opposed to Microsoft's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET based Silver light), and so far works pretty good.  If they begin to offer latest release movie rentals off this service, I' all for it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I downloaded it and am trying it now .
Very pleased to say that it is very light weight , uses the less evil Adobe Flash player ( as opposed to Microsoft 's .NET based Silver light ) , and so far works pretty good .
If they begin to offer latest release movie rentals off this service , I ' all for it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I downloaded it and am trying it now.
Very pleased to say that it is very light weight, uses the less evil Adobe Flash player (as opposed to Microsoft's .NET based Silver light), and so far works pretty good.
If they begin to offer latest release movie rentals off this service, I' all for it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141551</id>
	<title>Re:High Bandwidth requirements</title>
	<author>crazybilly</author>
	<datestamp>1243625220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's always the pause button. While Hulu video is paused, it gives you a cute little buffer-o-meter, showing you how much progress you've made.
<p>
Fwiw, I don't know if a full buffer-o-meter means the whole show's been downloaded or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's always the pause button .
While Hulu video is paused , it gives you a cute little buffer-o-meter , showing you how much progress you 've made .
Fwiw , I do n't know if a full buffer-o-meter means the whole show 's been downloaded or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's always the pause button.
While Hulu video is paused, it gives you a cute little buffer-o-meter, showing you how much progress you've made.
Fwiw, I don't know if a full buffer-o-meter means the whole show's been downloaded or not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140141</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140829</id>
	<title>Re:No love for the Penguin?</title>
	<author>Sparks23</author>
	<datestamp>1243622220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The BBC iPlayer does the same thing to American users, with a 'Not available in your territory' overlay message for, well, almost everything on their site save BBC News clips.  This includes all the little embedded flash clips scattered across the Beeb's website and embedded in articles on other sites.  Which is annoying, since trailers, cast interviews and video diaries for BBC-produced series which used to be put on YouTube are now on region-restricted iPlayer.  (I suppose I can understand this when dealing with full episodes, but cast interviews, trailers or video diaries from on the set?  Really, that seems excessive.)</p><p>The brand new SkyOne streaming media extravaganza for Xbox 360 will be only in the UK, too, though at least that's not an embedded thing you're likely to run across in a random web article.</p><p>There's plenty of annoying region lockouts going on there, not just in America.  I suspect this comes down to licensing ('why should we license your show for our territory when people are already watching it online?'), advertising ('why should I buy advertising on this show when people watching it could be anywhere in the world? I want to target my ad buys to people who can actually use my service/product.') and other funding (BBC productions being funded by UK license fees, for instance).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The BBC iPlayer does the same thing to American users , with a 'Not available in your territory ' overlay message for , well , almost everything on their site save BBC News clips .
This includes all the little embedded flash clips scattered across the Beeb 's website and embedded in articles on other sites .
Which is annoying , since trailers , cast interviews and video diaries for BBC-produced series which used to be put on YouTube are now on region-restricted iPlayer .
( I suppose I can understand this when dealing with full episodes , but cast interviews , trailers or video diaries from on the set ?
Really , that seems excessive .
) The brand new SkyOne streaming media extravaganza for Xbox 360 will be only in the UK , too , though at least that 's not an embedded thing you 're likely to run across in a random web article.There 's plenty of annoying region lockouts going on there , not just in America .
I suspect this comes down to licensing ( 'why should we license your show for our territory when people are already watching it online ?
' ) , advertising ( 'why should I buy advertising on this show when people watching it could be anywhere in the world ?
I want to target my ad buys to people who can actually use my service/product .
' ) and other funding ( BBC productions being funded by UK license fees , for instance ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The BBC iPlayer does the same thing to American users, with a 'Not available in your territory' overlay message for, well, almost everything on their site save BBC News clips.
This includes all the little embedded flash clips scattered across the Beeb's website and embedded in articles on other sites.
Which is annoying, since trailers, cast interviews and video diaries for BBC-produced series which used to be put on YouTube are now on region-restricted iPlayer.
(I suppose I can understand this when dealing with full episodes, but cast interviews, trailers or video diaries from on the set?
Really, that seems excessive.
)The brand new SkyOne streaming media extravaganza for Xbox 360 will be only in the UK, too, though at least that's not an embedded thing you're likely to run across in a random web article.There's plenty of annoying region lockouts going on there, not just in America.
I suspect this comes down to licensing ('why should we license your show for our territory when people are already watching it online?
'), advertising ('why should I buy advertising on this show when people watching it could be anywhere in the world?
I want to target my ad buys to people who can actually use my service/product.
') and other funding (BBC productions being funded by UK license fees, for instance).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140481</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28142669</id>
	<title>INSTALLED LAST NIGHT</title>
	<author>AnAdventurer</author>
	<datestamp>1243629600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One a 13" MacBook with 2 gig's RAM. HDMI to my Sony 37" and sound to Yamaha surround sound. New MacOS update gave me like 1900x resolution.<p>
Works and looks great.</p><p>
I had been bluetooth mousing it, but that had issues. BTW Magjaic Jack caused my MacBook to crash EVERY TIME I put the computer to sleep (good bye crappy VOIP).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One a 13 " MacBook with 2 gig 's RAM .
HDMI to my Sony 37 " and sound to Yamaha surround sound .
New MacOS update gave me like 1900x resolution .
Works and looks great .
I had been bluetooth mousing it , but that had issues .
BTW Magjaic Jack caused my MacBook to crash EVERY TIME I put the computer to sleep ( good bye crappy VOIP ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One a 13" MacBook with 2 gig's RAM.
HDMI to my Sony 37" and sound to Yamaha surround sound.
New MacOS update gave me like 1900x resolution.
Works and looks great.
I had been bluetooth mousing it, but that had issues.
BTW Magjaic Jack caused my MacBook to crash EVERY TIME I put the computer to sleep (good bye crappy VOIP).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141023</id>
	<title>Re:Adobe Flash. It Hurts.</title>
	<author>divisionbyzero</author>
	<datestamp>1243623000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it allows me to do an end-run around paying for cable in the long run it's probably worth it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it allows me to do an end-run around paying for cable in the long run it 's probably worth it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it allows me to do an end-run around paying for cable in the long run it's probably worth it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140141</id>
	<title>High Bandwidth requirements</title>
	<author>netruner</author>
	<datestamp>1243618740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The biggest problem I have with Hulu is its bandwidth requirements.  TFA states that you need a 2Mbit connection.  I just don't have that available to me.  On a good day I get<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.5Mbit out of my Sprint wireless card and I have the best connection in my neighborhood.  If I could set a buffer high enough, or if I could set it to download overnight, I could watch it later.  Does anyone know of a way to do this with Hulu or any other such service for that matter?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The biggest problem I have with Hulu is its bandwidth requirements .
TFA states that you need a 2Mbit connection .
I just do n't have that available to me .
On a good day I get .5Mbit out of my Sprint wireless card and I have the best connection in my neighborhood .
If I could set a buffer high enough , or if I could set it to download overnight , I could watch it later .
Does anyone know of a way to do this with Hulu or any other such service for that matter ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The biggest problem I have with Hulu is its bandwidth requirements.
TFA states that you need a 2Mbit connection.
I just don't have that available to me.
On a good day I get .5Mbit out of my Sprint wireless card and I have the best connection in my neighborhood.
If I could set a buffer high enough, or if I could set it to download overnight, I could watch it later.
Does anyone know of a way to do this with Hulu or any other such service for that matter?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140219</id>
	<title>Re:Why does there need to be a desktop app?</title>
	<author>Rude Turnip</author>
	<datestamp>1243619040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can run Hulu on Xbox 360, PS3 or any other dlna client with the PlayOn server for Windows.  I run it on my XP box and Hulu works just fine on my 360.  It's $40, but well worth it.  This is also why this whole Boxee situation is funny...PlayOn is designed to stream content from your computer to your TV and there has not been one peep whatsoever about any difficulties with Hulu.  No one has been able to provide an honest answer as to why PlayOn has no problems with the Hulu folks while Boxee does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can run Hulu on Xbox 360 , PS3 or any other dlna client with the PlayOn server for Windows .
I run it on my XP box and Hulu works just fine on my 360 .
It 's $ 40 , but well worth it .
This is also why this whole Boxee situation is funny...PlayOn is designed to stream content from your computer to your TV and there has not been one peep whatsoever about any difficulties with Hulu .
No one has been able to provide an honest answer as to why PlayOn has no problems with the Hulu folks while Boxee does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can run Hulu on Xbox 360, PS3 or any other dlna client with the PlayOn server for Windows.
I run it on my XP box and Hulu works just fine on my 360.
It's $40, but well worth it.
This is also why this whole Boxee situation is funny...PlayOn is designed to stream content from your computer to your TV and there has not been one peep whatsoever about any difficulties with Hulu.
No one has been able to provide an honest answer as to why PlayOn has no problems with the Hulu folks while Boxee does.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140513</id>
	<title>from the who-didn't-know-that dept</title>
	<author>doronbc</author>
	<datestamp>1243620540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It may not have been laid out before, but this has been the issue all along.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It may not have been laid out before , but this has been the issue all along .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It may not have been laid out before, but this has been the issue all along.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140053</id>
	<title>In related news...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243618260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot testing web code; website failure explained.</p><p>I mean seriously, do you guys actually test your code before releasing it?</p><p>"Fuck it; we'll do it live!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot testing web code ; website failure explained.I mean seriously , do you guys actually test your code before releasing it ?
" Fuck it ; we 'll do it live !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot testing web code; website failure explained.I mean seriously, do you guys actually test your code before releasing it?
"Fuck it; we'll do it live!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28144883</id>
	<title>Re:Adobe Flash. It Hurts.</title>
	<author>Fishbulb</author>
	<datestamp>1243596840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>I'm not sure why Hulu isn't beefing up other open source software, containers and codecs to meet these needs.</i> </p><p>Um, did you miss the part about Hulu being a whole-hearted tool for the networks and Hollywood (aka MPAA)?

</p><p> <i>It would certainly make it easier for them to satisfy the media licenses with ad revenue.</i> </p><p>It's not Hulu's ad revenue, it the networks'.  Why do you think Hulu is only available to US IP addresses?  It's because there's no point in advertising products/services only available in the US to viewers outside the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure why Hulu is n't beefing up other open source software , containers and codecs to meet these needs .
Um , did you miss the part about Hulu being a whole-hearted tool for the networks and Hollywood ( aka MPAA ) ?
It would certainly make it easier for them to satisfy the media licenses with ad revenue .
It 's not Hulu 's ad revenue , it the networks' .
Why do you think Hulu is only available to US IP addresses ?
It 's because there 's no point in advertising products/services only available in the US to viewers outside the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I'm not sure why Hulu isn't beefing up other open source software, containers and codecs to meet these needs.
Um, did you miss the part about Hulu being a whole-hearted tool for the networks and Hollywood (aka MPAA)?
It would certainly make it easier for them to satisfy the media licenses with ad revenue.
It's not Hulu's ad revenue, it the networks'.
Why do you think Hulu is only available to US IP addresses?
It's because there's no point in advertising products/services only available in the US to viewers outside the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28145623</id>
	<title>Re:High Bandwidth requirements</title>
	<author>N!NJA</author>
	<datestamp>1243601700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>btw, you dont need so much bandwidth. at least not if you watch on a browser. <a href="http://entertainment.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1249723&amp;cid=28144911" title="slashdot.org">watch the 296p</a> [slashdot.org] version of the video.</htmltext>
<tokenext>btw , you dont need so much bandwidth .
at least not if you watch on a browser .
watch the 296p [ slashdot.org ] version of the video .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>btw, you dont need so much bandwidth.
at least not if you watch on a browser.
watch the 296p [slashdot.org] version of the video.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140141</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28145763</id>
	<title>Complaints</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243603020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know what irritates me is that community of GNU/Linux users who routinely use the platform who don't complain. Those that do are often criticized for it because GNU/Linux has what many would call an insignificant market share. The thing is everybody wants to use it so there really isn't any excuse that companies don't support it. The reason many users can't use it is cause the companies don't support it. That circular effect is a LACK of people complaining who CAN and DO use it.</p><p>Here are two placed I'd suggest people start complaining:</p><p>Hulu's "Desktop Hulu" site is asking for feedback at:</p><p>http://www.hulu.com/discussions/19</p><p>Digg- don't requests outnumber requests for a GNU/Linux version:</p><p>http://digg.com/software/Hulu\_Desktop\_PC\_and\_Mac\_clients</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know what irritates me is that community of GNU/Linux users who routinely use the platform who do n't complain .
Those that do are often criticized for it because GNU/Linux has what many would call an insignificant market share .
The thing is everybody wants to use it so there really is n't any excuse that companies do n't support it .
The reason many users ca n't use it is cause the companies do n't support it .
That circular effect is a LACK of people complaining who CAN and DO use it.Here are two placed I 'd suggest people start complaining : Hulu 's " Desktop Hulu " site is asking for feedback at : http : //www.hulu.com/discussions/19Digg- do n't requests outnumber requests for a GNU/Linux version : http : //digg.com/software/Hulu \ _Desktop \ _PC \ _and \ _Mac \ _clients</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know what irritates me is that community of GNU/Linux users who routinely use the platform who don't complain.
Those that do are often criticized for it because GNU/Linux has what many would call an insignificant market share.
The thing is everybody wants to use it so there really isn't any excuse that companies don't support it.
The reason many users can't use it is cause the companies don't support it.
That circular effect is a LACK of people complaining who CAN and DO use it.Here are two placed I'd suggest people start complaining:Hulu's "Desktop Hulu" site is asking for feedback at:http://www.hulu.com/discussions/19Digg- don't requests outnumber requests for a GNU/Linux version:http://digg.com/software/Hulu\_Desktop\_PC\_and\_Mac\_clients</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141031</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think ads were the sticky issue with Bo</title>
	<author>defaria</author>
	<datestamp>1243623000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Ads? No, it doesn't have anything to do with ads. Advertising on Hulu is little more than a shell game for the networks (dba Hulu).</p></div></blockquote><p>

What the hell are you talking about? Hulu exists to make money - they are not a non-profit venture. If you believe they are then show evidence of that. Ads make Hulu money. They are not doing this for free.</p><blockquote><div><p>Consider the history of the music industry on the Internet. The technology for purchasing music online was entirely in place by 1995 when people started to use Netscape Navigator in large numbers. Napster didn't come into play until 1999, iTunes in 2001.

The general (and correct) opinion is that the music industry wasted several years of opportunity to establish themselves as the major purveyor of online music content on their own terms. When Napster came around people got used to trading music for free, and with iTunes the industry accidentally ceded major amounts of mindshare and control to Apple. I've seen interviews explaining that the reason for the wasted opportunity was that they had no clue what to do, even who they should work with.

The TV studios today are not nearly as clueless as the music industry was in 1995, and they are determined not to repeat the same mistakes. They are aware that they have an opportunity to dictate terms and lengthen the survival of their traditional broadcast delivery model if they play things right.</p></div></blockquote><p>

What are you saying or trying to imply here? Online music sharing is totally different than TV shows. When you get an MP3 file from some online music sharing site it's not like in the 3rd verse you hear "and now a word from our sponser...". With TV you do. The broadcast model for at least 70 years now have been advertiser supported. Hulu videos have ads in them. They are advertising supported. This is totally different than music. What you say above makes no sense.</p><blockquote><div><p>Enter Hulu -- Hulu is not a for-profit corporation in reality. Hulu is a (perhaps illegal) collusion among NBC, FOX, and ABC (via their respective owners) to provide a "just right" level of service via the Internet -- enough that people are not (as) tempted by BitTorrent/iTunes, but not enough to make for a better experience than that available on a TV.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Again, what are you saying here. Hulu is a for profit corporation. That is their legal structure and their aim - period. Stop spreading lies. And there's nothing illegal with the networks getting together - last I checked this was still a free country although I suspect you secretly wish it wasn't.</p><blockquote><div><p>That's the reason for all the jacking around with availability schedules and the reason Hulu will never allow itself to be repackaged into a convenient format. The inconvenience is the entire purpose of the service.</p></div></blockquote><p>

You have failed to show that and it doesn't even make any sense. Hulu makes money on ads. It really doesn't matter what vehicle you use to view the ads. Hulu's concern is that open source pirates might be able to break the encryption and serve up content without ads thus no money for Hulu. There's no need to invent conspiracy theories...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ads ?
No , it does n't have anything to do with ads .
Advertising on Hulu is little more than a shell game for the networks ( dba Hulu ) .
What the hell are you talking about ?
Hulu exists to make money - they are not a non-profit venture .
If you believe they are then show evidence of that .
Ads make Hulu money .
They are not doing this for free.Consider the history of the music industry on the Internet .
The technology for purchasing music online was entirely in place by 1995 when people started to use Netscape Navigator in large numbers .
Napster did n't come into play until 1999 , iTunes in 2001 .
The general ( and correct ) opinion is that the music industry wasted several years of opportunity to establish themselves as the major purveyor of online music content on their own terms .
When Napster came around people got used to trading music for free , and with iTunes the industry accidentally ceded major amounts of mindshare and control to Apple .
I 've seen interviews explaining that the reason for the wasted opportunity was that they had no clue what to do , even who they should work with .
The TV studios today are not nearly as clueless as the music industry was in 1995 , and they are determined not to repeat the same mistakes .
They are aware that they have an opportunity to dictate terms and lengthen the survival of their traditional broadcast delivery model if they play things right .
What are you saying or trying to imply here ?
Online music sharing is totally different than TV shows .
When you get an MP3 file from some online music sharing site it 's not like in the 3rd verse you hear " and now a word from our sponser... " .
With TV you do .
The broadcast model for at least 70 years now have been advertiser supported .
Hulu videos have ads in them .
They are advertising supported .
This is totally different than music .
What you say above makes no sense.Enter Hulu -- Hulu is not a for-profit corporation in reality .
Hulu is a ( perhaps illegal ) collusion among NBC , FOX , and ABC ( via their respective owners ) to provide a " just right " level of service via the Internet -- enough that people are not ( as ) tempted by BitTorrent/iTunes , but not enough to make for a better experience than that available on a TV .
Again , what are you saying here .
Hulu is a for profit corporation .
That is their legal structure and their aim - period .
Stop spreading lies .
And there 's nothing illegal with the networks getting together - last I checked this was still a free country although I suspect you secretly wish it was n't.That 's the reason for all the jacking around with availability schedules and the reason Hulu will never allow itself to be repackaged into a convenient format .
The inconvenience is the entire purpose of the service .
You have failed to show that and it does n't even make any sense .
Hulu makes money on ads .
It really does n't matter what vehicle you use to view the ads .
Hulu 's concern is that open source pirates might be able to break the encryption and serve up content without ads thus no money for Hulu .
There 's no need to invent conspiracy theories.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ads?
No, it doesn't have anything to do with ads.
Advertising on Hulu is little more than a shell game for the networks (dba Hulu).
What the hell are you talking about?
Hulu exists to make money - they are not a non-profit venture.
If you believe they are then show evidence of that.
Ads make Hulu money.
They are not doing this for free.Consider the history of the music industry on the Internet.
The technology for purchasing music online was entirely in place by 1995 when people started to use Netscape Navigator in large numbers.
Napster didn't come into play until 1999, iTunes in 2001.
The general (and correct) opinion is that the music industry wasted several years of opportunity to establish themselves as the major purveyor of online music content on their own terms.
When Napster came around people got used to trading music for free, and with iTunes the industry accidentally ceded major amounts of mindshare and control to Apple.
I've seen interviews explaining that the reason for the wasted opportunity was that they had no clue what to do, even who they should work with.
The TV studios today are not nearly as clueless as the music industry was in 1995, and they are determined not to repeat the same mistakes.
They are aware that they have an opportunity to dictate terms and lengthen the survival of their traditional broadcast delivery model if they play things right.
What are you saying or trying to imply here?
Online music sharing is totally different than TV shows.
When you get an MP3 file from some online music sharing site it's not like in the 3rd verse you hear "and now a word from our sponser...".
With TV you do.
The broadcast model for at least 70 years now have been advertiser supported.
Hulu videos have ads in them.
They are advertising supported.
This is totally different than music.
What you say above makes no sense.Enter Hulu -- Hulu is not a for-profit corporation in reality.
Hulu is a (perhaps illegal) collusion among NBC, FOX, and ABC (via their respective owners) to provide a "just right" level of service via the Internet -- enough that people are not (as) tempted by BitTorrent/iTunes, but not enough to make for a better experience than that available on a TV.
Again, what are you saying here.
Hulu is a for profit corporation.
That is their legal structure and their aim - period.
Stop spreading lies.
And there's nothing illegal with the networks getting together - last I checked this was still a free country although I suspect you secretly wish it wasn't.That's the reason for all the jacking around with availability schedules and the reason Hulu will never allow itself to be repackaged into a convenient format.
The inconvenience is the entire purpose of the service.
You have failed to show that and it doesn't even make any sense.
Hulu makes money on ads.
It really doesn't matter what vehicle you use to view the ads.
Hulu's concern is that open source pirates might be able to break the encryption and serve up content without ads thus no money for Hulu.
There's no need to invent conspiracy theories...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140605</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140481</id>
	<title>Re:No love for the Penguin?</title>
	<author>1u3hr</author>
	<datestamp>1243620300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>In any case, the Hulu web experience is pretty good,</i> <p>
For Americans. The rest of the world can fuck off. </p><p>
Wouldn't be a real problem, except that sites that used to have world-wide compatible embedded video, such as using Youtube, have replaced it with US-only Hulu.  It's very annoying to see all those video preview boxes with "Piss off foreigner" messages on them when I'm reading some media related article.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In any case , the Hulu web experience is pretty good , For Americans .
The rest of the world can fuck off .
Would n't be a real problem , except that sites that used to have world-wide compatible embedded video , such as using Youtube , have replaced it with US-only Hulu .
It 's very annoying to see all those video preview boxes with " Piss off foreigner " messages on them when I 'm reading some media related article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In any case, the Hulu web experience is pretty good, 
For Americans.
The rest of the world can fuck off.
Wouldn't be a real problem, except that sites that used to have world-wide compatible embedded video, such as using Youtube, have replaced it with US-only Hulu.
It's very annoying to see all those video preview boxes with "Piss off foreigner" messages on them when I'm reading some media related article.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140745</id>
	<title>Re:The real reason for blocking Media Centers</title>
	<author>kimvette</author>
	<datestamp>1243621860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Instead, they are clicking the "full screen" button and are watching the content -- and embedded advertisements -- just like the more tech-savvy users. Either way, you see the same ads, so I fail to understand the media producers' complaint(s).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead , they are clicking the " full screen " button and are watching the content -- and embedded advertisements -- just like the more tech-savvy users .
Either way , you see the same ads , so I fail to understand the media producers ' complaint ( s ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead, they are clicking the "full screen" button and are watching the content -- and embedded advertisements -- just like the more tech-savvy users.
Either way, you see the same ads, so I fail to understand the media producers' complaint(s).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141301</id>
	<title>Re:Hulu / Boxee</title>
	<author>whiledo</author>
	<datestamp>1243624140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would I need Plex or a Mac when I have SageTV and BitTorrent?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would I need Plex or a Mac when I have SageTV and BitTorrent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would I need Plex or a Mac when I have SageTV and BitTorrent?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139979</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140839</id>
	<title>Re:Why Hulu has been so touchy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243622280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>am i the only one who read this as "they use testicles to liquify your brain"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>am i the only one who read this as " they use testicles to liquify your brain " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>am i the only one who read this as "they use testicles to liquify your brain"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139979</id>
	<title>Hulu / Boxee</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243617960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would I need Boxee or a Hulu app when I have Plex on my Mac..</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would I need Boxee or a Hulu app when I have Plex on my Mac. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would I need Boxee or a Hulu app when I have Plex on my Mac..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139731</id>
	<title>Why Hulu has been so touchy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243616580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought it was the tentacles they used to liquify your brain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought it was the tentacles they used to liquify your brain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought it was the tentacles they used to liquify your brain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141229</id>
	<title>Re:No love for the Penguin?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243623840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>In any case, the Hulu web experience is pretty good,</i> </p><p>For Americans. The rest of the world can fuck off. </p><p>Wouldn't be a real problem, except that sites that used to have world-wide compatible embedded video, such as using Youtube, have replaced it with US-only Hulu.  It's very annoying to see all those video preview boxes with "Piss off foreigner" messages on them when I'm reading some media related article.</p></div><p>Sort of like the BBC's online offerings are only available to Brits?</p><p>Oops.  Sorry.....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In any case , the Hulu web experience is pretty good , For Americans .
The rest of the world can fuck off .
Would n't be a real problem , except that sites that used to have world-wide compatible embedded video , such as using Youtube , have replaced it with US-only Hulu .
It 's very annoying to see all those video preview boxes with " Piss off foreigner " messages on them when I 'm reading some media related article.Sort of like the BBC 's online offerings are only available to Brits ? Oops .
Sorry.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> In any case, the Hulu web experience is pretty good, For Americans.
The rest of the world can fuck off.
Wouldn't be a real problem, except that sites that used to have world-wide compatible embedded video, such as using Youtube, have replaced it with US-only Hulu.
It's very annoying to see all those video preview boxes with "Piss off foreigner" messages on them when I'm reading some media related article.Sort of like the BBC's online offerings are only available to Brits?Oops.
Sorry.....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140481</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140323</id>
	<title>Wine Support for Desktop App in Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243619580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has anyone tried running the desktop app in Linux with Wine? Is there any possibility of this working?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone tried running the desktop app in Linux with Wine ?
Is there any possibility of this working ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone tried running the desktop app in Linux with Wine?
Is there any possibility of this working?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141303</id>
	<title>Re:No love for the Penguin?</title>
	<author>malevolentjelly</author>
	<datestamp>1243624140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This has been asked before, but... where's the Linux version? And will we need a liquid cooled Phenom x4 processor to render the Adobe video in full screen?</p></div><p>Quick answer: the linux community is full of inconsistent and unstable API's with no standard way to package or distribute software. There's no right way to release proprietary software on linux. (Predicted freetard response: MAYBE THEY SHOULD OPEN SOURCE IT)</p><p>Anyway, it's not only the hardest and most expensive platform to release/maintain for, it's also the least popular. It's an utter waste of time considering everything works fine on the web side of things. When you're using Linux, the only stable and consistent API on which to build and release solutions of this magnitude is the web. Thanks, Adobe and Mozilla. Welcome to protected commercial content.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This has been asked before , but... where 's the Linux version ?
And will we need a liquid cooled Phenom x4 processor to render the Adobe video in full screen ? Quick answer : the linux community is full of inconsistent and unstable API 's with no standard way to package or distribute software .
There 's no right way to release proprietary software on linux .
( Predicted freetard response : MAYBE THEY SHOULD OPEN SOURCE IT ) Anyway , it 's not only the hardest and most expensive platform to release/maintain for , it 's also the least popular .
It 's an utter waste of time considering everything works fine on the web side of things .
When you 're using Linux , the only stable and consistent API on which to build and release solutions of this magnitude is the web .
Thanks , Adobe and Mozilla .
Welcome to protected commercial content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has been asked before, but... where's the Linux version?
And will we need a liquid cooled Phenom x4 processor to render the Adobe video in full screen?Quick answer: the linux community is full of inconsistent and unstable API's with no standard way to package or distribute software.
There's no right way to release proprietary software on linux.
(Predicted freetard response: MAYBE THEY SHOULD OPEN SOURCE IT)Anyway, it's not only the hardest and most expensive platform to release/maintain for, it's also the least popular.
It's an utter waste of time considering everything works fine on the web side of things.
When you're using Linux, the only stable and consistent API on which to build and release solutions of this magnitude is the web.
Thanks, Adobe and Mozilla.
Welcome to protected commercial content.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140605</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think ads were the sticky issue with Bo</title>
	<author>timster</author>
	<datestamp>1243620960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ads?  No, it doesn't have anything to do with ads.  Advertising on Hulu is little more than a shell game for the networks (dba Hulu).</p><p>Consider the history of the music industry on the Internet.  The technology for purchasing music online was entirely in place by 1995 when people started to use Netscape Navigator in large numbers.  Napster didn't come into play until 1999, iTunes in 2001.</p><p>The general (and correct) opinion is that the music industry wasted several years of opportunity to establish themselves as the major purveyor of online music content on their own terms.  When Napster came around people got used to trading music for free, and with iTunes the industry accidentally ceded major amounts of mindshare and control to Apple.  I've seen interviews explaining that the reason for the wasted opportunity was that they had no clue what to do, even who they should work with.</p><p>The TV studios today are not nearly as clueless as the music industry was in 1995, and they are determined not to repeat the same mistakes.  They are aware that they have an opportunity to dictate terms and lengthen the survival of their traditional broadcast delivery model if they play things right.</p><p>Enter Hulu -- Hulu is not a for-profit corporation in reality.  Hulu is a (perhaps illegal) collusion among NBC, FOX, and ABC (via their respective owners) to provide a "just right" level of service via the Internet -- enough that people are not (as) tempted by BitTorrent/iTunes, but not enough to make for a better experience than that available on a TV.</p><p>That's the reason for all the jacking around with availability schedules and the reason Hulu will never allow itself to be repackaged into a convenient format.  The inconvenience is the entire purpose of the service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ads ?
No , it does n't have anything to do with ads .
Advertising on Hulu is little more than a shell game for the networks ( dba Hulu ) .Consider the history of the music industry on the Internet .
The technology for purchasing music online was entirely in place by 1995 when people started to use Netscape Navigator in large numbers .
Napster did n't come into play until 1999 , iTunes in 2001.The general ( and correct ) opinion is that the music industry wasted several years of opportunity to establish themselves as the major purveyor of online music content on their own terms .
When Napster came around people got used to trading music for free , and with iTunes the industry accidentally ceded major amounts of mindshare and control to Apple .
I 've seen interviews explaining that the reason for the wasted opportunity was that they had no clue what to do , even who they should work with.The TV studios today are not nearly as clueless as the music industry was in 1995 , and they are determined not to repeat the same mistakes .
They are aware that they have an opportunity to dictate terms and lengthen the survival of their traditional broadcast delivery model if they play things right.Enter Hulu -- Hulu is not a for-profit corporation in reality .
Hulu is a ( perhaps illegal ) collusion among NBC , FOX , and ABC ( via their respective owners ) to provide a " just right " level of service via the Internet -- enough that people are not ( as ) tempted by BitTorrent/iTunes , but not enough to make for a better experience than that available on a TV.That 's the reason for all the jacking around with availability schedules and the reason Hulu will never allow itself to be repackaged into a convenient format .
The inconvenience is the entire purpose of the service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ads?
No, it doesn't have anything to do with ads.
Advertising on Hulu is little more than a shell game for the networks (dba Hulu).Consider the history of the music industry on the Internet.
The technology for purchasing music online was entirely in place by 1995 when people started to use Netscape Navigator in large numbers.
Napster didn't come into play until 1999, iTunes in 2001.The general (and correct) opinion is that the music industry wasted several years of opportunity to establish themselves as the major purveyor of online music content on their own terms.
When Napster came around people got used to trading music for free, and with iTunes the industry accidentally ceded major amounts of mindshare and control to Apple.
I've seen interviews explaining that the reason for the wasted opportunity was that they had no clue what to do, even who they should work with.The TV studios today are not nearly as clueless as the music industry was in 1995, and they are determined not to repeat the same mistakes.
They are aware that they have an opportunity to dictate terms and lengthen the survival of their traditional broadcast delivery model if they play things right.Enter Hulu -- Hulu is not a for-profit corporation in reality.
Hulu is a (perhaps illegal) collusion among NBC, FOX, and ABC (via their respective owners) to provide a "just right" level of service via the Internet -- enough that people are not (as) tempted by BitTorrent/iTunes, but not enough to make for a better experience than that available on a TV.That's the reason for all the jacking around with availability schedules and the reason Hulu will never allow itself to be repackaged into a convenient format.
The inconvenience is the entire purpose of the service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141845</id>
	<title>Re:Now just dump Flash</title>
	<author>drizek</author>
	<datestamp>1243626300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can watch 720p mkvs smoothly on my mini 9 with coreAVC, no hardware acceleration required.</p><p>Hulu is tolerable at the absolute lowest settings(low res, flash quality on low).</p><p>I was able to watch full screen SD video on abc.com. there were some audio stutters, but i think that is just some sort of network/configuration issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can watch 720p mkvs smoothly on my mini 9 with coreAVC , no hardware acceleration required.Hulu is tolerable at the absolute lowest settings ( low res , flash quality on low ) .I was able to watch full screen SD video on abc.com .
there were some audio stutters , but i think that is just some sort of network/configuration issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can watch 720p mkvs smoothly on my mini 9 with coreAVC, no hardware acceleration required.Hulu is tolerable at the absolute lowest settings(low res, flash quality on low).I was able to watch full screen SD video on abc.com.
there were some audio stutters, but i think that is just some sort of network/configuration issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28144353</id>
	<title>Can it be shown on TV as fullscreen overlay?</title>
	<author>antdude</author>
	<datestamp>1243593900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I watch DVDs and video files fullscreen on my 20" old/1996 CRT TV (S-video). Does this program let you do the same? I hate having to do extended desktop and make my Web browser show video fullscreen on the TV. I also prefre to use clone display setup and still use my PC while TV is showing the video.</p><p>BTW, this is in an updated Windows XP Pro. SP3 with an ATI Radeon 4870 video card.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I watch DVDs and video files fullscreen on my 20 " old/1996 CRT TV ( S-video ) .
Does this program let you do the same ?
I hate having to do extended desktop and make my Web browser show video fullscreen on the TV .
I also prefre to use clone display setup and still use my PC while TV is showing the video.BTW , this is in an updated Windows XP Pro .
SP3 with an ATI Radeon 4870 video card .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I watch DVDs and video files fullscreen on my 20" old/1996 CRT TV (S-video).
Does this program let you do the same?
I hate having to do extended desktop and make my Web browser show video fullscreen on the TV.
I also prefre to use clone display setup and still use my PC while TV is showing the video.BTW, this is in an updated Windows XP Pro.
SP3 with an ATI Radeon 4870 video card.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141043</id>
	<title>complainers</title>
	<author>Triv</author>
	<datestamp>1243623060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm usually the first person on the "closed SW sucks, screw the man" bandwagon, especially when it comes to the TV networks and media distribution / DRM, but I gotta steer clear of the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. party line on this one.</p><p>Hulu is actually pretty awesome - it streams shows on-demand with non-obtrusive ads, ads that are actually much better than the ads on OTA TV these days in that they're a bit (I hate this word, but) edgier and, more importantly, far less repetitive. You can vote on ads you don't like. The content available is from a diverse range of sources from the big 4 US networks and their subsidiaries and affiliates to subtitled (not dubbed) contemporary anime from Funimation and the like. It fixes MOST of the problems I have with traditional TV distribution, and it's legal.</p><p>So it requires Flash. BFD. It's a shame, but I understand why - Hulu needs room to breathe and focusing on the linux population when everybody else has Flash isn't good business.</p><p>As a corollary: my girlfriend runs Ubuntu 95\% of the time but still boots into Windows to play WoW. It's a 30 second inconvenience for her, but it's an acceptable one balanced with what she gets out of it. Dem's tha breaks. It doesn't keep her up at night, and Hulu's content control won't keep me up at night, either, because it is much, MUCH better than paying Comcast an uncomfortably large amount of month for the more annoying alternative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm usually the first person on the " closed SW sucks , screw the man " bandwagon , especially when it comes to the TV networks and media distribution / DRM , but I got ta steer clear of the / .
party line on this one.Hulu is actually pretty awesome - it streams shows on-demand with non-obtrusive ads , ads that are actually much better than the ads on OTA TV these days in that they 're a bit ( I hate this word , but ) edgier and , more importantly , far less repetitive .
You can vote on ads you do n't like .
The content available is from a diverse range of sources from the big 4 US networks and their subsidiaries and affiliates to subtitled ( not dubbed ) contemporary anime from Funimation and the like .
It fixes MOST of the problems I have with traditional TV distribution , and it 's legal.So it requires Flash .
BFD. It 's a shame , but I understand why - Hulu needs room to breathe and focusing on the linux population when everybody else has Flash is n't good business.As a corollary : my girlfriend runs Ubuntu 95 \ % of the time but still boots into Windows to play WoW .
It 's a 30 second inconvenience for her , but it 's an acceptable one balanced with what she gets out of it .
Dem 's tha breaks .
It does n't keep her up at night , and Hulu 's content control wo n't keep me up at night , either , because it is much , MUCH better than paying Comcast an uncomfortably large amount of month for the more annoying alternative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm usually the first person on the "closed SW sucks, screw the man" bandwagon, especially when it comes to the TV networks and media distribution / DRM, but I gotta steer clear of the /.
party line on this one.Hulu is actually pretty awesome - it streams shows on-demand with non-obtrusive ads, ads that are actually much better than the ads on OTA TV these days in that they're a bit (I hate this word, but) edgier and, more importantly, far less repetitive.
You can vote on ads you don't like.
The content available is from a diverse range of sources from the big 4 US networks and their subsidiaries and affiliates to subtitled (not dubbed) contemporary anime from Funimation and the like.
It fixes MOST of the problems I have with traditional TV distribution, and it's legal.So it requires Flash.
BFD. It's a shame, but I understand why - Hulu needs room to breathe and focusing on the linux population when everybody else has Flash isn't good business.As a corollary: my girlfriend runs Ubuntu 95\% of the time but still boots into Windows to play WoW.
It's a 30 second inconvenience for her, but it's an acceptable one balanced with what she gets out of it.
Dem's tha breaks.
It doesn't keep her up at night, and Hulu's content control won't keep me up at night, either, because it is much, MUCH better than paying Comcast an uncomfortably large amount of month for the more annoying alternative.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140039</id>
	<title>We got both kinds of music here</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1243618200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>a client that runs on both Windows and Mac.</p></div><p>Ride 'em in, rawhide.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>a client that runs on both Windows and Mac.Ride 'em in , rawhide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a client that runs on both Windows and Mac.Ride 'em in, rawhide.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139875</id>
	<title>so it will be tagged Adware ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243617360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>any client based application that displays adverts is usually classified as Adware, i presume the Hulu team are ok about that label on their software ?, also if it has any "user analytics" (a bullshit term made up by marketeers to avoid using the correct terminology for its covert functionality )<br>it will be classified to a more serious Spyware category due to the fact it is "spying" on the users behaviour<br>at least if its browser based the browser has (thank goodness) a security model to prevent the more serious nefarious behaviours (thats why advertising based companies are so keen for you to install a binary so they can avoid the browsers protection and collect data that they wouldn't otherwise be able to obtain)</p><p>Its a slippery road when you merge advertising based businesses and a binary application running natively on a client and for security companies there is no middle ground (no such thing as good adware/spyware)<br>so i trust that AV/AS companies will be marking it as such</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>any client based application that displays adverts is usually classified as Adware , i presume the Hulu team are ok about that label on their software ? , also if it has any " user analytics " ( a bullshit term made up by marketeers to avoid using the correct terminology for its covert functionality ) it will be classified to a more serious Spyware category due to the fact it is " spying " on the users behaviourat least if its browser based the browser has ( thank goodness ) a security model to prevent the more serious nefarious behaviours ( thats why advertising based companies are so keen for you to install a binary so they can avoid the browsers protection and collect data that they would n't otherwise be able to obtain ) Its a slippery road when you merge advertising based businesses and a binary application running natively on a client and for security companies there is no middle ground ( no such thing as good adware/spyware ) so i trust that AV/AS companies will be marking it as such</tokentext>
<sentencetext>any client based application that displays adverts is usually classified as Adware, i presume the Hulu team are ok about that label on their software ?, also if it has any "user analytics" (a bullshit term made up by marketeers to avoid using the correct terminology for its covert functionality )it will be classified to a more serious Spyware category due to the fact it is "spying" on the users behaviourat least if its browser based the browser has (thank goodness) a security model to prevent the more serious nefarious behaviours (thats why advertising based companies are so keen for you to install a binary so they can avoid the browsers protection and collect data that they wouldn't otherwise be able to obtain)Its a slippery road when you merge advertising based businesses and a binary application running natively on a client and for security companies there is no middle ground (no such thing as good adware/spyware)so i trust that AV/AS companies will be marking it as such</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139907</id>
	<title>Re:No love for the Penguin?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243617600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's no Linux version because no one gives a shit about Linux,</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no Linux version because no one gives a shit about Linux,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no Linux version because no one gives a shit about Linux,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140525</id>
	<title>The real reason for blocking Media Centers</title>
	<author>colin\_young</author>
	<datestamp>1243620540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This post (Q's 7 &amp; 8) I think explains why Hulu has been forced to block media center apps: <a href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/your-hulu-questions-answered/" title="nytimes.com" rel="nofollow">http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/your-hulu-questions-answered/</a> [nytimes.com]

To be fair, Hulu needs to satisfy the desires of their content-providing overlords, and whether or not the people at Hulu agree with blocking media centers, they need to at least make it appear they are making a good-faith effort to do so (it does seem that every block they've thrown up has been easily worked-around).

That said, I suspect the thinking is the full-screen app isn't going to be used by technically sophisticated users who are capable of setting up and running one of the Hulu-supporting media centers, and therefore anyone who is using the full-screen app isn't going to be the type that has their PC hooked up to their TV.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This post ( Q 's 7 &amp; 8 ) I think explains why Hulu has been forced to block media center apps : http : //freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/your-hulu-questions-answered/ [ nytimes.com ] To be fair , Hulu needs to satisfy the desires of their content-providing overlords , and whether or not the people at Hulu agree with blocking media centers , they need to at least make it appear they are making a good-faith effort to do so ( it does seem that every block they 've thrown up has been easily worked-around ) .
That said , I suspect the thinking is the full-screen app is n't going to be used by technically sophisticated users who are capable of setting up and running one of the Hulu-supporting media centers , and therefore anyone who is using the full-screen app is n't going to be the type that has their PC hooked up to their TV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This post (Q's 7 &amp; 8) I think explains why Hulu has been forced to block media center apps: http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/your-hulu-questions-answered/ [nytimes.com]

To be fair, Hulu needs to satisfy the desires of their content-providing overlords, and whether or not the people at Hulu agree with blocking media centers, they need to at least make it appear they are making a good-faith effort to do so (it does seem that every block they've thrown up has been easily worked-around).
That said, I suspect the thinking is the full-screen app isn't going to be used by technically sophisticated users who are capable of setting up and running one of the Hulu-supporting media centers, and therefore anyone who is using the full-screen app isn't going to be the type that has their PC hooked up to their TV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140913</id>
	<title>Already virtually stopped watching HULU</title>
	<author>HermMunster</author>
	<datestamp>1243622580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Early on with few ads and with little delay in streaming and without the aggressive anti-boxee actions I watched Hulu (albeit not on boxee).  The occasional ads of 15 to 30 seconds weren't bad.  But watching anything now you have to put up with ads quite frequently, at least for the popular shows.</p><p>Forget about movies, they always sucked and probably always will.  They relist the same movie web page after web page to make them look more complete, but they aren't, they are just relisting.</p><p>And now with them giving this farce of a client and expecting us to make the connection to it as to why they dumped boxee is just about enough.  I'm not going to buy  into their client, I'm not going to  use their client, I'm not going to restrict myself to Windows or the Mac to watch this content as I am a Linux user.</p><p>Enough is enough, this is the end of Hulu for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Early on with few ads and with little delay in streaming and without the aggressive anti-boxee actions I watched Hulu ( albeit not on boxee ) .
The occasional ads of 15 to 30 seconds were n't bad .
But watching anything now you have to put up with ads quite frequently , at least for the popular shows.Forget about movies , they always sucked and probably always will .
They relist the same movie web page after web page to make them look more complete , but they are n't , they are just relisting.And now with them giving this farce of a client and expecting us to make the connection to it as to why they dumped boxee is just about enough .
I 'm not going to buy into their client , I 'm not going to use their client , I 'm not going to restrict myself to Windows or the Mac to watch this content as I am a Linux user.Enough is enough , this is the end of Hulu for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Early on with few ads and with little delay in streaming and without the aggressive anti-boxee actions I watched Hulu (albeit not on boxee).
The occasional ads of 15 to 30 seconds weren't bad.
But watching anything now you have to put up with ads quite frequently, at least for the popular shows.Forget about movies, they always sucked and probably always will.
They relist the same movie web page after web page to make them look more complete, but they aren't, they are just relisting.And now with them giving this farce of a client and expecting us to make the connection to it as to why they dumped boxee is just about enough.
I'm not going to buy  into their client, I'm not going to  use their client, I'm not going to restrict myself to Windows or the Mac to watch this content as I am a Linux user.Enough is enough, this is the end of Hulu for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139833</id>
	<title>Now just dump Flash</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243617120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now Hulu just has to dump Flash and pick an HD format that can get some hardware accelerating love, and this will make every owner of a Netbook extremely happy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now Hulu just has to dump Flash and pick an HD format that can get some hardware accelerating love , and this will make every owner of a Netbook extremely happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now Hulu just has to dump Flash and pick an HD format that can get some hardware accelerating love, and this will make every owner of a Netbook extremely happy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28145485</id>
	<title>Ads can be removed</title>
	<author>florina2</author>
	<datestamp>1243600740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Use these ad blocking DNS server to avoid the ads on Hulu and similar services.  They work great.

75.147.151.12
71.249.184.157
205.232.175.67</htmltext>
<tokenext>Use these ad blocking DNS server to avoid the ads on Hulu and similar services .
They work great .
75.147.151.12 71.249.184.157 205.232.175.67</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use these ad blocking DNS server to avoid the ads on Hulu and similar services.
They work great.
75.147.151.12
71.249.184.157
205.232.175.67</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28150433</id>
	<title>I would rather</title>
	<author>vuffi\_raa</author>
	<datestamp>1243707540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would rather see them make a stable client that runs on the standard opera based browsers that are used by nintendo archos etc- and the ps3.... it is lame that you can watch every streaming video site out there on them except hulu because they screw up their code to "protect" their content- I would be browsing hulu all of the time if it worked on other devices and that is what they want, right? viewership in order to increase advertising revenue?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would rather see them make a stable client that runs on the standard opera based browsers that are used by nintendo archos etc- and the ps3.... it is lame that you can watch every streaming video site out there on them except hulu because they screw up their code to " protect " their content- I would be browsing hulu all of the time if it worked on other devices and that is what they want , right ?
viewership in order to increase advertising revenue ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would rather see them make a stable client that runs on the standard opera based browsers that are used by nintendo archos etc- and the ps3.... it is lame that you can watch every streaming video site out there on them except hulu because they screw up their code to "protect" their content- I would be browsing hulu all of the time if it worked on other devices and that is what they want, right?
viewership in order to increase advertising revenue?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28143255</id>
	<title>Re:High Bandwidth requirements</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243589040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's one of the many reasons that:
</p><p>1) Streaming sucks; it's simply a bad idea.  A bad idea to the core, such that no technological advance can make it not be a bad idea.  Tech can make streaming less painful (e.g. the parent poster would be happier if he had a T3 into his house) but can't make it not be stupid.
</p><p>2) time-shifting rules.  Watch it when its ready.  Just get it into my mythvideo folder.
</p><p>Dear hulu: you're a file server.  I know, you wanna be a media playback product.  Tough.  Media providers are never, ever, ever allowed to be be playback tools.  At least not on <b>my</b> computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's one of the many reasons that : 1 ) Streaming sucks ; it 's simply a bad idea .
A bad idea to the core , such that no technological advance can make it not be a bad idea .
Tech can make streaming less painful ( e.g .
the parent poster would be happier if he had a T3 into his house ) but ca n't make it not be stupid .
2 ) time-shifting rules .
Watch it when its ready .
Just get it into my mythvideo folder .
Dear hulu : you 're a file server .
I know , you wan na be a media playback product .
Tough. Media providers are never , ever , ever allowed to be be playback tools .
At least not on my computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's one of the many reasons that:
1) Streaming sucks; it's simply a bad idea.
A bad idea to the core, such that no technological advance can make it not be a bad idea.
Tech can make streaming less painful (e.g.
the parent poster would be happier if he had a T3 into his house) but can't make it not be stupid.
2) time-shifting rules.
Watch it when its ready.
Just get it into my mythvideo folder.
Dear hulu: you're a file server.
I know, you wanna be a media playback product.
Tough.  Media providers are never, ever, ever allowed to be be playback tools.
At least not on my computer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140141</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139931</id>
	<title>Re:No love for the Penguin?</title>
	<author>JustinOpinion</author>
	<datestamp>1243617720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>where's the Linux version?</p></div><p>Currently the web-based Hulu works great on Linux. This is why I use Hulu, because they built it in a platform-agnostic way. I can understand them not putting effort into a Linux application... but I just hope they don't get rid of the Hulu web interface totally in favor of a desktop app. That would be a mistake, since in addition to alienating the (small) Linux userbase, they will also exclude the (somewhat larger) group of people leery of installing third-party software, and the (positively huge) group of people who are too lazy to install some silly application just to watch videos on their computer.<br> <br>

In any case, the Hulu web experience is pretty good, and runs fine full-screen, so I have trouble seeing what this new application can really bring to the table from the user's perspective.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>where 's the Linux version ? Currently the web-based Hulu works great on Linux .
This is why I use Hulu , because they built it in a platform-agnostic way .
I can understand them not putting effort into a Linux application... but I just hope they do n't get rid of the Hulu web interface totally in favor of a desktop app .
That would be a mistake , since in addition to alienating the ( small ) Linux userbase , they will also exclude the ( somewhat larger ) group of people leery of installing third-party software , and the ( positively huge ) group of people who are too lazy to install some silly application just to watch videos on their computer .
In any case , the Hulu web experience is pretty good , and runs fine full-screen , so I have trouble seeing what this new application can really bring to the table from the user 's perspective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>where's the Linux version?Currently the web-based Hulu works great on Linux.
This is why I use Hulu, because they built it in a platform-agnostic way.
I can understand them not putting effort into a Linux application... but I just hope they don't get rid of the Hulu web interface totally in favor of a desktop app.
That would be a mistake, since in addition to alienating the (small) Linux userbase, they will also exclude the (somewhat larger) group of people leery of installing third-party software, and the (positively huge) group of people who are too lazy to install some silly application just to watch videos on their computer.
In any case, the Hulu web experience is pretty good, and runs fine full-screen, so I have trouble seeing what this new application can really bring to the table from the user's perspective.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139733</id>
	<title>Boxee?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243616580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's this Boxee business? Did Boxxy create a company without me knowing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's this Boxee business ?
Did Boxxy create a company without me knowing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's this Boxee business?
Did Boxxy create a company without me knowing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28150213</id>
	<title>Re:Conclusion: Slower than bathtub gin in Canadia</title>
	<author>vivek7006</author>
	<datestamp>1243705620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stop lying asshole. Everything you mentioned in your post is incorrect. The app is very fast and spiffy on my machine (core2duo, 2G Ram). Main interface IS full-screen. WTF are you smoking??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop lying asshole .
Everything you mentioned in your post is incorrect .
The app is very fast and spiffy on my machine ( core2duo , 2G Ram ) .
Main interface IS full-screen .
WTF are you smoking ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop lying asshole.
Everything you mentioned in your post is incorrect.
The app is very fast and spiffy on my machine (core2duo, 2G Ram).
Main interface IS full-screen.
WTF are you smoking?
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141315</id>
	<title>Re:No love for the Penguin?</title>
	<author>blitzkrieg3</author>
	<datestamp>1243624200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This has been asked before, but... where's the Linux version?  And will we need a liquid cooled Phenom x4 processor to render the Adobe video in full screen?</p></div><p>If the dudes from Gnash were smart they would get on RTMP and release their version of the "hulu player".  You can already run youtube videos <a href="http://wiki.gnashdev.org/YouTube" title="gnashdev.org">outside of your browser</a> [gnashdev.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This has been asked before , but... where 's the Linux version ?
And will we need a liquid cooled Phenom x4 processor to render the Adobe video in full screen ? If the dudes from Gnash were smart they would get on RTMP and release their version of the " hulu player " .
You can already run youtube videos outside of your browser [ gnashdev.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has been asked before, but... where's the Linux version?
And will we need a liquid cooled Phenom x4 processor to render the Adobe video in full screen?If the dudes from Gnash were smart they would get on RTMP and release their version of the "hulu player".
You can already run youtube videos outside of your browser [gnashdev.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139883</id>
	<title>Why does there need to be a desktop app?</title>
	<author>sohmc</author>
	<datestamp>1243617480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right now, hulu works on any browser that has flash.  What does the desktop app give you that the web site doesn't?

It seems like this is a step BACKWARD, not forward.  I'd be more impressed if it was on XBOX live like Netflix is right now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right now , hulu works on any browser that has flash .
What does the desktop app give you that the web site does n't ?
It seems like this is a step BACKWARD , not forward .
I 'd be more impressed if it was on XBOX live like Netflix is right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right now, hulu works on any browser that has flash.
What does the desktop app give you that the web site doesn't?
It seems like this is a step BACKWARD, not forward.
I'd be more impressed if it was on XBOX live like Netflix is right now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141087</id>
	<title>Re:Why does there need to be a desktop app?</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1243623300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You can run Hulu on Xbox 360, PS3 or any other dlna client with the PlayOn server for Windows.</p></div><p>Or you can just play Hulu via the PS3 web browser...</p><p>The Hulu site will give you a fake "video not available" message if your browser's client ID string tells them you're on a PS3, though...  A little web proxy fixes the problem nicely.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can run Hulu on Xbox 360 , PS3 or any other dlna client with the PlayOn server for Windows.Or you can just play Hulu via the PS3 web browser...The Hulu site will give you a fake " video not available " message if your browser 's client ID string tells them you 're on a PS3 , though... A little web proxy fixes the problem nicely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can run Hulu on Xbox 360, PS3 or any other dlna client with the PlayOn server for Windows.Or you can just play Hulu via the PS3 web browser...The Hulu site will give you a fake "video not available" message if your browser's client ID string tells them you're on a PS3, though...  A little web proxy fixes the problem nicely.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140159</id>
	<title>Re:Why does there need to be a desktop app?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243618800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remote control...um...control, the only thing boxee gave me over navigating on the net.  With my HTPC this makes loads of difference.  Sure I can whip out the keyboard and mouse, but I am a lazy, lazy, man and Hulu, thankfully, knows this</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remote control...um...control , the only thing boxee gave me over navigating on the net .
With my HTPC this makes loads of difference .
Sure I can whip out the keyboard and mouse , but I am a lazy , lazy , man and Hulu , thankfully , knows this</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remote control...um...control, the only thing boxee gave me over navigating on the net.
With my HTPC this makes loads of difference.
Sure I can whip out the keyboard and mouse, but I am a lazy, lazy, man and Hulu, thankfully, knows this</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140081</id>
	<title>An exclusive club</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243618380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm excited about the exclusion of game consoles, assorted media boxes, Linux machines, and all users outside the US. Still, this is a little too open for my tastes. Couldn't they have made it Vista-only?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm excited about the exclusion of game consoles , assorted media boxes , Linux machines , and all users outside the US .
Still , this is a little too open for my tastes .
Could n't they have made it Vista-only ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm excited about the exclusion of game consoles, assorted media boxes, Linux machines, and all users outside the US.
Still, this is a little too open for my tastes.
Couldn't they have made it Vista-only?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28142997</id>
	<title>Re:WTB HULU outside of the US</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243587780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No you don't.</p><p>They've basically moved their television scheme to the internet. I doubt anyone would enjoy watching a show or movie interrupted every 5 minutes with idiotic advertisements(Now with ad banners during the program!). You can't even rewind or ff without being forced to watch another ad. Hulu doesn't bring progress, it's just the same bullshit on a different platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No you do n't.They 've basically moved their television scheme to the internet .
I doubt anyone would enjoy watching a show or movie interrupted every 5 minutes with idiotic advertisements ( Now with ad banners during the program ! ) .
You ca n't even rewind or ff without being forced to watch another ad .
Hulu does n't bring progress , it 's just the same bullshit on a different platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No you don't.They've basically moved their television scheme to the internet.
I doubt anyone would enjoy watching a show or movie interrupted every 5 minutes with idiotic advertisements(Now with ad banners during the program!).
You can't even rewind or ff without being forced to watch another ad.
Hulu doesn't bring progress, it's just the same bullshit on a different platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139785</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139775</id>
	<title>Re:Boxee?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243616820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fuck you</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck you</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141711</id>
	<title>Re:No love for the Penguin?</title>
	<author>Thornburg</author>
	<datestamp>1243625820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In any case, the Hulu web experience is pretty good, and runs fine full-screen...</p></div><p>You must watch a different Hulu than I do.</p><p>I'm searching for alternatives, becaues Hulu will randomly stop streaming after 1 or more hours of working fine.  And no, it's not my FiOS internet connection.  Both Joost and Netflix (when I had a subscription) streamed absolutely fine, but the GD Hulu player hangs the connection.  I then have to load a different page of the Hulu site, go back to the video, and skip forward to where I was.</p><p>I wouldn't consider this a problem at all, except that watching 3 ads in a 20 minute program already takes up enough of my time.</p><p>I'm not interested in piracy.  Does anyone have any other legal, licensed for viewing in the US TV streaming sites?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In any case , the Hulu web experience is pretty good , and runs fine full-screen...You must watch a different Hulu than I do.I 'm searching for alternatives , becaues Hulu will randomly stop streaming after 1 or more hours of working fine .
And no , it 's not my FiOS internet connection .
Both Joost and Netflix ( when I had a subscription ) streamed absolutely fine , but the GD Hulu player hangs the connection .
I then have to load a different page of the Hulu site , go back to the video , and skip forward to where I was.I would n't consider this a problem at all , except that watching 3 ads in a 20 minute program already takes up enough of my time.I 'm not interested in piracy .
Does anyone have any other legal , licensed for viewing in the US TV streaming sites ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In any case, the Hulu web experience is pretty good, and runs fine full-screen...You must watch a different Hulu than I do.I'm searching for alternatives, becaues Hulu will randomly stop streaming after 1 or more hours of working fine.
And no, it's not my FiOS internet connection.
Both Joost and Netflix (when I had a subscription) streamed absolutely fine, but the GD Hulu player hangs the connection.
I then have to load a different page of the Hulu site, go back to the video, and skip forward to where I was.I wouldn't consider this a problem at all, except that watching 3 ads in a 20 minute program already takes up enough of my time.I'm not interested in piracy.
Does anyone have any other legal, licensed for viewing in the US TV streaming sites?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28144339</id>
	<title>Re:Adobe Flash. It Hurts.</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1243593780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, what the deuce is with the 2.4 GHz Core 2 duo requirement?</p><p>Last I checked, there are lots of still fairly expensive machines (admittedly mostly laptops these days) in the 1.8 -- 2.2 range.  I myself just recently purchased a 2.0 machine* that has no trouble with the "high-def" hulu stream (the HD gallery, not the 480 "high def"), and that's with a browser wrapped around everything.</p><p>*which may be the real reason I'm upset....</p><p>It's just stupid video.  What does the CPU need to do other than decrypt crap and move bits onto the video card?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , what the deuce is with the 2.4 GHz Core 2 duo requirement ? Last I checked , there are lots of still fairly expensive machines ( admittedly mostly laptops these days ) in the 1.8 -- 2.2 range .
I myself just recently purchased a 2.0 machine * that has no trouble with the " high-def " hulu stream ( the HD gallery , not the 480 " high def " ) , and that 's with a browser wrapped around everything .
* which may be the real reason I 'm upset....It 's just stupid video .
What does the CPU need to do other than decrypt crap and move bits onto the video card ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, what the deuce is with the 2.4 GHz Core 2 duo requirement?Last I checked, there are lots of still fairly expensive machines (admittedly mostly laptops these days) in the 1.8 -- 2.2 range.
I myself just recently purchased a 2.0 machine* that has no trouble with the "high-def" hulu stream (the HD gallery, not the 480 "high def"), and that's with a browser wrapped around everything.
*which may be the real reason I'm upset....It's just stupid video.
What does the CPU need to do other than decrypt crap and move bits onto the video card?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28147907</id>
	<title>Boxee's Hulu support is NOT opensource</title>
	<author>itslifejimbutnotaswe</author>
	<datestamp>1243717140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Boxee client for the most part is opensource (being based on the GPL'd XBMC <a href="http://xbmc.org/" title="xbmc.org" rel="nofollow">http://xbmc.org/</a> [xbmc.org], it has to be).  However, the part of Boxee that handles Hulu, Netflix and the like is NOT open source.  Instead, the Boxee client loads a proprietary, closed-source executable that then loads the Firefox flash or silverlight plugins.

Encourage Boxee to open things up - it's clear that they're not gaining anything by having this stuff closed off.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Boxee client for the most part is opensource ( being based on the GPL 'd XBMC http : //xbmc.org/ [ xbmc.org ] , it has to be ) .
However , the part of Boxee that handles Hulu , Netflix and the like is NOT open source .
Instead , the Boxee client loads a proprietary , closed-source executable that then loads the Firefox flash or silverlight plugins .
Encourage Boxee to open things up - it 's clear that they 're not gaining anything by having this stuff closed off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Boxee client for the most part is opensource (being based on the GPL'd XBMC http://xbmc.org/ [xbmc.org], it has to be).
However, the part of Boxee that handles Hulu, Netflix and the like is NOT open source.
Instead, the Boxee client loads a proprietary, closed-source executable that then loads the Firefox flash or silverlight plugins.
Encourage Boxee to open things up - it's clear that they're not gaining anything by having this stuff closed off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139803</id>
	<title>I don't think ads were the sticky issue with Boxee</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243617000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>As I run Boxee on Ubuntu and I get all the ads from Hulu.  Currently using the latest Boxee build, which uses the Hulu public feeds.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As I run Boxee on Ubuntu and I get all the ads from Hulu .
Currently using the latest Boxee build , which uses the Hulu public feeds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I run Boxee on Ubuntu and I get all the ads from Hulu.
Currently using the latest Boxee build, which uses the Hulu public feeds.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140431</id>
	<title>Hulu would love to support Boxee</title>
	<author>Late Adopter</author>
	<datestamp>1243620120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/your-hulu-questions-answered/" title="nytimes.com" rel="nofollow">According to the Hulu CEO</a> [nytimes.com], the issue is the cable channels.  They get a large chunk of their funding from cable subscriptions, and they feel very threatened by any project that attempts to replace the cable box in your living room.
<br> <br>
Hulu would much rather have shows like Battlestar Galactica and the users it draws than have the handful of hobbyists who currently have a Boxee or XBMC setup.  Of course they'd rather have both, but this is similar to the games Apple has to play with RIAA, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the Hulu CEO [ nytimes.com ] , the issue is the cable channels .
They get a large chunk of their funding from cable subscriptions , and they feel very threatened by any project that attempts to replace the cable box in your living room .
Hulu would much rather have shows like Battlestar Galactica and the users it draws than have the handful of hobbyists who currently have a Boxee or XBMC setup .
Of course they 'd rather have both , but this is similar to the games Apple has to play with RIAA , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the Hulu CEO [nytimes.com], the issue is the cable channels.
They get a large chunk of their funding from cable subscriptions, and they feel very threatened by any project that attempts to replace the cable box in your living room.
Hulu would much rather have shows like Battlestar Galactica and the users it draws than have the handful of hobbyists who currently have a Boxee or XBMC setup.
Of course they'd rather have both, but this is similar to the games Apple has to play with RIAA, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140091</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140257</id>
	<title>Revenues Reduced</title>
	<author>Bryan Gividen</author>
	<datestamp>1243619220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can see your point, but I think the only circumstances that it would happen is not Hulu "work[ing] with" Boxee, but instead buying them out or co-opting them. Hulu wants the ability to exclude people or devices from their service at will. Having that type of power allows them to use proprietary formats or hardware to deliver content. If Boxee exists, Hulu would have a much tougher time creating revenue off of new devices which do exactly the same thing as Boxee.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see your point , but I think the only circumstances that it would happen is not Hulu " work [ ing ] with " Boxee , but instead buying them out or co-opting them .
Hulu wants the ability to exclude people or devices from their service at will .
Having that type of power allows them to use proprietary formats or hardware to deliver content .
If Boxee exists , Hulu would have a much tougher time creating revenue off of new devices which do exactly the same thing as Boxee .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see your point, but I think the only circumstances that it would happen is not Hulu "work[ing] with" Boxee, but instead buying them out or co-opting them.
Hulu wants the ability to exclude people or devices from their service at will.
Having that type of power allows them to use proprietary formats or hardware to deliver content.
If Boxee exists, Hulu would have a much tougher time creating revenue off of new devices which do exactly the same thing as Boxee.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140091</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139829</id>
	<title>Adobe Flash.  It Hurts.</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1243617060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the article:<p><div class="quote"><p>As Hulu's popularity has skyrocketed over the past year, users have been clamoring for a way to get it out of the browser and into the living room. Hulu Desktop looks like quite a major effort towards answering this call, so we'll have to see how users respond.<br> <br>

Hulu Desktop is a free download and requires a Mac with a 2.4GHz Intel Core Duo or comparable processor, 2GB of RAM, and Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger or later. <b>You'll also need Adobe Flash 9.0.124</b> and a 2Mbps Internet connection.</p></div><p>Great, something about to explode in the consumer market passing up on open source and instead locking everyone and all their hardware in to the requirement of Adobe Flash.  You want to discuss why you need a <i>core duo</i> to run this!?  <br> <br>

<i>*massages his forehead*</i> I see in the future<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... people having to pay again<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... for their hardware and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... software and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... codecs and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... media licenses and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... internet connection and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... no one will have enough money to afford it anyway.  <br> <br> There's free (and I mean <i>actually free</i>) alternatives out there that could make it so that hardware manufacturers and mobile companies don't have to get Adobe Flash on their devices.  I'm not sure why Hulu isn't beefing up other open source software, containers and codecs to meet these needs.  It would certainly make it easier for them to satisfy the media licenses with ad revenue.  Oh well, enjoy your setback.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article : As Hulu 's popularity has skyrocketed over the past year , users have been clamoring for a way to get it out of the browser and into the living room .
Hulu Desktop looks like quite a major effort towards answering this call , so we 'll have to see how users respond .
Hulu Desktop is a free download and requires a Mac with a 2.4GHz Intel Core Duo or comparable processor , 2GB of RAM , and Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger or later .
You 'll also need Adobe Flash 9.0.124 and a 2Mbps Internet connection.Great , something about to explode in the consumer market passing up on open source and instead locking everyone and all their hardware in to the requirement of Adobe Flash .
You want to discuss why you need a core duo to run this ! ?
* massages his forehead * I see in the future ... people having to pay again ... for their hardware and ... software and ... codecs and ... media licenses and ... internet connection and ... no one will have enough money to afford it anyway .
There 's free ( and I mean actually free ) alternatives out there that could make it so that hardware manufacturers and mobile companies do n't have to get Adobe Flash on their devices .
I 'm not sure why Hulu is n't beefing up other open source software , containers and codecs to meet these needs .
It would certainly make it easier for them to satisfy the media licenses with ad revenue .
Oh well , enjoy your setback .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article:As Hulu's popularity has skyrocketed over the past year, users have been clamoring for a way to get it out of the browser and into the living room.
Hulu Desktop looks like quite a major effort towards answering this call, so we'll have to see how users respond.
Hulu Desktop is a free download and requires a Mac with a 2.4GHz Intel Core Duo or comparable processor, 2GB of RAM, and Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger or later.
You'll also need Adobe Flash 9.0.124 and a 2Mbps Internet connection.Great, something about to explode in the consumer market passing up on open source and instead locking everyone and all their hardware in to the requirement of Adobe Flash.
You want to discuss why you need a core duo to run this!?
*massages his forehead* I see in the future ... people having to pay again ... for their hardware and ... software and ... codecs and ... media licenses and ... internet connection and ... no one will have enough money to afford it anyway.
There's free (and I mean actually free) alternatives out there that could make it so that hardware manufacturers and mobile companies don't have to get Adobe Flash on their devices.
I'm not sure why Hulu isn't beefing up other open source software, containers and codecs to meet these needs.
It would certainly make it easier for them to satisfy the media licenses with ad revenue.
Oh well, enjoy your setback.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141563</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think ads were the sticky issue with Bo</title>
	<author>milas</author>
	<datestamp>1243625280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hulu is a (perhaps illegal) collusion among NBC, FOX, and ABC (via their respective owners) to provide a "just right" level of service via the Internet -- enough that people are not (as) tempted by BitTorrent/iTunes, but not enough to make for a better experience than that available on a TV.</p></div><p>While I agree with your point, I don't agree with this comment. Hulu to me is significantly more convenient than watching the shows on TV. There is a significant amount of overhead involved with a DVR (the ones from the cable manufacturers are worse than not having one, PC ones require a constantly running power-hungry computer, etc.)</p><p>Hulu lets me watch the shows on my schedule, and while I think the network's availability restrictions are dated and costing them business, I would much rather watch four 30 second commercials than fool with everything else. Now, if Hulu increases ads beyond what they currently are, I can't say I'd stick with the service.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hulu is a ( perhaps illegal ) collusion among NBC , FOX , and ABC ( via their respective owners ) to provide a " just right " level of service via the Internet -- enough that people are not ( as ) tempted by BitTorrent/iTunes , but not enough to make for a better experience than that available on a TV.While I agree with your point , I do n't agree with this comment .
Hulu to me is significantly more convenient than watching the shows on TV .
There is a significant amount of overhead involved with a DVR ( the ones from the cable manufacturers are worse than not having one , PC ones require a constantly running power-hungry computer , etc .
) Hulu lets me watch the shows on my schedule , and while I think the network 's availability restrictions are dated and costing them business , I would much rather watch four 30 second commercials than fool with everything else .
Now , if Hulu increases ads beyond what they currently are , I ca n't say I 'd stick with the service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hulu is a (perhaps illegal) collusion among NBC, FOX, and ABC (via their respective owners) to provide a "just right" level of service via the Internet -- enough that people are not (as) tempted by BitTorrent/iTunes, but not enough to make for a better experience than that available on a TV.While I agree with your point, I don't agree with this comment.
Hulu to me is significantly more convenient than watching the shows on TV.
There is a significant amount of overhead involved with a DVR (the ones from the cable manufacturers are worse than not having one, PC ones require a constantly running power-hungry computer, etc.
)Hulu lets me watch the shows on my schedule, and while I think the network's availability restrictions are dated and costing them business, I would much rather watch four 30 second commercials than fool with everything else.
Now, if Hulu increases ads beyond what they currently are, I can't say I'd stick with the service.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140605</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140895</id>
	<title>Re:Why not just work with Boxee</title>
	<author>phrend</author>
	<datestamp>1243622460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect that part of the reason is that Boxee doesn't support Windows yet... and I suspect that the majority of Hulu users are Windows users.  Additionally, Hulu most likely wants (possibly needs, based on contracts) total control of their distribution channel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect that part of the reason is that Boxee does n't support Windows yet... and I suspect that the majority of Hulu users are Windows users .
Additionally , Hulu most likely wants ( possibly needs , based on contracts ) total control of their distribution channel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect that part of the reason is that Boxee doesn't support Windows yet... and I suspect that the majority of Hulu users are Windows users.
Additionally, Hulu most likely wants (possibly needs, based on contracts) total control of their distribution channel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140091</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28143611</id>
	<title>don't know if this is interesting or not...</title>
	<author>earlymon</author>
	<datestamp>1243590600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recently went to watch a movie on Hulu that was there before, isn't now.  I searched Hulu for it, and the search Window told me that it was now available on crackle.com - and that welcomed me to the Sony Entertainment Group.  Crackle doesn't buffer as Hulu does (in fact, if you pause long enough hoping to build a buffer - you'll just have to reload the page), but it does offer some form of hi-def - and their FAQ is worthless.  While the hi-def was good, I couldn't get past a few minutes without hangs.</p><p>Now - today's subject is all about Hulu and Boxee.  But also.... Hulu on Safari lately has been telling me that I'm blocking ads - when I'm doing no such thing, nor have upgraded Safari to cause this trouble, nor have I changed my settings.</p><p>All in all, it's just starting to feel like Hulu is starting to go the way of bad Hollywood management, instead of the encompassing, embracing way that we all hoped for.</p><p>I hope I'm wrong, but that's my two cents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recently went to watch a movie on Hulu that was there before , is n't now .
I searched Hulu for it , and the search Window told me that it was now available on crackle.com - and that welcomed me to the Sony Entertainment Group .
Crackle does n't buffer as Hulu does ( in fact , if you pause long enough hoping to build a buffer - you 'll just have to reload the page ) , but it does offer some form of hi-def - and their FAQ is worthless .
While the hi-def was good , I could n't get past a few minutes without hangs.Now - today 's subject is all about Hulu and Boxee .
But also.... Hulu on Safari lately has been telling me that I 'm blocking ads - when I 'm doing no such thing , nor have upgraded Safari to cause this trouble , nor have I changed my settings.All in all , it 's just starting to feel like Hulu is starting to go the way of bad Hollywood management , instead of the encompassing , embracing way that we all hoped for.I hope I 'm wrong , but that 's my two cents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recently went to watch a movie on Hulu that was there before, isn't now.
I searched Hulu for it, and the search Window told me that it was now available on crackle.com - and that welcomed me to the Sony Entertainment Group.
Crackle doesn't buffer as Hulu does (in fact, if you pause long enough hoping to build a buffer - you'll just have to reload the page), but it does offer some form of hi-def - and their FAQ is worthless.
While the hi-def was good, I couldn't get past a few minutes without hangs.Now - today's subject is all about Hulu and Boxee.
But also.... Hulu on Safari lately has been telling me that I'm blocking ads - when I'm doing no such thing, nor have upgraded Safari to cause this trouble, nor have I changed my settings.All in all, it's just starting to feel like Hulu is starting to go the way of bad Hollywood management, instead of the encompassing, embracing way that we all hoped for.I hope I'm wrong, but that's my two cents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140477</id>
	<title>Re:Why not just work with Boxee</title>
	<author>Neeperando</author>
	<datestamp>1243620300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think Hulu does care.  It's the people that provide them with content that seem to think because it's a website that it can only be run on a computer and only nerds and people slacking off from work will use it.  Once they realized that Boxee was designed for running on a TV, the situation changes.  Once your computer is hooked up to your TV, the only reason to watch TV over Hulu is if you can't wait until the next day.</p><p>Now, consider how many ads run on TV vs on Hulu.  One 30-second ad 6 times during a show?  Half of which are for charities?  How much money can they really be making off of Hulu?  Of course the folks running Hulu just want to get their site used, but the content providers, as has been discussed time and time again, have no clue about anything, for example, that it's been possible, even easy, to hook your computer up to your TV for years.  And since Hulu relies on the providers for their very existence, I think it's fair that they do just about everything the providers ask.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think Hulu does care .
It 's the people that provide them with content that seem to think because it 's a website that it can only be run on a computer and only nerds and people slacking off from work will use it .
Once they realized that Boxee was designed for running on a TV , the situation changes .
Once your computer is hooked up to your TV , the only reason to watch TV over Hulu is if you ca n't wait until the next day.Now , consider how many ads run on TV vs on Hulu .
One 30-second ad 6 times during a show ?
Half of which are for charities ?
How much money can they really be making off of Hulu ?
Of course the folks running Hulu just want to get their site used , but the content providers , as has been discussed time and time again , have no clue about anything , for example , that it 's been possible , even easy , to hook your computer up to your TV for years .
And since Hulu relies on the providers for their very existence , I think it 's fair that they do just about everything the providers ask .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think Hulu does care.
It's the people that provide them with content that seem to think because it's a website that it can only be run on a computer and only nerds and people slacking off from work will use it.
Once they realized that Boxee was designed for running on a TV, the situation changes.
Once your computer is hooked up to your TV, the only reason to watch TV over Hulu is if you can't wait until the next day.Now, consider how many ads run on TV vs on Hulu.
One 30-second ad 6 times during a show?
Half of which are for charities?
How much money can they really be making off of Hulu?
Of course the folks running Hulu just want to get their site used, but the content providers, as has been discussed time and time again, have no clue about anything, for example, that it's been possible, even easy, to hook your computer up to your TV for years.
And since Hulu relies on the providers for their very existence, I think it's fair that they do just about everything the providers ask.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140091</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28145523</id>
	<title>Re:High Bandwidth requirements</title>
	<author>N!NJA</author>
	<datestamp>1243601040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the "DownloadHelper" plugin for Firefox allows you to download any embedded video as long as the video can be fully buffered to the hard drive. that means it works with YouTube, but it doesnt work with Hulu. depending on the protocol in use, it's possible to use "Orbit Downloader" to save a video stream, but again, it doesnt work with Hulu.</htmltext>
<tokenext>the " DownloadHelper " plugin for Firefox allows you to download any embedded video as long as the video can be fully buffered to the hard drive .
that means it works with YouTube , but it doesnt work with Hulu .
depending on the protocol in use , it 's possible to use " Orbit Downloader " to save a video stream , but again , it doesnt work with Hulu .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the "DownloadHelper" plugin for Firefox allows you to download any embedded video as long as the video can be fully buffered to the hard drive.
that means it works with YouTube, but it doesnt work with Hulu.
depending on the protocol in use, it's possible to use "Orbit Downloader" to save a video stream, but again, it doesnt work with Hulu.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140141</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28163573</id>
	<title>Re:WTB HULU outside of the US</title>
	<author>geekangel</author>
	<datestamp>1243785060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have a look at <a href="http://witopia.net/" title="witopia.net" rel="nofollow">http://witopia.net/</a> [witopia.net]. Works excellently, about US$40/year.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have a look at http : //witopia.net/ [ witopia.net ] .
Works excellently , about US $ 40/year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have a look at http://witopia.net/ [witopia.net].
Works excellently, about US$40/year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139785</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139833
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28146309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140041
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28142997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139785
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140257
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140055
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28143255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28145523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141315
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140745
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28144883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140829
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28145623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28144339
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28163573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139785
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141551
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139733
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1534236_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28150213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140203
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140745
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140855
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140839
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140055
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140219
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141087
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139833
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140039
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140141
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28145523
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28145623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28143255
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141551
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139785
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28163573
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28142997
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141301
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139829
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141023
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28144339
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140041
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28146309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28144883
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141665
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140091
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140895
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140431
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140257
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140477
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140203
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28150213
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140605
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141563
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141031
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140081
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141043
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139761
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139931
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140481
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141229
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28140829
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141303
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28141315
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1534236.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1534236.28139775
</commentlist>
</conversation>
