<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_05_1922242</id>
	<title>"Colossal Magnetic Effect" Could Lead To Another Breakthrough In Storage Tech</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1244190600000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://twitter.com/conhopper" rel="nofollow">Bryant</a> writes <i>"Scientists with the Carnegie Institution for Science have discovered what could bring yet another massive advance in memory and storage. The discovery, a magnetoresistence literally '<a href="http://www.ciw.edu/news/colossal\_magnetic\_effect\_under\_pressure">up to 1000 times more powerful</a>' than the Giant Magnetoresistence Effect discovered roughly 20 years ago, which led to one of the major breakthroughs in memory, seems to be a result of high-pressure interactions between Manganites. Manganites aren't new to this game; MRAM uses Manganite layers to achieve the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic\_tunnel\_effect">Magnetic Tunnel Effect</a> needed to keep the state of memory stable. Applying significant amounts of pressure to known tech-useful materials isn't a new trick; you might recall the recent breakthrough with Europium superconductivity thanks to <a href="//science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/20/2340249&amp;tid=232">similar high-pressure antics</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bryant writes " Scientists with the Carnegie Institution for Science have discovered what could bring yet another massive advance in memory and storage .
The discovery , a magnetoresistence literally 'up to 1000 times more powerful ' than the Giant Magnetoresistence Effect discovered roughly 20 years ago , which led to one of the major breakthroughs in memory , seems to be a result of high-pressure interactions between Manganites .
Manganites are n't new to this game ; MRAM uses Manganite layers to achieve the Magnetic Tunnel Effect needed to keep the state of memory stable .
Applying significant amounts of pressure to known tech-useful materials is n't a new trick ; you might recall the recent breakthrough with Europium superconductivity thanks to similar high-pressure antics .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bryant writes "Scientists with the Carnegie Institution for Science have discovered what could bring yet another massive advance in memory and storage.
The discovery, a magnetoresistence literally 'up to 1000 times more powerful' than the Giant Magnetoresistence Effect discovered roughly 20 years ago, which led to one of the major breakthroughs in memory, seems to be a result of high-pressure interactions between Manganites.
Manganites aren't new to this game; MRAM uses Manganite layers to achieve the Magnetic Tunnel Effect needed to keep the state of memory stable.
Applying significant amounts of pressure to known tech-useful materials isn't a new trick; you might recall the recent breakthrough with Europium superconductivity thanks to similar high-pressure antics.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227351</id>
	<title>Massless advance in memory and storage</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244194860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the future, instead of using disk compression, you can get your fat momma to sit on your computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the future , instead of using disk compression , you can get your fat momma to sit on your computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the future, instead of using disk compression, you can get your fat momma to sit on your computer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228355</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244201700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem isn't storage its speed. Really with 1TB of HD space there isn't anything you can't have a lot of. On the other hand I/O, especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck. Storage isn't a problem.</p></div><p>So drop some SSDs in front to act as read (MLC) and write (SLC) caches:</p><p>http://blogs.sun.com/studler/entry/zfs\_and\_the\_hybrid\_storage<br>http://mags.acm.org/communications/200807/?pg=49</p><p>Sun calls this "hybrid storage".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is n't storage its speed .
Really with 1TB of HD space there is n't anything you ca n't have a lot of .
On the other hand I/O , especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck .
Storage is n't a problem.So drop some SSDs in front to act as read ( MLC ) and write ( SLC ) caches : http : //blogs.sun.com/studler/entry/zfs \ _and \ _the \ _hybrid \ _storagehttp : //mags.acm.org/communications/200807/ ? pg = 49Sun calls this " hybrid storage " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem isn't storage its speed.
Really with 1TB of HD space there isn't anything you can't have a lot of.
On the other hand I/O, especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck.
Storage isn't a problem.So drop some SSDs in front to act as read (MLC) and write (SLC) caches:http://blogs.sun.com/studler/entry/zfs\_and\_the\_hybrid\_storagehttp://mags.acm.org/communications/200807/?pg=49Sun calls this "hybrid storage".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28229999</id>
	<title>"Up to"</title>
	<author>algae</author>
	<datestamp>1244221440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2x more powerful, is included in the set of "up to" 1000x more powerful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2x more powerful , is included in the set of " up to " 1000x more powerful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2x more powerful, is included in the set of "up to" 1000x more powerful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228259</id>
	<title>Re:Speed and latency matters</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244200920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think by then <a href="http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Storage/Products\_Overview.aspx?ProductID=2180" title="gigabyte.com.tw" rel="nofollow">i-RAM</a> [gigabyte.com.tw] will have more capacity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think by then i-RAM [ gigabyte.com.tw ] will have more capacity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think by then i-RAM [gigabyte.com.tw] will have more capacity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227267</id>
	<title>c u on the island...</title>
	<author>IlluminatedOne</author>
	<datestamp>1244194380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So <i>this</i> is what happens when you don't push the button....got it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So this is what happens when you do n't push the button....got it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So this is what happens when you don't push the button....got it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227393</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>wjh31</author>
	<datestamp>1244195160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>its both. Servers need both speed and storage. And alot of consumers, especially gamers want both. Plenty of people can fill up a hard drive with films, photos, music etc... yet want their applications and system to be resposive. Ive hear more and more of people using an SSD for their system for performance, and keeping a 'traditional' hard drive for mass storage. Having both says to me that they are just waiting for the costs to come down such that performance and storage are available on a single drive again</htmltext>
<tokenext>its both .
Servers need both speed and storage .
And alot of consumers , especially gamers want both .
Plenty of people can fill up a hard drive with films , photos , music etc... yet want their applications and system to be resposive .
Ive hear more and more of people using an SSD for their system for performance , and keeping a 'traditional ' hard drive for mass storage .
Having both says to me that they are just waiting for the costs to come down such that performance and storage are available on a single drive again</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its both.
Servers need both speed and storage.
And alot of consumers, especially gamers want both.
Plenty of people can fill up a hard drive with films, photos, music etc... yet want their applications and system to be resposive.
Ive hear more and more of people using an SSD for their system for performance, and keeping a 'traditional' hard drive for mass storage.
Having both says to me that they are just waiting for the costs to come down such that performance and storage are available on a single drive again</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227397</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244195160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem isn't storage its speed. Really with 1TB of HD space there isn't anything you can't have a lot of. On the other hand I/O, especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck. Storage isn't a problem.</p></div><p>Are you saying that 1TB of space should be enough for anyone?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is n't storage its speed .
Really with 1TB of HD space there is n't anything you ca n't have a lot of .
On the other hand I/O , especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck .
Storage is n't a problem.Are you saying that 1TB of space should be enough for anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem isn't storage its speed.
Really with 1TB of HD space there isn't anything you can't have a lot of.
On the other hand I/O, especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck.
Storage isn't a problem.Are you saying that 1TB of space should be enough for anyone?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227281</id>
	<title>Magnetic Tunnel Effect</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244194440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought the magnetic tunnel effect was achieved with a slutty girl with a new tongue ring</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the magnetic tunnel effect was achieved with a slutty girl with a new tongue ring</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the magnetic tunnel effect was achieved with a slutty girl with a new tongue ring</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227755</id>
	<title>It is great but ...</title>
	<author>Lemming Mark</author>
	<datestamp>1244197620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Should that Giant Magnetoresistive?    Someone else seems to so because the article is tagged "typoinsummary".  Google and I haven't heard much about Great Magnetoresistive effect in the past, so unless it's some obscure term...</p><p>But hey, it's not my area of expertise and I certainly agree that with the sentiment that this magnetoresistive stuff is rather great!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should that Giant Magnetoresistive ?
Someone else seems to so because the article is tagged " typoinsummary " .
Google and I have n't heard much about Great Magnetoresistive effect in the past , so unless it 's some obscure term...But hey , it 's not my area of expertise and I certainly agree that with the sentiment that this magnetoresistive stuff is rather great !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Should that Giant Magnetoresistive?
Someone else seems to so because the article is tagged "typoinsummary".
Google and I haven't heard much about Great Magnetoresistive effect in the past, so unless it's some obscure term...But hey, it's not my area of expertise and I certainly agree that with the sentiment that this magnetoresistive stuff is rather great!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</id>
	<title>Storage....</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1244194560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem isn't storage its speed. Really with 1TB of HD space there isn't anything you can't have a lot of. On the other hand I/O, especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck. Storage isn't a problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is n't storage its speed .
Really with 1TB of HD space there is n't anything you ca n't have a lot of .
On the other hand I/O , especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck .
Storage is n't a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem isn't storage its speed.
Really with 1TB of HD space there isn't anything you can't have a lot of.
On the other hand I/O, especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck.
Storage isn't a problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28229071</id>
	<title>Re:And if we can predict anything...</title>
	<author>Gibbs-Duhem</author>
	<datestamp>1244207580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not new, nor truly preliminary technology; I researched this back in 2004 and there was already a huge amount in the literature. It's just an incremental improvement and uses by and large existing thin film technologies pushed to their limit.</p><p>Most people didn't even notice the transition from regular magnetorestrictive heads to giant magnetoresistive heads, they were just incorporated naturally so that hard drive densities could further increase. This technology is the obvious and natural extension from giant magnetoresistive heads, and the increased signal to noise ratio will allow for denser drives with no doubt -- although we're already at the point where a "bit" is only made up of a few dozen magnetic domains. But in any case, this type of technology is a prerequisite for using more highly nanocrystalline magnetic materials with smaller domains...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not new , nor truly preliminary technology ; I researched this back in 2004 and there was already a huge amount in the literature .
It 's just an incremental improvement and uses by and large existing thin film technologies pushed to their limit.Most people did n't even notice the transition from regular magnetorestrictive heads to giant magnetoresistive heads , they were just incorporated naturally so that hard drive densities could further increase .
This technology is the obvious and natural extension from giant magnetoresistive heads , and the increased signal to noise ratio will allow for denser drives with no doubt -- although we 're already at the point where a " bit " is only made up of a few dozen magnetic domains .
But in any case , this type of technology is a prerequisite for using more highly nanocrystalline magnetic materials with smaller domains.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not new, nor truly preliminary technology; I researched this back in 2004 and there was already a huge amount in the literature.
It's just an incremental improvement and uses by and large existing thin film technologies pushed to their limit.Most people didn't even notice the transition from regular magnetorestrictive heads to giant magnetoresistive heads, they were just incorporated naturally so that hard drive densities could further increase.
This technology is the obvious and natural extension from giant magnetoresistive heads, and the increased signal to noise ratio will allow for denser drives with no doubt -- although we're already at the point where a "bit" is only made up of a few dozen magnetic domains.
But in any case, this type of technology is a prerequisite for using more highly nanocrystalline magnetic materials with smaller domains...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28229497</id>
	<title>Re:One wonders what they'll call the next discover</title>
	<author>Civil\_Disobedient</author>
	<datestamp>1244214120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google-resistive.</p><p>Much like a lot of Slashdotters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google-resistive.Much like a lot of Slashdotters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google-resistive.Much like a lot of Slashdotters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28252999</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>PCSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1244485140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All your Manganites are belong to us!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All your Manganites are belong to us !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All your Manganites are belong to us!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228353</id>
	<title>Actual application in spinning storage?</title>
	<author>Gat0r30y</author>
	<datestamp>1244201640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I suspect never. Very high pressures + spinning media doesn't work particularly well. Not to say this investigation will not lead to some interesting condensed matter physics, which in turn could lead to actual discoveries that make it to market.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect never .
Very high pressures + spinning media does n't work particularly well .
Not to say this investigation will not lead to some interesting condensed matter physics , which in turn could lead to actual discoveries that make it to market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect never.
Very high pressures + spinning media doesn't work particularly well.
Not to say this investigation will not lead to some interesting condensed matter physics, which in turn could lead to actual discoveries that make it to market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228839</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1244205180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Really with 1TB of HD space there isn't anything you can't have a lot of.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sure there is.</p><p>HDTV takes about 8GBytes/hour.  That's just ~120 hours on a a terabyte HDD, or perhaps a month of TV viewing.  Now, you're not going to want to save EVERYTHING you view, but you'll probably fill-up a second terabyte drive within a year.  Quicker if you're saving blu-ray movies as well.</p><p>So, while it isn't as big of a constraint as it once was, we could still use more space...</p><blockquote><div><p>On the other hand I/O, especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck.</p></div></blockquote><p>So RAID-0 your drives...  Instantly double the speed.  And if you really can't find a way to use the space, buy a pair of 500GB drives instead of 1x 1TB drive.  With the popularity of SATA RAID controllers, most systems can easily enough have 4 HD drives in a RAID set.  Are you suggesting that 4x the transfer speed of the best 10kRPM drives still isn't fast enough for you?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really with 1TB of HD space there is n't anything you ca n't have a lot of.Sure there is.HDTV takes about 8GBytes/hour .
That 's just ~ 120 hours on a a terabyte HDD , or perhaps a month of TV viewing .
Now , you 're not going to want to save EVERYTHING you view , but you 'll probably fill-up a second terabyte drive within a year .
Quicker if you 're saving blu-ray movies as well.So , while it is n't as big of a constraint as it once was , we could still use more space...On the other hand I/O , especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck.So RAID-0 your drives... Instantly double the speed .
And if you really ca n't find a way to use the space , buy a pair of 500GB drives instead of 1x 1TB drive .
With the popularity of SATA RAID controllers , most systems can easily enough have 4 HD drives in a RAID set .
Are you suggesting that 4x the transfer speed of the best 10kRPM drives still is n't fast enough for you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really with 1TB of HD space there isn't anything you can't have a lot of.Sure there is.HDTV takes about 8GBytes/hour.
That's just ~120 hours on a a terabyte HDD, or perhaps a month of TV viewing.
Now, you're not going to want to save EVERYTHING you view, but you'll probably fill-up a second terabyte drive within a year.
Quicker if you're saving blu-ray movies as well.So, while it isn't as big of a constraint as it once was, we could still use more space...On the other hand I/O, especially magnetic I/O is the main bottleneck.So RAID-0 your drives...  Instantly double the speed.
And if you really can't find a way to use the space, buy a pair of 500GB drives instead of 1x 1TB drive.
With the popularity of SATA RAID controllers, most systems can easily enough have 4 HD drives in a RAID set.
Are you suggesting that 4x the transfer speed of the best 10kRPM drives still isn't fast enough for you?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228467</id>
	<title>Did anyone else read the first few words and...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244202480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... think "oh no, here is another 2012 crackpot article again"?</p><p>I was very pleased that it was not another 2012 crackpot article, i think i might have exploded into a colossal magnetic effect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... think " oh no , here is another 2012 crackpot article again " ? I was very pleased that it was not another 2012 crackpot article , i think i might have exploded into a colossal magnetic effect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... think "oh no, here is another 2012 crackpot article again"?I was very pleased that it was not another 2012 crackpot article, i think i might have exploded into a colossal magnetic effect.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28234691</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>toddestan</author>
	<datestamp>1244315100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>We went from a GB to a TB HDD in about 10 years, so it's not unreasonable to think that we'll have 1 PB in another 10.</p></div></blockquote><p>I wouldn't count on it.  We've only gone from 1TB to 2TB in the past 2 1/2 years.  Things are definently slowing down in the harddrive industry.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We went from a GB to a TB HDD in about 10 years , so it 's not unreasonable to think that we 'll have 1 PB in another 10.I would n't count on it .
We 've only gone from 1TB to 2TB in the past 2 1/2 years .
Things are definently slowing down in the harddrive industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We went from a GB to a TB HDD in about 10 years, so it's not unreasonable to think that we'll have 1 PB in another 10.I wouldn't count on it.
We've only gone from 1TB to 2TB in the past 2 1/2 years.
Things are definently slowing down in the harddrive industry.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228543</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244203080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have no idea.  Two jobs ago (and 3 years ago), the commercial systems I was working on at a Geophysics place had about 1.3 Petabytes of online, actively accessed hard drive storage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have no idea .
Two jobs ago ( and 3 years ago ) , the commercial systems I was working on at a Geophysics place had about 1.3 Petabytes of online , actively accessed hard drive storage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have no idea.
Two jobs ago (and 3 years ago), the commercial systems I was working on at a Geophysics place had about 1.3 Petabytes of online, actively accessed hard drive storage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227509</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244196000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>imagine having a beowulf cluster of these new drives... no, seriously!</p><p>instead of one big disk with a slow read write time, you could make a drive with multiple small disks, get a write time 10-20x faster, and have a larger capacity overall.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>imagine having a beowulf cluster of these new drives... no , seriously ! instead of one big disk with a slow read write time , you could make a drive with multiple small disks , get a write time 10-20x faster , and have a larger capacity overall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>imagine having a beowulf cluster of these new drives... no, seriously!instead of one big disk with a slow read write time, you could make a drive with multiple small disks, get a write time 10-20x faster, and have a larger capacity overall.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227691</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1244197260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're thinking home computers, maybe.</p><p>For a lot of businesses, 1TB isn't that much.  We have systems with well over 1TB of data, to which over 5GB of new data are added every day, with an accelerating rate of new data coming in (as the systems model more fo the business, in more detail, etc.).</p><p>Historically these scales have only increased over time, and nothing is evident that would show that slowing down any time soon.</p><p>Now, do you want all that storage in one HDD?  Probably not; there are pros and cons.  But, there are absolutely applications where the desired amount of storage on a device exceeds what you could get today.  It's not all about how many movies you can torrent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're thinking home computers , maybe.For a lot of businesses , 1TB is n't that much .
We have systems with well over 1TB of data , to which over 5GB of new data are added every day , with an accelerating rate of new data coming in ( as the systems model more fo the business , in more detail , etc .
) .Historically these scales have only increased over time , and nothing is evident that would show that slowing down any time soon.Now , do you want all that storage in one HDD ?
Probably not ; there are pros and cons .
But , there are absolutely applications where the desired amount of storage on a device exceeds what you could get today .
It 's not all about how many movies you can torrent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're thinking home computers, maybe.For a lot of businesses, 1TB isn't that much.
We have systems with well over 1TB of data, to which over 5GB of new data are added every day, with an accelerating rate of new data coming in (as the systems model more fo the business, in more detail, etc.
).Historically these scales have only increased over time, and nothing is evident that would show that slowing down any time soon.Now, do you want all that storage in one HDD?
Probably not; there are pros and cons.
But, there are absolutely applications where the desired amount of storage on a device exceeds what you could get today.
It's not all about how many movies you can torrent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228323</id>
	<title>X-Men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244201520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Magneto X 10^Super-Hyper-Colossal</p><p>But how do you get Magneto &amp; Professor X to work together to produce it?  That's the hard part...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Magneto X 10 ^ Super-Hyper-ColossalBut how do you get Magneto &amp; Professor X to work together to produce it ?
That 's the hard part.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Magneto X 10^Super-Hyper-ColossalBut how do you get Magneto &amp; Professor X to work together to produce it?
That's the hard part...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227605</id>
	<title>In Plain English...</title>
	<author>creimer</author>
	<datestamp>1244196720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...someone been watching too much <a href="http://www.voltaire.net/2007/voltaire\%20podcast/Podcast/6C77F090-87AE-46FA-9E39-BEF8460AF7F1.html" title="voltaire.net">Star Trek</a> [voltaire.net].</htmltext>
<tokenext>...someone been watching too much Star Trek [ voltaire.net ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...someone been watching too much Star Trek [voltaire.net].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227347</id>
	<title>Article text in case of slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244194860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Argonne, IL&#226;"Millions of people today carry around pocket-sized music players capable of holding thousands of songs, thanks to the discovery 20 years ago of a phenomenon known as the &#226;oegiant magnetoresistance effect,&#226; which made it possible to pack more data onto smaller and smaller hard drives. Now scientists are on the trail of another phenomenon, called the &#226;oecolossal magnetoresistance effect&#226; (CMR) which is up to a thousand times more powerful and could trigger another revolution in computing technology. Understanding, and ultimately controlling, this effect and the intricate coupling between electrical conductivity and magnetism in these materials remains a challenge, however, because of competing interactions in manganites, the materials in which CMR was discovered. In the June 12, 2009, issue of the journal Physical Review Letters, a team of researchers report new progress in using high pressure techniques to unravel the subtleties of this coupling.</p><p>To study the magnetic properties of manganites, a form of manganese oxide, the research team, led by Yang Ding of the Carnegie Institution&#226;(TM)s High Pressure Synergetic Center (HPSync), applied techniques called x-ray magnetic circular dichroism (XMCD) and angular-dispersive diffraction at the Advanced Photon Source (APS) of Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois. High pressure XMCD is a newly developed technique that uses high-brilliance circularly polarized x-rays to probe the magnetic state of a material under pressures of many hundreds of thousands of atmospheres inside a diamond anvil cell.</p><p>The discovery of CMR in manganite compounds has already made manganites invaluable components in technological applications. An example is magnetic tunneling junctions in soon-to-be marketed magnetic random access memory (MRAM), where the tunneling of electrical current between two thin layers of manganite material separated by an electrical insulator depends on the relative orientation of magnetization in the manganite layers. Unlike conventional RAM, MRAM could yield instant-on computers. However, no current theories can fully explain the rich physics, including CMR effects, seen in manganites.</p><p>&#226;oeThe challenge is that there are competing interactions in manganites among the electrons that determine magnetic properties,&#226; said Ding. &#226;oeAnd the properties are also affected by external stimuli, such as, temperature, pressure, magnetic field, and chemical doping.&#226;</p><p>&#226;oePressure has a unique ability to tune the electron interactions in a clean and theoretically transparent manner,&#226; he added. &#226;oeIt is a direct and effective means for manipulating the behavior of electrons and could provide valuable information on the magnetic and electronic properties of manganite systems. But of all the effects, pressure effects have been the least explored.&#226;</p><p>The researchers found that when a manganite was subjected to conditions above 230,000 times atmospheric pressure it underwent a transition in which its magnetic ordering changed from a ferromagnetic type (electron spins aligned) to an antiferromagnetic type (electron spins opposed). This transition was accompanied by a non-uniform structural distortion called the Jahn-Teller effect.</p><p>&#226;oeIt is quite interesting to observe that uniform compression leads to a non-uniform structural change in a manganite, which was not predicted by theory,&#226; said Ding, &#226;oeWorking with Michel van Veenendaal&#226;(TM)s theoretical group at APS, we found that the predominant effect of pressure on this material is to increase the strength of an interaction known as superexchange relative to another known as the double exchange interaction. A consequence of this is that the overall ferromagnetic interactions in the system occur in a plane (two dimensions) rather than in three dimensions, which produces a non-uniform redistribution of electrons. This leads to the structural distortion.&#226;</p><p>Another intriguing response of manganite to high p</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Argonne , IL   " Millions of people today carry around pocket-sized music players capable of holding thousands of songs , thanks to the discovery 20 years ago of a phenomenon known as the   oegiant magnetoresistance effect ,   which made it possible to pack more data onto smaller and smaller hard drives .
Now scientists are on the trail of another phenomenon , called the   oecolossal magnetoresistance effect   ( CMR ) which is up to a thousand times more powerful and could trigger another revolution in computing technology .
Understanding , and ultimately controlling , this effect and the intricate coupling between electrical conductivity and magnetism in these materials remains a challenge , however , because of competing interactions in manganites , the materials in which CMR was discovered .
In the June 12 , 2009 , issue of the journal Physical Review Letters , a team of researchers report new progress in using high pressure techniques to unravel the subtleties of this coupling.To study the magnetic properties of manganites , a form of manganese oxide , the research team , led by Yang Ding of the Carnegie Institution   ( TM ) s High Pressure Synergetic Center ( HPSync ) , applied techniques called x-ray magnetic circular dichroism ( XMCD ) and angular-dispersive diffraction at the Advanced Photon Source ( APS ) of Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois .
High pressure XMCD is a newly developed technique that uses high-brilliance circularly polarized x-rays to probe the magnetic state of a material under pressures of many hundreds of thousands of atmospheres inside a diamond anvil cell.The discovery of CMR in manganite compounds has already made manganites invaluable components in technological applications .
An example is magnetic tunneling junctions in soon-to-be marketed magnetic random access memory ( MRAM ) , where the tunneling of electrical current between two thin layers of manganite material separated by an electrical insulator depends on the relative orientation of magnetization in the manganite layers .
Unlike conventional RAM , MRAM could yield instant-on computers .
However , no current theories can fully explain the rich physics , including CMR effects , seen in manganites.   oeThe challenge is that there are competing interactions in manganites among the electrons that determine magnetic properties ,   said Ding .
  oeAnd the properties are also affected by external stimuli , such as , temperature , pressure , magnetic field , and chemical doping.     oePressure has a unique ability to tune the electron interactions in a clean and theoretically transparent manner ,   he added .
  oeIt is a direct and effective means for manipulating the behavior of electrons and could provide valuable information on the magnetic and electronic properties of manganite systems .
But of all the effects , pressure effects have been the least explored.   The researchers found that when a manganite was subjected to conditions above 230,000 times atmospheric pressure it underwent a transition in which its magnetic ordering changed from a ferromagnetic type ( electron spins aligned ) to an antiferromagnetic type ( electron spins opposed ) .
This transition was accompanied by a non-uniform structural distortion called the Jahn-Teller effect.   oeIt is quite interesting to observe that uniform compression leads to a non-uniform structural change in a manganite , which was not predicted by theory ,   said Ding ,   oeWorking with Michel van Veenendaal   ( TM ) s theoretical group at APS , we found that the predominant effect of pressure on this material is to increase the strength of an interaction known as superexchange relative to another known as the double exchange interaction .
A consequence of this is that the overall ferromagnetic interactions in the system occur in a plane ( two dimensions ) rather than in three dimensions , which produces a non-uniform redistribution of electrons .
This leads to the structural distortion.   Another intriguing response of manganite to high p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Argonne, ILâ"Millions of people today carry around pocket-sized music players capable of holding thousands of songs, thanks to the discovery 20 years ago of a phenomenon known as the âoegiant magnetoresistance effect,â which made it possible to pack more data onto smaller and smaller hard drives.
Now scientists are on the trail of another phenomenon, called the âoecolossal magnetoresistance effectâ (CMR) which is up to a thousand times more powerful and could trigger another revolution in computing technology.
Understanding, and ultimately controlling, this effect and the intricate coupling between electrical conductivity and magnetism in these materials remains a challenge, however, because of competing interactions in manganites, the materials in which CMR was discovered.
In the June 12, 2009, issue of the journal Physical Review Letters, a team of researchers report new progress in using high pressure techniques to unravel the subtleties of this coupling.To study the magnetic properties of manganites, a form of manganese oxide, the research team, led by Yang Ding of the Carnegie Institutionâ(TM)s High Pressure Synergetic Center (HPSync), applied techniques called x-ray magnetic circular dichroism (XMCD) and angular-dispersive diffraction at the Advanced Photon Source (APS) of Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois.
High pressure XMCD is a newly developed technique that uses high-brilliance circularly polarized x-rays to probe the magnetic state of a material under pressures of many hundreds of thousands of atmospheres inside a diamond anvil cell.The discovery of CMR in manganite compounds has already made manganites invaluable components in technological applications.
An example is magnetic tunneling junctions in soon-to-be marketed magnetic random access memory (MRAM), where the tunneling of electrical current between two thin layers of manganite material separated by an electrical insulator depends on the relative orientation of magnetization in the manganite layers.
Unlike conventional RAM, MRAM could yield instant-on computers.
However, no current theories can fully explain the rich physics, including CMR effects, seen in manganites.âoeThe challenge is that there are competing interactions in manganites among the electrons that determine magnetic properties,â said Ding.
âoeAnd the properties are also affected by external stimuli, such as, temperature, pressure, magnetic field, and chemical doping.ââoePressure has a unique ability to tune the electron interactions in a clean and theoretically transparent manner,â he added.
âoeIt is a direct and effective means for manipulating the behavior of electrons and could provide valuable information on the magnetic and electronic properties of manganite systems.
But of all the effects, pressure effects have been the least explored.âThe researchers found that when a manganite was subjected to conditions above 230,000 times atmospheric pressure it underwent a transition in which its magnetic ordering changed from a ferromagnetic type (electron spins aligned) to an antiferromagnetic type (electron spins opposed).
This transition was accompanied by a non-uniform structural distortion called the Jahn-Teller effect.âoeIt is quite interesting to observe that uniform compression leads to a non-uniform structural change in a manganite, which was not predicted by theory,â said Ding, âoeWorking with Michel van Veenendaalâ(TM)s theoretical group at APS, we found that the predominant effect of pressure on this material is to increase the strength of an interaction known as superexchange relative to another known as the double exchange interaction.
A consequence of this is that the overall ferromagnetic interactions in the system occur in a plane (two dimensions) rather than in three dimensions, which produces a non-uniform redistribution of electrons.
This leads to the structural distortion.âAnother intriguing response of manganite to high p</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228325</id>
	<title>This is not new</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244201520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Colossal magnetoresistance in manganites are discovered some 15+ years ago.<br>And this field is so hot in recently years that tons of papers come out every month. In fact I did my masters thesis just on this particular topic.<br>You guys should check <a href="http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive/phd051809s.gif" title="phdcomics.com" rel="nofollow">this</a> [phdcomics.com] out, it is so true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Colossal magnetoresistance in manganites are discovered some 15 + years ago.And this field is so hot in recently years that tons of papers come out every month .
In fact I did my masters thesis just on this particular topic.You guys should check this [ phdcomics.com ] out , it is so true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Colossal magnetoresistance in manganites are discovered some 15+ years ago.And this field is so hot in recently years that tons of papers come out every month.
In fact I did my masters thesis just on this particular topic.You guys should check this [phdcomics.com] out, it is so true.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227639</id>
	<title>For shame</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244196840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>seems to be a result of high-pressure interactions between <b>Manga</b>nites. <b>Manga</b>nites aren't new to this game</p></div><p>For shame<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.  No comments or jokes on the obvious? Its right there for the taking.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>seems to be a result of high-pressure interactions between Manganites .
Manganites are n't new to this gameFor shame / .
No comments or jokes on the obvious ?
Its right there for the taking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>seems to be a result of high-pressure interactions between Manganites.
Manganites aren't new to this gameFor shame /.
No comments or jokes on the obvious?
Its right there for the taking.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227969</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244199120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know that's a Gates quote, but I work for a data management company that specializes in oil seismic data. I'm using 13TB of data and I'm only 1/8th the way through the project.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know that 's a Gates quote , but I work for a data management company that specializes in oil seismic data .
I 'm using 13TB of data and I 'm only 1/8th the way through the project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know that's a Gates quote, but I work for a data management company that specializes in oil seismic data.
I'm using 13TB of data and I'm only 1/8th the way through the project.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227397</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228219</id>
	<title>Re:so we just need 2 diamonds per bit</title>
	<author>the\_other\_chewey</author>
	<datestamp>1244200740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>well, atleast it will be cheaper than SSS's</p></div><p>
Yup, the thermal shield on Super-Sonic Sandwiches is made out of pure Unobtainium.<br>
We really should start work on a replacement for that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>well , atleast it will be cheaper than SSS 's Yup , the thermal shield on Super-Sonic Sandwiches is made out of pure Unobtainium .
We really should start work on a replacement for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well, atleast it will be cheaper than SSS's
Yup, the thermal shield on Super-Sonic Sandwiches is made out of pure Unobtainium.
We really should start work on a replacement for that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227313</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227409</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244195220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except rendering projects.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except rendering projects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except rendering projects.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227257</id>
	<title>bike, nigga stole my bike!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244194320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>aadddrriiiaannn</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>aadddrriiiaannn</tokentext>
<sentencetext>aadddrriiiaannn</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227861</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244198280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Are you saying that 1TB of space should be enough for anyone?</i></p><p>No, but let's be a bit realistic, here. 1 TB is enough space for some 100 hours of DVD-quality video. 1 PB is 100,000 hours of DVD video. If current trends continue, we're fast approaching the point where we really *can* store ALL movies ever produced on a single backpack HDD. We went from a GB to a TB HDD in about 10 years, so it's not unreasonable to think that we'll have 1 PB in another 10. At that time, you can record every second of your life on a single HDD, in RAW format.</p><p>With strong lossy compression you can do it now.</p><p>The Dollhouse isn't so horribly far away....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you saying that 1TB of space should be enough for anyone ? No , but let 's be a bit realistic , here .
1 TB is enough space for some 100 hours of DVD-quality video .
1 PB is 100,000 hours of DVD video .
If current trends continue , we 're fast approaching the point where we really * can * store ALL movies ever produced on a single backpack HDD .
We went from a GB to a TB HDD in about 10 years , so it 's not unreasonable to think that we 'll have 1 PB in another 10 .
At that time , you can record every second of your life on a single HDD , in RAW format.With strong lossy compression you can do it now.The Dollhouse is n't so horribly far away... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you saying that 1TB of space should be enough for anyone?No, but let's be a bit realistic, here.
1 TB is enough space for some 100 hours of DVD-quality video.
1 PB is 100,000 hours of DVD video.
If current trends continue, we're fast approaching the point where we really *can* store ALL movies ever produced on a single backpack HDD.
We went from a GB to a TB HDD in about 10 years, so it's not unreasonable to think that we'll have 1 PB in another 10.
At that time, you can record every second of your life on a single HDD, in RAW format.With strong lossy compression you can do it now.The Dollhouse isn't so horribly far away....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227397</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227313</id>
	<title>so we just need 2 diamonds per bit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244194680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>well, atleast it will be cheaper than SSS's</htmltext>
<tokenext>well , atleast it will be cheaper than SSS 's</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well, atleast it will be cheaper than SSS's</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228427</id>
	<title>Not that new</title>
	<author>booch</author>
	<datestamp>1244202120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I did a <a href="http://craigbuchek.com/presentations/2006-06-14/HardDrives.html" title="craigbuchek.com">presentation on hard drives</a> [craigbuchek.com] 3 years ago, I had already read some things saying that the Colossal Magnetorsestive Effect was the next step in read-write head technology. The Wikipedia page says the effect was discovered in 1993. This new discovery might make it more feasible, but hard drive technology developers already knew that CMR would be a part of the technology going forward.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I did a presentation on hard drives [ craigbuchek.com ] 3 years ago , I had already read some things saying that the Colossal Magnetorsestive Effect was the next step in read-write head technology .
The Wikipedia page says the effect was discovered in 1993 .
This new discovery might make it more feasible , but hard drive technology developers already knew that CMR would be a part of the technology going forward .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I did a presentation on hard drives [craigbuchek.com] 3 years ago, I had already read some things saying that the Colossal Magnetorsestive Effect was the next step in read-write head technology.
The Wikipedia page says the effect was discovered in 1993.
This new discovery might make it more feasible, but hard drive technology developers already knew that CMR would be a part of the technology going forward.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228007</id>
	<title>Re:Speed and latency matters</title>
	<author>moderatorrater</author>
	<datestamp>1244199360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, we'd be where we're at right now, just with 100x the storage? That wouldn't be too bad in my book.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , we 'd be where we 're at right now , just with 100x the storage ?
That would n't be too bad in my book .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, we'd be where we're at right now, just with 100x the storage?
That wouldn't be too bad in my book.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227529</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>OpenGLFan</author>
	<datestamp>1244196240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd love it.  Bring it on -- the bigger and slower, the better.  Ever since big, slow backup tapes stopped being significantly larger than the drives they backed up, keeping important info safe has been a nontrivial task.  If you can back up an enterprise's 20GB-a-day data generation habit with an array of slow-but-reliable 10-20TB drives, then your life gets a lot easier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd love it .
Bring it on -- the bigger and slower , the better .
Ever since big , slow backup tapes stopped being significantly larger than the drives they backed up , keeping important info safe has been a nontrivial task .
If you can back up an enterprise 's 20GB-a-day data generation habit with an array of slow-but-reliable 10-20TB drives , then your life gets a lot easier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd love it.
Bring it on -- the bigger and slower, the better.
Ever since big, slow backup tapes stopped being significantly larger than the drives they backed up, keeping important info safe has been a nontrivial task.
If you can back up an enterprise's 20GB-a-day data generation habit with an array of slow-but-reliable 10-20TB drives, then your life gets a lot easier.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228119</id>
	<title>Those antics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244200080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>you might recall the recent breakthrough with Europium superconductivity thanks to similar high-pressure antics.</i>
<br>
<br>
Well who <i>wouldn't</i>?  *shakes head*
<br>
<br>
Gosh darn newfangled Europium superconductivity breakthroughs that come out of high-pressure antics.  Kids these days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>you might recall the recent breakthrough with Europium superconductivity thanks to similar high-pressure antics .
Well who would n't ?
* shakes head * Gosh darn newfangled Europium superconductivity breakthroughs that come out of high-pressure antics .
Kids these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you might recall the recent breakthrough with Europium superconductivity thanks to similar high-pressure antics.
Well who wouldn't?
*shakes head*


Gosh darn newfangled Europium superconductivity breakthroughs that come out of high-pressure antics.
Kids these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227601</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244196720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I heard the same said for 1GB, not 10 years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I heard the same said for 1GB , not 10 years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heard the same said for 1GB, not 10 years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227397</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227641</id>
	<title>New Tech</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244196840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>At last! I hope my magnetic personality won't wipe this new technology as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At last !
I hope my magnetic personality wo n't wipe this new technology as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At last!
I hope my magnetic personality won't wipe this new technology as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28231687</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>bn-7bc</author>
	<datestamp>1244291400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm can you please post a link to a 1TB 2.5in HDD tha toes not cost an arm an a leg? I know that large cheap HDDs exsist but not for laptops<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm can you please post a link to a 1TB 2.5in HDD tha toes not cost an arm an a leg ?
I know that large cheap HDDs exsist but not for laptops  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm can you please post a link to a 1TB 2.5in HDD tha toes not cost an arm an a leg?
I know that large cheap HDDs exsist but not for laptops
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28243559</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Mattsson</author>
	<datestamp>1244407740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But 1 or 2TB per drive will get you quite a data-density.<br>You can fit 448TB of storage in a single 48U rack using 2TB-drives. =)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But 1 or 2TB per drive will get you quite a data-density.You can fit 448TB of storage in a single 48U rack using 2TB-drives .
= )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But 1 or 2TB per drive will get you quite a data-density.You can fit 448TB of storage in a single 48U rack using 2TB-drives.
=)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228249</id>
	<title>This is not new</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244200860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Colossal magnetoresistance in manganites are discovered some 15+ years ago.<br>And this area has been very hot in recently years with tons of papers coming out every month. In fact I did my own masters thesis on this particular topic.<br>You guys should really check this out, it is so true...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Colossal magnetoresistance in manganites are discovered some 15 + years ago.And this area has been very hot in recently years with tons of papers coming out every month .
In fact I did my own masters thesis on this particular topic.You guys should really check this out , it is so true.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Colossal magnetoresistance in manganites are discovered some 15+ years ago.And this area has been very hot in recently years with tons of papers coming out every month.
In fact I did my own masters thesis on this particular topic.You guys should really check this out, it is so true...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28230277</id>
	<title>Re:Massless advance in memory and storage</title>
	<author>JoCat</author>
	<datestamp>1244225100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, still using FAT32?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , still using FAT32 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, still using FAT32?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227351</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227405</id>
	<title>Speed and latency matters</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244195220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think I'd be complaining much about huge amounts of cheap storage.<br><br>However I'd complain about low bandwidth and high latency.<br><br>Imagine if you have 100TB drives but they only do sequential transfers at 200MB/sec and are still stuck at about 10milliseconds access time (7200rpm).<br><br>What that means: it'll take 6 days to transfer 100TB at 200MB/sec, and random transfer speeds will be about as crap as now (1-2MB/sec).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think I 'd be complaining much about huge amounts of cheap storage.However I 'd complain about low bandwidth and high latency.Imagine if you have 100TB drives but they only do sequential transfers at 200MB/sec and are still stuck at about 10milliseconds access time ( 7200rpm ) .What that means : it 'll take 6 days to transfer 100TB at 200MB/sec , and random transfer speeds will be about as crap as now ( 1-2MB/sec ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think I'd be complaining much about huge amounts of cheap storage.However I'd complain about low bandwidth and high latency.Imagine if you have 100TB drives but they only do sequential transfers at 200MB/sec and are still stuck at about 10milliseconds access time (7200rpm).What that means: it'll take 6 days to transfer 100TB at 200MB/sec, and random transfer speeds will be about as crap as now (1-2MB/sec).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28229681</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244216220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And it was true, up until fairly recently. I survived quite happily on 1GB of RAM from 2001 all the way through to about a year ago, when I scored a couple of free sticks and bumped it up to 2GB. It's only in the last couple of years that your average home user has had any use for more than a gig.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And it was true , up until fairly recently .
I survived quite happily on 1GB of RAM from 2001 all the way through to about a year ago , when I scored a couple of free sticks and bumped it up to 2GB .
It 's only in the last couple of years that your average home user has had any use for more than a gig .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And it was true, up until fairly recently.
I survived quite happily on 1GB of RAM from 2001 all the way through to about a year ago, when I scored a couple of free sticks and bumped it up to 2GB.
It's only in the last couple of years that your average home user has had any use for more than a gig.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227601</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228099</id>
	<title>Re:One wonders what they'll call the next discover</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244200020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence-Effect-Mega-Zord! What the Power Rangers use to defeat the evil forces of insufficient memory.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence-Effect-Mega-Zord !
What the Power Rangers use to defeat the evil forces of insufficient memory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence-Effect-Mega-Zord!
What the Power Rangers use to defeat the evil forces of insufficient memory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228527</id>
	<title>The old saying</title>
	<author>mac1235</author>
	<datestamp>1244203020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't underestimate the bandwidth of station wagon full of magnetic tapes, could be updated:

Don't underestimate the bandwidth of a briefcase full of Colossal(Tm) hard disks?

Don't underestimate the size of my portable drive, I've got every song that made it into the charts in every country on this Colossal(Tm) thing.

Jenna Jameson 2010, 200Mb/sec required for ColossalVision(Tm)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't underestimate the bandwidth of station wagon full of magnetic tapes , could be updated : Do n't underestimate the bandwidth of a briefcase full of Colossal ( Tm ) hard disks ?
Do n't underestimate the size of my portable drive , I 've got every song that made it into the charts in every country on this Colossal ( Tm ) thing .
Jenna Jameson 2010 , 200Mb/sec required for ColossalVision ( Tm )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't underestimate the bandwidth of station wagon full of magnetic tapes, could be updated:

Don't underestimate the bandwidth of a briefcase full of Colossal(Tm) hard disks?
Don't underestimate the size of my portable drive, I've got every song that made it into the charts in every country on this Colossal(Tm) thing.
Jenna Jameson 2010, 200Mb/sec required for ColossalVision(Tm)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228889</id>
	<title>Re:Speed and latency matters</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1244205600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Imagine if you have 100TB drives but they only do sequential transfers at 200MB/sec and are still stuck at about 10milliseconds access time (7200rpm).</p></div></blockquote><p>Fine with me.  rsync rocks.  Tape drives, and particularly optical drives (CDs/DVDs/MOs), have FAR WORSE performance characteristics, and they all refuse to die.</p><p>Maybe we'll just see Flash take the place of smaller HDDs, and large slow HDDs take the place of tapes and most uses of optical media.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine if you have 100TB drives but they only do sequential transfers at 200MB/sec and are still stuck at about 10milliseconds access time ( 7200rpm ) .Fine with me .
rsync rocks .
Tape drives , and particularly optical drives ( CDs/DVDs/MOs ) , have FAR WORSE performance characteristics , and they all refuse to die.Maybe we 'll just see Flash take the place of smaller HDDs , and large slow HDDs take the place of tapes and most uses of optical media .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine if you have 100TB drives but they only do sequential transfers at 200MB/sec and are still stuck at about 10milliseconds access time (7200rpm).Fine with me.
rsync rocks.
Tape drives, and particularly optical drives (CDs/DVDs/MOs), have FAR WORSE performance characteristics, and they all refuse to die.Maybe we'll just see Flash take the place of smaller HDDs, and large slow HDDs take the place of tapes and most uses of optical media.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228855</id>
	<title>LMR Effect</title>
	<author>HiggsBison</author>
	<datestamp>1244205300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>How about the "Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence Effect?" </i> </p><p>I'm waiting for the Ludicrous Magnetoresistence Effect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about the " Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence Effect ?
" I 'm waiting for the Ludicrous Magnetoresistence Effect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> How about the "Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence Effect?
"  I'm waiting for the Ludicrous Magnetoresistence Effect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28231209</id>
	<title>Re:And if we can predict anything...</title>
	<author>SlashWombat</author>
	<datestamp>1244282700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The article said 230,000 times atmospheric pressure. I guess this would bring a new dimension to the term "my memory blew up"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I imagine it would be a lot more dramatic than just letting out the smoke!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article said 230,000 times atmospheric pressure .
I guess this would bring a new dimension to the term " my memory blew up " ... I imagine it would be a lot more dramatic than just letting out the smoke !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article said 230,000 times atmospheric pressure.
I guess this would bring a new dimension to the term "my memory blew up" ... I imagine it would be a lot more dramatic than just letting out the smoke!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228817</id>
	<title>Re:One wonders what they'll call the next discover</title>
	<author>ShakaUVM</author>
	<datestamp>1244205000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;How about the "Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence Effect?"</p><p>Yeah, they were really short sided when they skipped directly from "giant" to "colossal". As all nerds know, the progression goes:<br>Fine -&gt; Diminutive -&gt; Tiny -&gt; Small -&gt; Medium -&gt; Large -&gt; Huge -&gt; Gargantuan -&gt; Colossal.</p><p>Since giants are Huge, the next step up in technology would be Gargantuan.</p><p>(And after Colossal comes Colossal+, of course.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; How about the " Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence Effect ?
" Yeah , they were really short sided when they skipped directly from " giant " to " colossal " .
As all nerds know , the progression goes : Fine - &gt; Diminutive - &gt; Tiny - &gt; Small - &gt; Medium - &gt; Large - &gt; Huge - &gt; Gargantuan - &gt; Colossal.Since giants are Huge , the next step up in technology would be Gargantuan .
( And after Colossal comes Colossal + , of course .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;How about the "Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence Effect?
"Yeah, they were really short sided when they skipped directly from "giant" to "colossal".
As all nerds know, the progression goes:Fine -&gt; Diminutive -&gt; Tiny -&gt; Small -&gt; Medium -&gt; Large -&gt; Huge -&gt; Gargantuan -&gt; Colossal.Since giants are Huge, the next step up in technology would be Gargantuan.
(And after Colossal comes Colossal+, of course.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28233471</id>
	<title>What's next?</title>
	<author>Alzheimers</author>
	<datestamp>1244306280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Giant resistance?  Colossal effect?</p><p>We're about two adjectives away from Ginormous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Giant resistance ?
Colossal effect ? We 're about two adjectives away from Ginormous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Giant resistance?
Colossal effect?We're about two adjectives away from Ginormous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931</id>
	<title>One wonders what they'll call the next discovery?</title>
	<author>cutecub</author>
	<datestamp>1244198820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
How about the "Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence Effect?"
</p><p>
At some point, you run out of superlatives and need to go Exponential:
</p><p>
<b>Magneto X 10^Super-Hyper-Colossal</b>
</p><p>
-S</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about the " Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence Effect ?
" At some point , you run out of superlatives and need to go Exponential : Magneto X 10 ^ Super-Hyper-Colossal -S</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
How about the "Super-Hyper-Colossal-Magnetoresistence Effect?
"

At some point, you run out of superlatives and need to go Exponential:

Magneto X 10^Super-Hyper-Colossal

-S</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293</id>
	<title>And if we can predict anything...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244194500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
This discovery seems to still be in the very preliminary stages. It is premature to conclude that this will lead to substantial improvements. Putting things under high pressure is difficult and keeping them under high pressure is really hard (although from my minimal physics understanding it looks like this could be used to assist in low pressure situations also).
</p><p>
One thing is certain. If this does lead to improvement in memory we'll have a few months of people asking whatever they could do with all that memory. And then a few years after they'll complain that it isn't enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This discovery seems to still be in the very preliminary stages .
It is premature to conclude that this will lead to substantial improvements .
Putting things under high pressure is difficult and keeping them under high pressure is really hard ( although from my minimal physics understanding it looks like this could be used to assist in low pressure situations also ) .
One thing is certain .
If this does lead to improvement in memory we 'll have a few months of people asking whatever they could do with all that memory .
And then a few years after they 'll complain that it is n't enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
This discovery seems to still be in the very preliminary stages.
It is premature to conclude that this will lead to substantial improvements.
Putting things under high pressure is difficult and keeping them under high pressure is really hard (although from my minimal physics understanding it looks like this could be used to assist in low pressure situations also).
One thing is certain.
If this does lead to improvement in memory we'll have a few months of people asking whatever they could do with all that memory.
And then a few years after they'll complain that it isn't enough.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227539</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1244196300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simple. Just have a 1TB cache.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple .
Just have a 1TB cache .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple.
Just have a 1TB cache.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28230799</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244319420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work for a company that routinely processes videos of several hours runtime, extracts still images from them etc. Let me tell you that 1 TiB of disk space isn't really that much.</p><p>But on top of that, as you correctly point out, it becomes even worse if you start putting houndreds of thousands jpegs on these things and have to find a program that reliably copies and checks them. Hint: Don't try windows explorer. Robocopy works fine as does BeyondCompare. Most others fail somewhere near 150.000 files, which usually happens after several hours into the process and leaves you with an inconsistent state which means you might have to start all over again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a company that routinely processes videos of several hours runtime , extracts still images from them etc .
Let me tell you that 1 TiB of disk space is n't really that much.But on top of that , as you correctly point out , it becomes even worse if you start putting houndreds of thousands jpegs on these things and have to find a program that reliably copies and checks them .
Hint : Do n't try windows explorer .
Robocopy works fine as does BeyondCompare .
Most others fail somewhere near 150.000 files , which usually happens after several hours into the process and leaves you with an inconsistent state which means you might have to start all over again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a company that routinely processes videos of several hours runtime, extracts still images from them etc.
Let me tell you that 1 TiB of disk space isn't really that much.But on top of that, as you correctly point out, it becomes even worse if you start putting houndreds of thousands jpegs on these things and have to find a program that reliably copies and checks them.
Hint: Don't try windows explorer.
Robocopy works fine as does BeyondCompare.
Most others fail somewhere near 150.000 files, which usually happens after several hours into the process and leaves you with an inconsistent state which means you might have to start all over again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228489</id>
	<title>Re:Storage....</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1244202600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>No, but let's be a bit realistic, here. 1 TB is enough space for some 100 hours of DVD-quality video. 1 PB is 100,000 hours of DVD video.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sure -- of DVD-quality video. Of course, significantly less of HD video, and even less of, say, Ultra HD with 22.2 channel sound.</p><blockquote><div><p>We went from a GB to a TB HDD in about 10 years, so it's not unreasonable to think that we'll have 1 PB in another 10.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Sure, if you assume that the growth rate is exponential without bound. OTOH, technologies of all types often flatten out as they mature, and a logistic growth pattern (which looks exponential in its early phase) is perhaps more reasonable of a long-term expectation.</p><blockquote><div><p>At that time, you can record every second of your life on a single HDD, in RAW format.</p></div></blockquote><p>Assuming that you are doing uncompressed, 8 bit/channel RGB images at a measly 640x480 resolution, 1 image per second, 1 PB will only get you less than 39 years of images, so your statement is only true with extremely low resolution images, or short lives.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , but let 's be a bit realistic , here .
1 TB is enough space for some 100 hours of DVD-quality video .
1 PB is 100,000 hours of DVD video.Sure -- of DVD-quality video .
Of course , significantly less of HD video , and even less of , say , Ultra HD with 22.2 channel sound.We went from a GB to a TB HDD in about 10 years , so it 's not unreasonable to think that we 'll have 1 PB in another 10 .
Sure , if you assume that the growth rate is exponential without bound .
OTOH , technologies of all types often flatten out as they mature , and a logistic growth pattern ( which looks exponential in its early phase ) is perhaps more reasonable of a long-term expectation.At that time , you can record every second of your life on a single HDD , in RAW format.Assuming that you are doing uncompressed , 8 bit/channel RGB images at a measly 640x480 resolution , 1 image per second , 1 PB will only get you less than 39 years of images , so your statement is only true with extremely low resolution images , or short lives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, but let's be a bit realistic, here.
1 TB is enough space for some 100 hours of DVD-quality video.
1 PB is 100,000 hours of DVD video.Sure -- of DVD-quality video.
Of course, significantly less of HD video, and even less of, say, Ultra HD with 22.2 channel sound.We went from a GB to a TB HDD in about 10 years, so it's not unreasonable to think that we'll have 1 PB in another 10.
Sure, if you assume that the growth rate is exponential without bound.
OTOH, technologies of all types often flatten out as they mature, and a logistic growth pattern (which looks exponential in its early phase) is perhaps more reasonable of a long-term expectation.At that time, you can record every second of your life on a single HDD, in RAW format.Assuming that you are doing uncompressed, 8 bit/channel RGB images at a measly 640x480 resolution, 1 image per second, 1 PB will only get you less than 39 years of images, so your statement is only true with extremely low resolution images, or short lives.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227861</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28231687
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28229681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227601
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28243559
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28229071
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28230799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227405
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227405
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28234691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227405
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28230277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227405
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227969
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28229497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_1922242_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28231209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228119
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227639
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227303
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227397
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227861
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228489
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28234691
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227969
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227601
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28229681
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227409
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228839
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228355
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28231687
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227691
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28243559
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28230799
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227351
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28230277
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227267
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227293
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28229071
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28231209
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227405
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228889
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228527
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228007
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228259
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227281
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227257
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227755
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227641
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228427
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228219
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228325
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228353
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_1922242.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28227931
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228817
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28228099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_1922242.28229497
</commentlist>
</conversation>
