<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_14_0218212</id>
	<title>A Twitter Client For the Commodore 64</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1244970300000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Johan Van den Brande has developed a <a href="http://www.vandenbrande.com/wp/2009/06/breadbox64-a-twitter-client-for-the-c64/">Twitter client for the Commodore 64</a>, allowing 140-character messages to be posted directly from this TV-connected 1982 home computer. This YouTube video shows <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8m86mm-SMGA">how the Twitter client is &mdash; slowly! &mdash; loaded</a> from a 5.25" floppy disk, how the latest Twitter messages are downloaded and shown on the TV screen, and how <a href="http://twitter.com/breadbox64/status/2048263477">this tweet</a> is posted. All that is needed is a C64, a TV, and a C64 Ethernet card. The Twitter client is implemented with <a href="http://www.sics.se/contiki/about-contiki.html">the Contiki operating system</a>, which otherwise is used for connecting tiny embedded systems to the Internet."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Johan Van den Brande has developed a Twitter client for the Commodore 64 , allowing 140-character messages to be posted directly from this TV-connected 1982 home computer .
This YouTube video shows how the Twitter client is    slowly !
   loaded from a 5.25 " floppy disk , how the latest Twitter messages are downloaded and shown on the TV screen , and how this tweet is posted .
All that is needed is a C64 , a TV , and a C64 Ethernet card .
The Twitter client is implemented with the Contiki operating system , which otherwise is used for connecting tiny embedded systems to the Internet .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Johan Van den Brande has developed a Twitter client for the Commodore 64, allowing 140-character messages to be posted directly from this TV-connected 1982 home computer.
This YouTube video shows how the Twitter client is — slowly!
— loaded from a 5.25" floppy disk, how the latest Twitter messages are downloaded and shown on the TV screen, and how this tweet is posted.
All that is needed is a C64, a TV, and a C64 Ethernet card.
The Twitter client is implemented with the Contiki operating system, which otherwise is used for connecting tiny embedded systems to the Internet.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28330423</id>
	<title>Where is the ABC80 version?</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1244986020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Eh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eh?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325745</id>
	<title>Re:Software really has yet to catch up to hardware</title>
	<author>Dan541</author>
	<datestamp>1244982960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In this case both software AND hardware need to catch up about 27 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In this case both software AND hardware need to catch up about 27 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In this case both software AND hardware need to catch up about 27 years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326589</id>
	<title>Re:Before anyone asks...</title>
	<author>Cruciform</author>
	<datestamp>1244995380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you talking about the C64 project or Twitter?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you talking about the C64 project or Twitter ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you talking about the C64 project or Twitter?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327191</id>
	<title>Re:The Commodore as I/O Device- A dumb terminal</title>
	<author>VanessaE</author>
	<datestamp>1245001320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And this differs from modern PC hardware<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... how?</p><p>Last I knew, virtually all modern PC peripherals, whether they be modems, printers, network cards, video cards, hard disks, sound cards, monitors, etc. all had some kind of reasonably powerful processor in them, if not a complete self-contained embedded computer.  Other than my speakers, I can't think of a single device inside of or attached to any of my three PC's that does not contain a small, embedded computer of some sort.  I'd bet even my optical mouse has one also.  Even today, some of those peripherals are faster and more powerful than the PCs they go with (video cards being the prime example).</p><p>As for the C64, IEC floppy and hard disk devices for the C64 or C128 use a 6502 CPU running at whatever speed that the technology allowed for: 1 MHz for the C64 + 1541, 2 MHz for the C128 and all later drives, because it was the smartest way to build these devices.  Whatever the technology of the era was capable of, that's what the manufacturers went with.</p><p>Since the programming model of the time, regardless of platform, meant tailoring your software to run on a specific model of computer running at a specific speed, with specific minimum peripheral requirements, expecting any manufacturer to have released new, faster versions of their otherwise old hardware as technology progresses is insane - it would break too many programs and cause too many problems for the users.  They develop entirely new hardware that mostly retains backward compatibility instead, and market it as such.  Think C128 versus C64, Spectrum 128k versus Spectrum 48k, 286 versus XT... you get the point.</p><p>As for the software, the Twitter client and OS do all the hard work of dealing with TCP/IP and communicating via whatever protocol Twitter uses.  The only help they get from the hardware is the physical interface and Ethernet protocol layers (and whatever else goes with it)...  just like any other computer.</p><p>The only tangible differences between running a Twitter (or IRC, email, web...) client on a 27 year old 8-bit platform and running one on a just-invented-yesterday top of the line PC are that one runs (a whole freaking lot) faster, while the other has an undeniable "cool" factor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And this differs from modern PC hardware ... how ? Last I knew , virtually all modern PC peripherals , whether they be modems , printers , network cards , video cards , hard disks , sound cards , monitors , etc .
all had some kind of reasonably powerful processor in them , if not a complete self-contained embedded computer .
Other than my speakers , I ca n't think of a single device inside of or attached to any of my three PC 's that does not contain a small , embedded computer of some sort .
I 'd bet even my optical mouse has one also .
Even today , some of those peripherals are faster and more powerful than the PCs they go with ( video cards being the prime example ) .As for the C64 , IEC floppy and hard disk devices for the C64 or C128 use a 6502 CPU running at whatever speed that the technology allowed for : 1 MHz for the C64 + 1541 , 2 MHz for the C128 and all later drives , because it was the smartest way to build these devices .
Whatever the technology of the era was capable of , that 's what the manufacturers went with.Since the programming model of the time , regardless of platform , meant tailoring your software to run on a specific model of computer running at a specific speed , with specific minimum peripheral requirements , expecting any manufacturer to have released new , faster versions of their otherwise old hardware as technology progresses is insane - it would break too many programs and cause too many problems for the users .
They develop entirely new hardware that mostly retains backward compatibility instead , and market it as such .
Think C128 versus C64 , Spectrum 128k versus Spectrum 48k , 286 versus XT... you get the point.As for the software , the Twitter client and OS do all the hard work of dealing with TCP/IP and communicating via whatever protocol Twitter uses .
The only help they get from the hardware is the physical interface and Ethernet protocol layers ( and whatever else goes with it ) ... just like any other computer.The only tangible differences between running a Twitter ( or IRC , email , web... ) client on a 27 year old 8-bit platform and running one on a just-invented-yesterday top of the line PC are that one runs ( a whole freaking lot ) faster , while the other has an undeniable " cool " factor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And this differs from modern PC hardware ... how?Last I knew, virtually all modern PC peripherals, whether they be modems, printers, network cards, video cards, hard disks, sound cards, monitors, etc.
all had some kind of reasonably powerful processor in them, if not a complete self-contained embedded computer.
Other than my speakers, I can't think of a single device inside of or attached to any of my three PC's that does not contain a small, embedded computer of some sort.
I'd bet even my optical mouse has one also.
Even today, some of those peripherals are faster and more powerful than the PCs they go with (video cards being the prime example).As for the C64, IEC floppy and hard disk devices for the C64 or C128 use a 6502 CPU running at whatever speed that the technology allowed for: 1 MHz for the C64 + 1541, 2 MHz for the C128 and all later drives, because it was the smartest way to build these devices.
Whatever the technology of the era was capable of, that's what the manufacturers went with.Since the programming model of the time, regardless of platform, meant tailoring your software to run on a specific model of computer running at a specific speed, with specific minimum peripheral requirements, expecting any manufacturer to have released new, faster versions of their otherwise old hardware as technology progresses is insane - it would break too many programs and cause too many problems for the users.
They develop entirely new hardware that mostly retains backward compatibility instead, and market it as such.
Think C128 versus C64, Spectrum 128k versus Spectrum 48k, 286 versus XT... you get the point.As for the software, the Twitter client and OS do all the hard work of dealing with TCP/IP and communicating via whatever protocol Twitter uses.
The only help they get from the hardware is the physical interface and Ethernet protocol layers (and whatever else goes with it)...  just like any other computer.The only tangible differences between running a Twitter (or IRC, email, web...) client on a 27 year old 8-bit platform and running one on a just-invented-yesterday top of the line PC are that one runs (a whole freaking lot) faster, while the other has an undeniable "cool" factor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326231</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325793</id>
	<title>Goog Things Cum with Age...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244984040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My old c64 isn't as hot as these <a href="http://www.mymilfspace.com/" title="mymilfspace.com" rel="nofollow">Hardcore MILFs</a> [mymilfspace.com]!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My old c64 is n't as hot as these Hardcore MILFs [ mymilfspace.com ] !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My old c64 isn't as hot as these Hardcore MILFs [mymilfspace.com]!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28334655</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>MBGMorden</author>
	<datestamp>1245078240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Projects like this truly serve to show just how much hardware that was considered "obsolete" 20 years ago is capable of.  There is a live webserver running on a C64 out there.  There are Twitter and email clients, as well as basic web browsers.  They're not flash-complaint YouTube surfing machines, but for the purposes of exchanging information across the globe you can get by with the most modest of hardware.</p><p>It's been said (and it's true) many times over that the entire world cannot live and consume at the rate at which Americans do.  We consume so much that if the whole planet did so at the same rate we'd need 3 planets to support us all.  Eventually, we are going to have to achieve an equilibrium, which means Americans will have to consume and buy less.  Projects like this help a lot to show me that even if our spending power is greatly reduced, and we end up having to use the same computer for 10, 20, or even 30 years at a time, that I will still be able to continue to do most of the core things that I care about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Projects like this truly serve to show just how much hardware that was considered " obsolete " 20 years ago is capable of .
There is a live webserver running on a C64 out there .
There are Twitter and email clients , as well as basic web browsers .
They 're not flash-complaint YouTube surfing machines , but for the purposes of exchanging information across the globe you can get by with the most modest of hardware.It 's been said ( and it 's true ) many times over that the entire world can not live and consume at the rate at which Americans do .
We consume so much that if the whole planet did so at the same rate we 'd need 3 planets to support us all .
Eventually , we are going to have to achieve an equilibrium , which means Americans will have to consume and buy less .
Projects like this help a lot to show me that even if our spending power is greatly reduced , and we end up having to use the same computer for 10 , 20 , or even 30 years at a time , that I will still be able to continue to do most of the core things that I care about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Projects like this truly serve to show just how much hardware that was considered "obsolete" 20 years ago is capable of.
There is a live webserver running on a C64 out there.
There are Twitter and email clients, as well as basic web browsers.
They're not flash-complaint YouTube surfing machines, but for the purposes of exchanging information across the globe you can get by with the most modest of hardware.It's been said (and it's true) many times over that the entire world cannot live and consume at the rate at which Americans do.
We consume so much that if the whole planet did so at the same rate we'd need 3 planets to support us all.
Eventually, we are going to have to achieve an equilibrium, which means Americans will have to consume and buy less.
Projects like this help a lot to show me that even if our spending power is greatly reduced, and we end up having to use the same computer for 10, 20, or even 30 years at a time, that I will still be able to continue to do most of the core things that I care about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325453</id>
	<title>Probably came from here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244975400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1268047&amp;cid=28324013" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow"> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1268047&amp;cid=28324013 </a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>I'm sick of hearing about twitter. When will it end?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1268047&amp;cid = 28324013 [ slashdot.org ] I 'm sick of hearing about twitter .
When will it end ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1268047&amp;cid=28324013  [slashdot.org]I'm sick of hearing about twitter.
When will it end?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325857</id>
	<title>Plaintext login?</title>
	<author>PRMan</author>
	<datestamp>1244985480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did he just type his username and password in plaintext?  Now be good everyone...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did he just type his username and password in plaintext ?
Now be good everyone.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did he just type his username and password in plaintext?
Now be good everyone...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325603</id>
	<title>Before anyone asks...</title>
	<author>GF678</author>
	<datestamp>1244978580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Before anyone asks <i>why</i> someone bothered to do this, I'll answer it - because they <i>can</i>. Simple as that.</p><p>It has no practical use, that's for sure, but not everyone needs to be done to have a practical use. Some stuff is just cool. That's why we have these things called hobbies. I certainly wouldn't have invested my time into getting something like this to work, but I can't disparage anyone who does. It's a hobby. I would even argue that it does not reflect one way or another on a person's ability to get laid.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Before anyone asks why someone bothered to do this , I 'll answer it - because they can .
Simple as that.It has no practical use , that 's for sure , but not everyone needs to be done to have a practical use .
Some stuff is just cool .
That 's why we have these things called hobbies .
I certainly would n't have invested my time into getting something like this to work , but I ca n't disparage anyone who does .
It 's a hobby .
I would even argue that it does not reflect one way or another on a person 's ability to get laid .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before anyone asks why someone bothered to do this, I'll answer it - because they can.
Simple as that.It has no practical use, that's for sure, but not everyone needs to be done to have a practical use.
Some stuff is just cool.
That's why we have these things called hobbies.
I certainly wouldn't have invested my time into getting something like this to work, but I can't disparage anyone who does.
It's a hobby.
I would even argue that it does not reflect one way or another on a person's ability to get laid.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325899</id>
	<title>You.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244986260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will.<br>Never.<br>Get.<br>Laid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will.Never.Get.Laid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will.Never.Get.Laid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325695</id>
	<title>So does this mean..</title>
	<author>anomnomnomymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244981400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So Juno can now also finally start twittering?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So Juno can now also finally start twittering ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Juno can now also finally start twittering?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325485</id>
	<title>I call "cheating"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244976240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The ethernet card is not original C64 equipment.  He should be bit banging an rs232 link to a 300 baud modem in order to get a net connection.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The ethernet card is not original C64 equipment .
He should be bit banging an rs232 link to a 300 baud modem in order to get a net connection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ethernet card is not original C64 equipment.
He should be bit banging an rs232 link to a 300 baud modem in order to get a net connection.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326433</id>
	<title>Re:Software really has yet to catch up to hardware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244993160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Twitter sucks.  The C64 sucks.  This project sucks.</p><p>OH SURE, it's all cool, but it sucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Twitter sucks .
The C64 sucks .
This project sucks.OH SURE , it 's all cool , but it sucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Twitter sucks.
The C64 sucks.
This project sucks.OH SURE, it's all cool, but it sucks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325461</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244975700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>To enable you to Tweet in between games of <i>Attack of the Mutant Camels</i>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To enable you to Tweet in between games of Attack of the Mutant Camels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To enable you to Tweet in between games of Attack of the Mutant Camels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325879</id>
	<title>Re:Speccy vs. C64 slugfest - start here!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244985960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Losers.  BBC Micro FTW!!!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Losers .
BBC Micro FTW ! ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Losers.
BBC Micro FTW!!!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325609</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327091</id>
	<title>Re:Before anyone asks...</title>
	<author>NJRoadfan</author>
	<datestamp>1245000420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FWIW, a Twitter client for the Apple IIgs is coming out soon (scroll down to "Coming Soon"): <a href="http://www.ryansapplesoftware.com/" title="ryansapplesoftware.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.ryansapplesoftware.com/</a> [ryansapplesoftware.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>FWIW , a Twitter client for the Apple IIgs is coming out soon ( scroll down to " Coming Soon " ) : http : //www.ryansapplesoftware.com/ [ ryansapplesoftware.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FWIW, a Twitter client for the Apple IIgs is coming out soon (scroll down to "Coming Soon"): http://www.ryansapplesoftware.com/ [ryansapplesoftware.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327355</id>
	<title>Television</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245002940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The poster seems a little enthralled that a TV is used, mentioning it three times.</p><p>It doesn't have to be a TV. Early home computers simply used a video output that worked with the available CRTs of the time. My 1986 Amiga 1080 monitor works with the C64, and the 1080 can display the output from a VCR or PS2 etc, though it is not a TV. It's just that the video signal of the time is compatible with televisions. Nothing special is going on there. By the late 80s computers had moved on to higher definition specialized displays, and 'television' output required a special card.</p><p>Guess I've got to go chase some kids out of my yard now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The poster seems a little enthralled that a TV is used , mentioning it three times.It does n't have to be a TV .
Early home computers simply used a video output that worked with the available CRTs of the time .
My 1986 Amiga 1080 monitor works with the C64 , and the 1080 can display the output from a VCR or PS2 etc , though it is not a TV .
It 's just that the video signal of the time is compatible with televisions .
Nothing special is going on there .
By the late 80s computers had moved on to higher definition specialized displays , and 'television ' output required a special card.Guess I 've got to go chase some kids out of my yard now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The poster seems a little enthralled that a TV is used, mentioning it three times.It doesn't have to be a TV.
Early home computers simply used a video output that worked with the available CRTs of the time.
My 1986 Amiga 1080 monitor works with the C64, and the 1080 can display the output from a VCR or PS2 etc, though it is not a TV.
It's just that the video signal of the time is compatible with televisions.
Nothing special is going on there.
By the late 80s computers had moved on to higher definition specialized displays, and 'television' output required a special card.Guess I've got to go chase some kids out of my yard now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28333537</id>
	<title>Re:I call "cheating"</title>
	<author>claytonjr</author>
	<datestamp>1245068400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>To do that you'd have to have a serial adapter as well - so where do you draw the line?</p></div><p>On the screen, silly.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To do that you 'd have to have a serial adapter as well - so where do you draw the line ? On the screen , silly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To do that you'd have to have a serial adapter as well - so where do you draw the line?On the screen, silly.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325545</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326123</id>
	<title>Re:Software really has yet to catch up to hardware</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1244989680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And because on a C64, you do not expect all the little features, grapics, etc. Like a spell checker, an animated mouse cursor semi-transparent high-color smooth-moving windows. many of them. An MP3 stream playing it he background, with an OSD poppig up. An instant messenger for 5 different networks running in the background. Sub-pixel-anti-aliased beautiful vector fonts, with different styles, intelligent breaking on the field end, full HTML+CSS+JavaScript+DOM+flash rendering/interpreting, automatic error checks for wrong data in I/O, a firewall and other tools protecting us, etc. And the convenience of a high-level language.</p><p>That stuff adds up.</p><p>Sure, I would love to see us all programming and even scripting in Haskell, with some extensions, and a compiler producing smaller files. And efficient use of data (like not using an array of 64-bit fields for single bit variables. [flag-fields where are you?]).</p><p>But, well...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And because on a C64 , you do not expect all the little features , grapics , etc .
Like a spell checker , an animated mouse cursor semi-transparent high-color smooth-moving windows .
many of them .
An MP3 stream playing it he background , with an OSD poppig up .
An instant messenger for 5 different networks running in the background .
Sub-pixel-anti-aliased beautiful vector fonts , with different styles , intelligent breaking on the field end , full HTML + CSS + JavaScript + DOM + flash rendering/interpreting , automatic error checks for wrong data in I/O , a firewall and other tools protecting us , etc .
And the convenience of a high-level language.That stuff adds up.Sure , I would love to see us all programming and even scripting in Haskell , with some extensions , and a compiler producing smaller files .
And efficient use of data ( like not using an array of 64-bit fields for single bit variables .
[ flag-fields where are you ?
] ) .But , well.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And because on a C64, you do not expect all the little features, grapics, etc.
Like a spell checker, an animated mouse cursor semi-transparent high-color smooth-moving windows.
many of them.
An MP3 stream playing it he background, with an OSD poppig up.
An instant messenger for 5 different networks running in the background.
Sub-pixel-anti-aliased beautiful vector fonts, with different styles, intelligent breaking on the field end, full HTML+CSS+JavaScript+DOM+flash rendering/interpreting, automatic error checks for wrong data in I/O, a firewall and other tools protecting us, etc.
And the convenience of a high-level language.That stuff adds up.Sure, I would love to see us all programming and even scripting in Haskell, with some extensions, and a compiler producing smaller files.
And efficient use of data (like not using an array of 64-bit fields for single bit variables.
[flag-fields where are you?
]).But, well...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325451</id>
	<title>Wait wait wait...</title>
	<author>Osmosis\_Garett</author>
	<datestamp>1244975400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you telling me this works without an internet connection?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you telling me this works without an internet connection ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you telling me this works without an internet connection?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326197</id>
	<title>Re:Not necessarily so funny</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1244990700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My not particularly efficient laptop uses less than 60 watts to power a 1.6 Ghz Core Duo processor and everything else inside it. Improvements on that would be valuable, but 60 watts is practically noise if you have enough generation to do something useful and well within what can be generated by a human when connected to the appropriate device.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My not particularly efficient laptop uses less than 60 watts to power a 1.6 Ghz Core Duo processor and everything else inside it .
Improvements on that would be valuable , but 60 watts is practically noise if you have enough generation to do something useful and well within what can be generated by a human when connected to the appropriate device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My not particularly efficient laptop uses less than 60 watts to power a 1.6 Ghz Core Duo processor and everything else inside it.
Improvements on that would be valuable, but 60 watts is practically noise if you have enough generation to do something useful and well within what can be generated by a human when connected to the appropriate device.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325927</id>
	<title>Re:Much Faster Floppy Drive for the C64</title>
	<author>A Life in Hell</author>
	<datestamp>1244986740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you mean like the 1541 ultimate ( <a href="http://www.1541ultimate.net/" title="1541ultimate.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.1541ultimate.net/</a> [1541ultimate.net] )?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you mean like the 1541 ultimate ( http : //www.1541ultimate.net/ [ 1541ultimate.net ] ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you mean like the 1541 ultimate ( http://www.1541ultimate.net/ [1541ultimate.net] )?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325563</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244977500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are on Slashdot and you need explanation to see that implementing a Twitter client on a C64 is totally cool?</p><p>Sir, you are requested to leave this room please.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are on Slashdot and you need explanation to see that implementing a Twitter client on a C64 is totally cool ? Sir , you are requested to leave this room please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are on Slashdot and you need explanation to see that implementing a Twitter client on a C64 is totally cool?Sir, you are requested to leave this room please.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326913</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong why?</title>
	<author>fyrie</author>
	<datestamp>1244999040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it makes you feel any better I've been loading it off of an SDHC card that is inside of a cartridge that emulates a 1541 disk drive.</p><p><a href="http://www.1541ultimate.net/" title="1541ultimate.net">http://www.1541ultimate.net/</a> [1541ultimate.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it makes you feel any better I 've been loading it off of an SDHC card that is inside of a cartridge that emulates a 1541 disk drive.http : //www.1541ultimate.net/ [ 1541ultimate.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it makes you feel any better I've been loading it off of an SDHC card that is inside of a cartridge that emulates a 1541 disk drive.http://www.1541ultimate.net/ [1541ultimate.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28425911</id>
	<title>Re:Not good enough</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245698400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This one would work since contiki has been ported to the VIC-20.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This one would work since contiki has been ported to the VIC-20 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This one would work since contiki has been ported to the VIC-20.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325839</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325635</id>
	<title>Re:Much Faster Floppy Drive for the C64</title>
	<author>WarwickRyan</author>
	<datestamp>1244979300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are also harddrives for the C64, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone has built an flash-based storage device for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are also harddrives for the C64 , and I would n't be surprised if someone has built an flash-based storage device for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are also harddrives for the C64, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone has built an flash-based storage device for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325611</id>
	<title>A new target market for Dell!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244978820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is great news for Dell, <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/06/13/185216/Dell-Makes-3-Million-From-Twitter-Sales" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">who have moved into the Twitter marketing area</a> [slashdot.org]. Hordes of upgrade-hungry Commodore 64 users now have access to all the Dell special offers!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is great news for Dell , who have moved into the Twitter marketing area [ slashdot.org ] .
Hordes of upgrade-hungry Commodore 64 users now have access to all the Dell special offers !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is great news for Dell, who have moved into the Twitter marketing area [slashdot.org].
Hordes of upgrade-hungry Commodore 64 users now have access to all the Dell special offers!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325805</id>
	<title>Re:Speccy vs. C64 slugfest - start here!</title>
	<author>biscuitlover</author>
	<datestamp>1244984160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After having to slog through a million and one boring PS3/Xbox360 fanboy wars on pretty much every forum out there, is there anyone else who finds the prospect of a spectrum/C64 slugfest actually quite appealing?</p><p>And have I been spending too much time on the Internet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After having to slog through a million and one boring PS3/Xbox360 fanboy wars on pretty much every forum out there , is there anyone else who finds the prospect of a spectrum/C64 slugfest actually quite appealing ? And have I been spending too much time on the Internet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After having to slog through a million and one boring PS3/Xbox360 fanboy wars on pretty much every forum out there, is there anyone else who finds the prospect of a spectrum/C64 slugfest actually quite appealing?And have I been spending too much time on the Internet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325609</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325531</id>
	<title>Re:i can feel a tv series comming</title>
	<author>MobileTatsu-NJG</author>
	<datestamp>1244977200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Nerds that never get laid"</p></div><p>At least we know there'll never be a Nerds that Never get Laid TNG.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Nerds that never get laid " At least we know there 'll never be a Nerds that Never get Laid TNG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Nerds that never get laid"At least we know there'll never be a Nerds that Never get Laid TNG.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327847</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245007800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's been a tradition to troll idiots with no life, too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's been a tradition to troll idiots with no life , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's been a tradition to troll idiots with no life, too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325495</id>
	<title>Twitter isn't exactly an intensive application</title>
	<author>rugger</author>
	<datestamp>1244976480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The hardest parts of doing this will be the TCP/IP stack and drivers to connect to the internet.</p><p>The messages are not long/require lots of screen realestate or memory.</p><p>It certainly scores *cool* points for making exceptionally OLD hardware do very new things, but it doesn't score points for difficulty or complexity.</p><p>But if someone finds it useful, then it wasn't a waste of time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The hardest parts of doing this will be the TCP/IP stack and drivers to connect to the internet.The messages are not long/require lots of screen realestate or memory.It certainly scores * cool * points for making exceptionally OLD hardware do very new things , but it does n't score points for difficulty or complexity.But if someone finds it useful , then it was n't a waste of time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hardest parts of doing this will be the TCP/IP stack and drivers to connect to the internet.The messages are not long/require lots of screen realestate or memory.It certainly scores *cool* points for making exceptionally OLD hardware do very new things, but it doesn't score points for difficulty or complexity.But if someone finds it useful, then it wasn't a waste of time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325397</id>
	<title>fp !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244974020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow my first first post !</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow my first first post !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow my first first post !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325425</id>
	<title>i can feel a tv series comming</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244974680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Nerds that never get laid"</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Nerds that never get laid "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Nerds that never get laid"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28329627</id>
	<title>Re:Before anyone asks...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244977680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You hit the nail on the head i have been watching a commodore 64 run web site for the past 2 years and find it amazing its still on the internet as its been run from a commodore 64 built back in the 80s http://www.c64web.com just checked its still there. would have to be hobbie based.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You hit the nail on the head i have been watching a commodore 64 run web site for the past 2 years and find it amazing its still on the internet as its been run from a commodore 64 built back in the 80s http : //www.c64web.com just checked its still there .
would have to be hobbie based .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You hit the nail on the head i have been watching a commodore 64 run web site for the past 2 years and find it amazing its still on the internet as its been run from a commodore 64 built back in the 80s http://www.c64web.com just checked its still there.
would have to be hobbie based.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28328727</id>
	<title>It's not a floppy!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244970600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It just looks like a 5.25" floppy, but it's something slightly different (and not compatable). I found a c64 in my friend's attic, and the floppy drive was the reason that we were unable to get it working.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It just looks like a 5.25 " floppy , but it 's something slightly different ( and not compatable ) .
I found a c64 in my friend 's attic , and the floppy drive was the reason that we were unable to get it working .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It just looks like a 5.25" floppy, but it's something slightly different (and not compatable).
I found a c64 in my friend's attic, and the floppy drive was the reason that we were unable to get it working.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28329487</id>
	<title>Re:Not necessarily so funny</title>
	<author>petrus4</author>
	<datestamp>1244976180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can understand why some of my recent posts have been modded Troll, but this one?</p><p>Come on, guys...cut me a <i>little</i> slack, here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can understand why some of my recent posts have been modded Troll , but this one ? Come on , guys...cut me a little slack , here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can understand why some of my recent posts have been modded Troll, but this one?Come on, guys...cut me a little slack, here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325439</id>
	<title>Trying to change history</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244975040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>By releasing a client in the past Twitter will have become an integral part of our lives in the future. The only solution is to send a robot back in time to kill Jack Dorsey before he is born.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By releasing a client in the past Twitter will have become an integral part of our lives in the future .
The only solution is to send a robot back in time to kill Jack Dorsey before he is born .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By releasing a client in the past Twitter will have become an integral part of our lives in the future.
The only solution is to send a robot back in time to kill Jack Dorsey before he is born.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327033</id>
	<title>Finally!</title>
	<author>EddyPearson</author>
	<datestamp>1244999940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank god.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank god .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank god.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325797</id>
	<title>Camel what?</title>
	<author>caliburngreywolf</author>
	<datestamp>1244984040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey now, every COOL C64 user ran f-15 strike eagle or arctic fox.
Now GEOS just made me scratch my head until we got an actual PC.
I jsut wish I'd had a modem and used the BBSs back then.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey now , every COOL C64 user ran f-15 strike eagle or arctic fox .
Now GEOS just made me scratch my head until we got an actual PC .
I jsut wish I 'd had a modem and used the BBSs back then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey now, every COOL C64 user ran f-15 strike eagle or arctic fox.
Now GEOS just made me scratch my head until we got an actual PC.
I jsut wish I'd had a modem and used the BBSs back then.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325555</id>
	<title>Re:Wait wait wait...</title>
	<author>MobileTatsu-NJG</author>
	<datestamp>1244977380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Are you telling me this works without an internet connection?!</p></div><p>Correct.  The ethernet peripheral that's required uses 80's sub-etha technology.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you telling me this works without an internet connection ? ! Correct .
The ethernet peripheral that 's required uses 80 's sub-etha technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you telling me this works without an internet connection?!Correct.
The ethernet peripheral that's required uses 80's sub-etha technology.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326379</id>
	<title>Re:Not necessarily so funny</title>
	<author>Purity Of Essence</author>
	<datestamp>1244992560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm thus able to recognise a graphical user interface for exactly what it really is. A convenience. Not a necessity. There's a very big difference.</p></div></blockquote><p>If I had to edit my films and create my graphics in a text terminal, I'd have to kill somebody. Probably you. No offense.</p><p>As much as I enjoyed using Gopher and Lynx on my Atari, I've moved on to using a 100\% necessary GUI for many of my computing needs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm thus able to recognise a graphical user interface for exactly what it really is .
A convenience .
Not a necessity .
There 's a very big difference.If I had to edit my films and create my graphics in a text terminal , I 'd have to kill somebody .
Probably you .
No offense.As much as I enjoyed using Gopher and Lynx on my Atari , I 've moved on to using a 100 \ % necessary GUI for many of my computing needs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm thus able to recognise a graphical user interface for exactly what it really is.
A convenience.
Not a necessity.
There's a very big difference.If I had to edit my films and create my graphics in a text terminal, I'd have to kill somebody.
Probably you.
No offense.As much as I enjoyed using Gopher and Lynx on my Atari, I've moved on to using a 100\% necessary GUI for many of my computing needs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325419</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244974380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because fuck you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because fuck you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because fuck you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28328039</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1245009180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why, so that kids in Afghanistan can use Twitter, of course!

(Can't believe I'm the first to mention this. Has Jon Katz really been scrubbed from the collective-Slashdot memory?)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why , so that kids in Afghanistan can use Twitter , of course !
( Ca n't believe I 'm the first to mention this .
Has Jon Katz really been scrubbed from the collective-Slashdot memory ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why, so that kids in Afghanistan can use Twitter, of course!
(Can't believe I'm the first to mention this.
Has Jon Katz really been scrubbed from the collective-Slashdot memory?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28332237</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>laejoh</author>
	<datestamp>1245005820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you're refering to Perl 6 yeah... that would leave you plenty of time!</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're refering to Perl 6 yeah... that would leave you plenty of time !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're refering to Perl 6 yeah... that would leave you plenty of time!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325545</id>
	<title>Re:I call "cheating"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244977260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To do that you'd have to have a serial adapter as well - so where do you draw the line?</p><p>By definition even - the 1541 (to load the program for those who don't know) isn't original C64 equipment (I couldn't even get one when I bought my C64 new - had to use tapes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)).</p><p>Yeah - a completely stock C64 is pretty hard to use...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To do that you 'd have to have a serial adapter as well - so where do you draw the line ? By definition even - the 1541 ( to load the program for those who do n't know ) is n't original C64 equipment ( I could n't even get one when I bought my C64 new - had to use tapes : ) ) .Yeah - a completely stock C64 is pretty hard to use.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To do that you'd have to have a serial adapter as well - so where do you draw the line?By definition even - the 1541 (to load the program for those who don't know) isn't original C64 equipment (I couldn't even get one when I bought my C64 new - had to use tapes :)).Yeah - a completely stock C64 is pretty hard to use...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326231</id>
	<title>The Commodore as I/O Device- A dumb terminal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244991120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In schemes like this, the Commodore itself is just a thin layer of the user interface.  There is definitely a more powerful processor than the 6502 on the Ethernet Card.  Most of the processor intensive networking layers are 'contained' on the Ethernet Card, just as is/was the case with primitive processors like the 8088 communicating via Ethernet.</p><p>Almost any 'expansion' of the Commodore involves adding a 'peripheral' containing a co-processor at least, and sometimes significantly more powerful than the 6502 in the Commodore.  The 1541 disk drive has a 6502 processor  in it.  A Commodore 'Hard Drive' has a processor more powerful than the C64 it attaches to.  So, really,  this is no different than attaching a dumb terminal to a proprietary PC and claiming it's 'A Twitter Client for a Dumb Terminal.'</p><p>Heck, I could attach a largish 44780-based LCD display and a P2/2 keyboard to one of the smaller PIC controllers and hang it off a linux box as a terminal and do about the same thing.  Or, better yet, just attach a TDD terminal to the linux box.  Wow!  A Twitter Client for the TDD!  Maybe I can get funding for 'facilitating' something to aid the handicapped!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In schemes like this , the Commodore itself is just a thin layer of the user interface .
There is definitely a more powerful processor than the 6502 on the Ethernet Card .
Most of the processor intensive networking layers are 'contained ' on the Ethernet Card , just as is/was the case with primitive processors like the 8088 communicating via Ethernet.Almost any 'expansion ' of the Commodore involves adding a 'peripheral ' containing a co-processor at least , and sometimes significantly more powerful than the 6502 in the Commodore .
The 1541 disk drive has a 6502 processor in it .
A Commodore 'Hard Drive ' has a processor more powerful than the C64 it attaches to .
So , really , this is no different than attaching a dumb terminal to a proprietary PC and claiming it 's 'A Twitter Client for a Dumb Terminal .
'Heck , I could attach a largish 44780-based LCD display and a P2/2 keyboard to one of the smaller PIC controllers and hang it off a linux box as a terminal and do about the same thing .
Or , better yet , just attach a TDD terminal to the linux box .
Wow ! A Twitter Client for the TDD !
Maybe I can get funding for 'facilitating ' something to aid the handicapped !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In schemes like this, the Commodore itself is just a thin layer of the user interface.
There is definitely a more powerful processor than the 6502 on the Ethernet Card.
Most of the processor intensive networking layers are 'contained' on the Ethernet Card, just as is/was the case with primitive processors like the 8088 communicating via Ethernet.Almost any 'expansion' of the Commodore involves adding a 'peripheral' containing a co-processor at least, and sometimes significantly more powerful than the 6502 in the Commodore.
The 1541 disk drive has a 6502 processor  in it.
A Commodore 'Hard Drive' has a processor more powerful than the C64 it attaches to.
So, really,  this is no different than attaching a dumb terminal to a proprietary PC and claiming it's 'A Twitter Client for a Dumb Terminal.
'Heck, I could attach a largish 44780-based LCD display and a P2/2 keyboard to one of the smaller PIC controllers and hang it off a linux box as a terminal and do about the same thing.
Or, better yet, just attach a TDD terminal to the linux box.
Wow!  A Twitter Client for the TDD!
Maybe I can get funding for 'facilitating' something to aid the handicapped!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28330455</id>
	<title>Re:Software really has yet to catch up to hardware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244986200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I'm gonna torture my first-born son to implement OpenGL 2.0 on an abacus</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I 'm gon na torture my first-born son to implement OpenGL 2.0 on an abacus</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I'm gonna torture my first-born son to implement OpenGL 2.0 on an abacus</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28328865</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>rs79</author>
	<datestamp>1244971500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"First "Why""</p><p>HI! I AM BIFF!</p><p>WHY DO YOU ASK WHY? DON'T YOU NO THE C= MACHINES ARE<br>THE BEST EVER MADE? ASK YERSELF HOE MUCH YOU"VE SPENT<br>ON STOOPID PC HARDWARE SINCE THE C64 CAME OUT... YOU<br>COULD HAVE GONE TO PARIS FOR LUNCH EVERY DAY WITH THE<br>MONEY INSTEAD IF YOU"D JUST STUCK WITH A PERFECTLY<br>GOOD WORKING COMPUTER! LIKE, DUH</p><p>I MEAN REALLY IF<br>~x~~~~~~~~x~X~x~~xx~x~X~<br>NO CARRIER</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" First " Why " " HI !
I AM BIFF ! WHY DO YOU ASK WHY ?
DO N'T YOU NO THE C = MACHINES ARETHE BEST EVER MADE ?
ASK YERSELF HOE MUCH YOU " VE SPENTON STOOPID PC HARDWARE SINCE THE C64 CAME OUT... YOUCOULD HAVE GONE TO PARIS FOR LUNCH EVERY DAY WITH THEMONEY INSTEAD IF YOU " D JUST STUCK WITH A PERFECTLYGOOD WORKING COMPUTER !
LIKE , DUHI MEAN REALLY IF ~ x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x ~ X ~ x ~ ~ xx ~ x ~ X ~ NO CARRIER</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"First "Why""HI!
I AM BIFF!WHY DO YOU ASK WHY?
DON'T YOU NO THE C= MACHINES ARETHE BEST EVER MADE?
ASK YERSELF HOE MUCH YOU"VE SPENTON STOOPID PC HARDWARE SINCE THE C64 CAME OUT... YOUCOULD HAVE GONE TO PARIS FOR LUNCH EVERY DAY WITH THEMONEY INSTEAD IF YOU"D JUST STUCK WITH A PERFECTLYGOOD WORKING COMPUTER!
LIKE, DUHI MEAN REALLY IF~x~~~~~~~~x~X~x~~xx~x~X~NO CARRIER</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325933</id>
	<title>But how will it handle the twitpocalypse?</title>
	<author>donatzsky</author>
	<datestamp>1244986860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cool and all, but is he prepared for The End?<br><a href="http://www.twitpocalypse.com/" title="twitpocalypse.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.twitpocalypse.com/</a> [twitpocalypse.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cool and all , but is he prepared for The End ? http : //www.twitpocalypse.com/ [ twitpocalypse.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cool and all, but is he prepared for The End?http://www.twitpocalypse.com/ [twitpocalypse.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28334031</id>
	<title>Re:I call "cheating"</title>
	<author>c64web</author>
	<datestamp>1245073980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I call "Dickhead" !! you never upgraded your PC by adding accessories to add new features that were not standard when you bought your PC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I call " Dickhead " ! !
you never upgraded your PC by adding accessories to add new features that were not standard when you bought your PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I call "Dickhead" !!
you never upgraded your PC by adding accessories to add new features that were not standard when you bought your PC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325583</id>
	<title>Re:Software really has yet to catch up to hardware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244977860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>True, but... if we can reach such achievements on a C64, it&rsquo;s also because we can use nice development tools, running on much beefier machines, programmed using cycles-eating high level languages, with the comforts of a contemporary operating system. I don&rsquo;t think Contiki was programmed on a C64 monitor cartridge, in 6510 assembly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>True , but... if we can reach such achievements on a C64 , it    s also because we can use nice development tools , running on much beefier machines , programmed using cycles-eating high level languages , with the comforts of a contemporary operating system .
I don    t think Contiki was programmed on a C64 monitor cartridge , in 6510 assembly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, but... if we can reach such achievements on a C64, it’s also because we can use nice development tools, running on much beefier machines, programmed using cycles-eating high level languages, with the comforts of a contemporary operating system.
I don’t think Contiki was programmed on a C64 monitor cartridge, in 6510 assembly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423</id>
	<title>Software really has yet to catch up to hardware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244974680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Friend at Intel corp said once - that software we are running will be really impressive once they catch up to the hardware. I think the Commodore 64 really goes to show what can be done on a really minimal environment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Friend at Intel corp said once - that software we are running will be really impressive once they catch up to the hardware .
I think the Commodore 64 really goes to show what can be done on a really minimal environment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Friend at Intel corp said once - that software we are running will be really impressive once they catch up to the hardware.
I think the Commodore 64 really goes to show what can be done on a really minimal environment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28333777</id>
	<title>Re:I call "cheating"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245071340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The VIC-20 disc drives should work with the C64 IIRC. So they predate it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The VIC-20 disc drives should work with the C64 IIRC .
So they predate it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The VIC-20 disc drives should work with the C64 IIRC.
So they predate it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325545</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326297</id>
	<title>Re:Much Faster Floppy Drive for the C64</title>
	<author>lxs</author>
	<datestamp>1244991660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"I still cannot believe how badly those 1541 floppy drives sucked."</i></p><p>Their <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gnMgmlKi\_o" title="youtube.com">death rattle</a> [youtube.com] produced during formatting and seek errors still haunts my nightmares.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I still can not believe how badly those 1541 floppy drives sucked .
" Their death rattle [ youtube.com ] produced during formatting and seek errors still haunts my nightmares .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I still cannot believe how badly those 1541 floppy drives sucked.
"Their death rattle [youtube.com] produced during formatting and seek errors still haunts my nightmares.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28329703</id>
	<title>stunned again guys</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244978400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once again i am gob smacked what can be done with 64k of memory on a 8bit 1mhz cpu built over 20 years ago.<br>Been interested in this little machine since finding out what a c64 is and discovering one on the internet www.c64web.com running a web site with online c64 games.<br>I am luck to get 4 years out of a computer hats off to guys getting 25+ years out of theirs and still writing new software for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once again i am gob smacked what can be done with 64k of memory on a 8bit 1mhz cpu built over 20 years ago.Been interested in this little machine since finding out what a c64 is and discovering one on the internet www.c64web.com running a web site with online c64 games.I am luck to get 4 years out of a computer hats off to guys getting 25 + years out of theirs and still writing new software for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once again i am gob smacked what can be done with 64k of memory on a 8bit 1mhz cpu built over 20 years ago.Been interested in this little machine since finding out what a c64 is and discovering one on the internet www.c64web.com running a web site with online c64 games.I am luck to get 4 years out of a computer hats off to guys getting 25+ years out of theirs and still writing new software for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325609</id>
	<title>Speccy vs. C64 slugfest - start here!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244978640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first, and obvious, salvo into the Speccy camp: your rubbery toy didn't have a decent keyboard, a decent GPU, sound processor or disk drive, and now... you guys miss out on the 21st century, too<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;o)</p><p>Slug away, have at it!</p><p>(P.S. this is all tongue-in-cheek. I actually wish I had a Speccy - there was a ton of great software for that little beast)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first , and obvious , salvo into the Speccy camp : your rubbery toy did n't have a decent keyboard , a decent GPU , sound processor or disk drive , and now... you guys miss out on the 21st century , too ; o ) Slug away , have at it ! ( P.S .
this is all tongue-in-cheek .
I actually wish I had a Speccy - there was a ton of great software for that little beast )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first, and obvious, salvo into the Speccy camp: your rubbery toy didn't have a decent keyboard, a decent GPU, sound processor or disk drive, and now... you guys miss out on the 21st century, too ;o)Slug away, have at it!(P.S.
this is all tongue-in-cheek.
I actually wish I had a Speccy - there was a ton of great software for that little beast)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28330151</id>
	<title>Re:Much Faster Floppy Drive for the C64</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1244983200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With all the C64 hacking going on, I'm surprised you can't just plug a flash drive into the thing. Or would that take all the fun out of it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With all the C64 hacking going on , I 'm surprised you ca n't just plug a flash drive into the thing .
Or would that take all the fun out of it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With all the C64 hacking going on, I'm surprised you can't just plug a flash drive into the thing.
Or would that take all the fun out of it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325553</id>
	<title>Re:i can feel a tv series comming</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244977380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We heard you the first time. No need to repeat yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We heard you the first time .
No need to repeat yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We heard you the first time.
No need to repeat yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327951</id>
	<title>Re:Wait wait wait...</title>
	<author>arndawg</author>
	<datestamp>1245008520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He uses IP over Avian Carriers of course.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He uses IP over Avian Carriers of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He uses IP over Avian Carriers of course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325839</id>
	<title>Not good enough</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244984940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want to know where the twitter client is for my VIC-20.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want to know where the twitter client is for my VIC-20 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want to know where the twitter client is for my VIC-20.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326107</id>
	<title>Re:Speccy vs. C64 slugfest - start here!</title>
	<author>sa1lnr</author>
	<datestamp>1244989560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"(P.S. this is all tongue-in-cheek. I actually wish I had a Speccy - there was a ton of great software for that little beast)"</p><p>You can still enjoy it even without the hardware.</p><p><a href="http://www.spectaculator.com/" title="spectaculator.com">http://www.spectaculator.com/</a> [spectaculator.com]</p><p><a href="http://www.worldofspectrum.org/" title="worldofspectrum.org">http://www.worldofspectrum.org/</a> [worldofspectrum.org]</p><p><a href="http://www.tzxvault.org/" title="tzxvault.org">http://www.tzxvault.org/</a> [tzxvault.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ( P.S .
this is all tongue-in-cheek .
I actually wish I had a Speccy - there was a ton of great software for that little beast ) " You can still enjoy it even without the hardware.http : //www.spectaculator.com/ [ spectaculator.com ] http : //www.worldofspectrum.org/ [ worldofspectrum.org ] http : //www.tzxvault.org/ [ tzxvault.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"(P.S.
this is all tongue-in-cheek.
I actually wish I had a Speccy - there was a ton of great software for that little beast)"You can still enjoy it even without the hardware.http://www.spectaculator.com/ [spectaculator.com]http://www.worldofspectrum.org/ [worldofspectrum.org]http://www.tzxvault.org/ [tzxvault.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325609</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325469</id>
	<title>Re:i can feel a tv series comming</title>
	<author>GreenTech11</author>
	<datestamp>1244975820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And the documentary series that followed:

"Things that should never have been done"</htmltext>
<tokenext>And the documentary series that followed : " Things that should never have been done "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the documentary series that followed:

"Things that should never have been done"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325425</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326341</id>
	<title>Re:Twitter isn't exactly an intensive application</title>
	<author>SpinyNorman</author>
	<datestamp>1244992080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, if you RTFA, he didn't develop the TCP/IP interface.</p><p>This project uses an "MMC replay" C64 expansion box with an RR-net ethernet daughterboard installed. He wrote the Twitter client to run on the Contiki OS, which comes with a built-in TCP/IP stack and a driver for the RR-card. Credit for Contiki and it's uIP TCP/IP stack go primarily to Adam Dunkels:</p><p><a href="http://www.sics.se/~adam/" title="www.sics.se">http://www.sics.se/~adam/</a> [www.sics.se]</p><p>The accomplishment of the C64 Twitter client's author is really more about writing a Twitter client with one hand tied behind your back rather than really being C64 specific. He wrote it in C (CC65 6502 compiler) on Contiki, so the fact that it happens to be running on a C64 as opposed to any other environment that supports Contiki is somewhat irrelevant.</p><p>Whether it scores any points for complexity really depends on your level of experience. Given that the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./ readership has become less and less hard core over the years, I think there are many people here who should be avoiding this guy's front lawn. At least, if you've never written any networking code in your life, how about firing up Linux, or installing MinGW (maybe roughly comparable to installing Contiki and CC65 on a C64), then writing your own Twitter client... It certainly won't be a waste of time if you learn how to do socket programming as a result.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , if you RTFA , he did n't develop the TCP/IP interface.This project uses an " MMC replay " C64 expansion box with an RR-net ethernet daughterboard installed .
He wrote the Twitter client to run on the Contiki OS , which comes with a built-in TCP/IP stack and a driver for the RR-card .
Credit for Contiki and it 's uIP TCP/IP stack go primarily to Adam Dunkels : http : //www.sics.se/ ~ adam/ [ www.sics.se ] The accomplishment of the C64 Twitter client 's author is really more about writing a Twitter client with one hand tied behind your back rather than really being C64 specific .
He wrote it in C ( CC65 6502 compiler ) on Contiki , so the fact that it happens to be running on a C64 as opposed to any other environment that supports Contiki is somewhat irrelevant.Whether it scores any points for complexity really depends on your level of experience .
Given that the ./ readership has become less and less hard core over the years , I think there are many people here who should be avoiding this guy 's front lawn .
At least , if you 've never written any networking code in your life , how about firing up Linux , or installing MinGW ( maybe roughly comparable to installing Contiki and CC65 on a C64 ) , then writing your own Twitter client... It certainly wo n't be a waste of time if you learn how to do socket programming as a result .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, if you RTFA, he didn't develop the TCP/IP interface.This project uses an "MMC replay" C64 expansion box with an RR-net ethernet daughterboard installed.
He wrote the Twitter client to run on the Contiki OS, which comes with a built-in TCP/IP stack and a driver for the RR-card.
Credit for Contiki and it's uIP TCP/IP stack go primarily to Adam Dunkels:http://www.sics.se/~adam/ [www.sics.se]The accomplishment of the C64 Twitter client's author is really more about writing a Twitter client with one hand tied behind your back rather than really being C64 specific.
He wrote it in C (CC65 6502 compiler) on Contiki, so the fact that it happens to be running on a C64 as opposed to any other environment that supports Contiki is somewhat irrelevant.Whether it scores any points for complexity really depends on your level of experience.
Given that the ./ readership has become less and less hard core over the years, I think there are many people here who should be avoiding this guy's front lawn.
At least, if you've never written any networking code in your life, how about firing up Linux, or installing MinGW (maybe roughly comparable to installing Contiki and CC65 on a C64), then writing your own Twitter client... It certainly won't be a waste of time if you learn how to do socket programming as a result.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326611</id>
	<title>Re:Software really has yet to catch up to hardware</title>
	<author>SpinyNorman</author>
	<datestamp>1244995680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's obviously a lot of truth to the ease of programming using high level tools, and standing on other's shoulders, but back in the day we made do with what we had. I used to work for Acorn Computers (UK) back in 1982, and was one half of the team that implemented ISO Pascal for the 6502-based BBC Micro...</p><p>The project was divided into two halves (shipped on two 16K EPROMS), one half being a stack-based virtual instruction set for the compiler to target (to get reasonable code density), Pascal run-time libraries (I/O, floating point, heap, etc), a decent screen editor including regex search/replace etc, a command line interpreter... this all written in 6502 assembler developed on a BBC micro using it's own BBC BASIC inline assember... and the other half being the Pascal compiler which was written in Pascal and self-compiled. We did bootstrap the compiler using an existing one on another (equally slow!) system, but as soon as it could self-compile we moved all development to the BBC micro.</p><p>It's really not so bad to bootstrap yourself up from assembler to decent development tools. Write a very minimal C/whatever compiler in assembler, then write a better one in that language/etc, and repeat!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's obviously a lot of truth to the ease of programming using high level tools , and standing on other 's shoulders , but back in the day we made do with what we had .
I used to work for Acorn Computers ( UK ) back in 1982 , and was one half of the team that implemented ISO Pascal for the 6502-based BBC Micro...The project was divided into two halves ( shipped on two 16K EPROMS ) , one half being a stack-based virtual instruction set for the compiler to target ( to get reasonable code density ) , Pascal run-time libraries ( I/O , floating point , heap , etc ) , a decent screen editor including regex search/replace etc , a command line interpreter... this all written in 6502 assembler developed on a BBC micro using it 's own BBC BASIC inline assember... and the other half being the Pascal compiler which was written in Pascal and self-compiled .
We did bootstrap the compiler using an existing one on another ( equally slow !
) system , but as soon as it could self-compile we moved all development to the BBC micro.It 's really not so bad to bootstrap yourself up from assembler to decent development tools .
Write a very minimal C/whatever compiler in assembler , then write a better one in that language/etc , and repeat !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's obviously a lot of truth to the ease of programming using high level tools, and standing on other's shoulders, but back in the day we made do with what we had.
I used to work for Acorn Computers (UK) back in 1982, and was one half of the team that implemented ISO Pascal for the 6502-based BBC Micro...The project was divided into two halves (shipped on two 16K EPROMS), one half being a stack-based virtual instruction set for the compiler to target (to get reasonable code density), Pascal run-time libraries (I/O, floating point, heap, etc), a decent screen editor including regex search/replace etc, a command line interpreter... this all written in 6502 assembler developed on a BBC micro using it's own BBC BASIC inline assember... and the other half being the Pascal compiler which was written in Pascal and self-compiled.
We did bootstrap the compiler using an existing one on another (equally slow!
) system, but as soon as it could self-compile we moved all development to the BBC micro.It's really not so bad to bootstrap yourself up from assembler to decent development tools.
Write a very minimal C/whatever compiler in assembler, then write a better one in that language/etc, and repeat!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325421</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>Heytunk</author>
	<datestamp>1244974500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why not?<br> <br>
Im sending this to my dad in the hopes he will revive the ole 64 back home.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not ?
Im sending this to my dad in the hopes he will revive the ole 64 back home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not?
Im sending this to my dad in the hopes he will revive the ole 64 back home.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325945</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1244987040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think you meant to come to this site.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think you meant to come to this site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think you meant to come to this site.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325509</id>
	<title>Much Faster Floppy Drive for the C64</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244976660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a Commodore IEEE-bus floppy drive that works great with a C64 with the right adapter.  It takes 1.2 Mb floppies and it makes a 1541 look really sad.  It was radically expensive at the time and I remember how annoyed my boss was when I told him the price.</p><p>We actually had it pretty good even back then.  We had a Kontron 6510 ICE so we could go in and figure out exactly what was going on with that weird video hardware, and it was great for finding those odd bugs.</p><p>I still cannot believe how badly those 1541 floppy drives sucked.  They are the most miserable pieces of computer gear I have ever encountered.  It is just beyond belief that someone has managed to keep one working after all these years!</p><p>I liked the Atari 800 much better.  The video hardware had a much cleaner design and it was a lot easier to code for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a Commodore IEEE-bus floppy drive that works great with a C64 with the right adapter .
It takes 1.2 Mb floppies and it makes a 1541 look really sad .
It was radically expensive at the time and I remember how annoyed my boss was when I told him the price.We actually had it pretty good even back then .
We had a Kontron 6510 ICE so we could go in and figure out exactly what was going on with that weird video hardware , and it was great for finding those odd bugs.I still can not believe how badly those 1541 floppy drives sucked .
They are the most miserable pieces of computer gear I have ever encountered .
It is just beyond belief that someone has managed to keep one working after all these years ! I liked the Atari 800 much better .
The video hardware had a much cleaner design and it was a lot easier to code for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a Commodore IEEE-bus floppy drive that works great with a C64 with the right adapter.
It takes 1.2 Mb floppies and it makes a 1541 look really sad.
It was radically expensive at the time and I remember how annoyed my boss was when I told him the price.We actually had it pretty good even back then.
We had a Kontron 6510 ICE so we could go in and figure out exactly what was going on with that weird video hardware, and it was great for finding those odd bugs.I still cannot believe how badly those 1541 floppy drives sucked.
They are the most miserable pieces of computer gear I have ever encountered.
It is just beyond belief that someone has managed to keep one working after all these years!I liked the Atari 800 much better.
The video hardware had a much cleaner design and it was a lot easier to code for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28333151</id>
	<title>Re:Software really has yet to catch up to hardware</title>
	<author>dugeen</author>
	<datestamp>1245061620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Minimal? 64K RAM, 3-channel sound, 16 colours, 320x200 graphics and \_sprites\_? In my day we had 22x32 text screens and 16K RAM and we were grateful.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Minimal ?
64K RAM , 3-channel sound , 16 colours , 320x200 graphics and \ _sprites \ _ ?
In my day we had 22x32 text screens and 16K RAM and we were grateful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Minimal?
64K RAM, 3-channel sound, 16 colours, 320x200 graphics and \_sprites\_?
In my day we had 22x32 text screens and 16K RAM and we were grateful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326843</id>
	<title>Define "more powerful processor"</title>
	<author>Kupfernigk</author>
	<datestamp>1244998500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Many peripherals used to be controlled by dedicated bit-slice processors which were faster at instruction execution than the main CPU. However, they had their operating code in ROM, had a limited instruction set, and had very limited memory. In the days when memory was expensive, this was a sensible tradeoff. Many early 8-bit CPUs were simply not fast enough to control a floppy disc drive and do anything else (hence the Commodore solution.)<p>Try writing a useful program on one of those bit-slice efforts, though, and you would quickly run into a brick wall. Very limited microcode, no assembly language, no developer tools of any kind. The point about the 6502, the Z80, and even the 8088, was that you could write general purpose programs to run on them, execute them and debug them.</p><p>By the time general purpose CPUs were powerful enough to run the floppy, control the display and handle the I/O devices at the same time, it no longer made sense to do so because it was more cost effective (in terms of performance) to hand off the functions to dedicated peripherals even in microcomputers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many peripherals used to be controlled by dedicated bit-slice processors which were faster at instruction execution than the main CPU .
However , they had their operating code in ROM , had a limited instruction set , and had very limited memory .
In the days when memory was expensive , this was a sensible tradeoff .
Many early 8-bit CPUs were simply not fast enough to control a floppy disc drive and do anything else ( hence the Commodore solution .
) Try writing a useful program on one of those bit-slice efforts , though , and you would quickly run into a brick wall .
Very limited microcode , no assembly language , no developer tools of any kind .
The point about the 6502 , the Z80 , and even the 8088 , was that you could write general purpose programs to run on them , execute them and debug them.By the time general purpose CPUs were powerful enough to run the floppy , control the display and handle the I/O devices at the same time , it no longer made sense to do so because it was more cost effective ( in terms of performance ) to hand off the functions to dedicated peripherals even in microcomputers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many peripherals used to be controlled by dedicated bit-slice processors which were faster at instruction execution than the main CPU.
However, they had their operating code in ROM, had a limited instruction set, and had very limited memory.
In the days when memory was expensive, this was a sensible tradeoff.
Many early 8-bit CPUs were simply not fast enough to control a floppy disc drive and do anything else (hence the Commodore solution.
)Try writing a useful program on one of those bit-slice efforts, though, and you would quickly run into a brick wall.
Very limited microcode, no assembly language, no developer tools of any kind.
The point about the 6502, the Z80, and even the 8088, was that you could write general purpose programs to run on them, execute them and debug them.By the time general purpose CPUs were powerful enough to run the floppy, control the display and handle the I/O devices at the same time, it no longer made sense to do so because it was more cost effective (in terms of performance) to hand off the functions to dedicated peripherals even in microcomputers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326231</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326437</id>
	<title>Cassette Tape, anyone?</title>
	<author>UziBeatle</author>
	<datestamp>1244993160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; Damn it to hell. I don't have a disk drive, you insensitive clod developer<br>person you.</p><p>
&nbsp; I do have a Vic-20 with cassette tape though.</p><p>
&nbsp; Can I get a copy on cassette tape? Or perhaps at the least the sheet music<br>so I can peek and poke the code in via keyboard?</p><p>
&nbsp; Then I could hook up the old Vic-20 Commodore to my 46 inch Samsung big screen TeeVee<br>and leave my Twitter up 24/7.</p><p>
&nbsp; Oh, this Twitter client better fit on 8k RAM. I got the big RAM expansion doohickey cartridge thing plugged in the back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>  Damn it to hell .
I do n't have a disk drive , you insensitive clod developerperson you .
  I do have a Vic-20 with cassette tape though .
  Can I get a copy on cassette tape ?
Or perhaps at the least the sheet musicso I can peek and poke the code in via keyboard ?
  Then I could hook up the old Vic-20 Commodore to my 46 inch Samsung big screen TeeVeeand leave my Twitter up 24/7 .
  Oh , this Twitter client better fit on 8k RAM .
I got the big RAM expansion doohickey cartridge thing plugged in the back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  Damn it to hell.
I don't have a disk drive, you insensitive clod developerperson you.
  I do have a Vic-20 with cassette tape though.
  Can I get a copy on cassette tape?
Or perhaps at the least the sheet musicso I can peek and poke the code in via keyboard?
  Then I could hook up the old Vic-20 Commodore to my 46 inch Samsung big screen TeeVeeand leave my Twitter up 24/7.
  Oh, this Twitter client better fit on 8k RAM.
I got the big RAM expansion doohickey cartridge thing plugged in the back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326111</id>
	<title>Re:Not necessarily so funny</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1244989620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There is far too much of a trend these days of writing bloated, horribly inefficient crap, simply because in hardware terms we can get away with it.</p></div><p>I think <a href="http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1208265&amp;cid=27679369" title="slashdot.org">you're wrong</a> [slashdot.org].</p><p><div class="quote"><p>There's a reason why I have Ratpoison as a window manager for daily use, despite having a gigabyte of ram at my disposal. It's because I've used a C64 with a tape drive, and a portable IBM XT with a 2400 baud modem, and I'm thus able to recognise a graphical user interface for exactly what it really is.</p></div><p>No, it's not.  I upgraded to a C64 from a TS-1000 (and an Atari 2600 with the "BASIC Programming" cartridge and 63 <em>bytes</em> of RAM before that), and I use KDE on my desktop and Netbook Remix on my Eee PC.  <em>You</em> use Ratpoison because <em>you want to</em>, not because exposure to old computers automatically makes a person allergic to new systems.</p><p>If someone told me I was stuck at a text console from now on, I'd be OK (if grousy) about it.  Until that day comes, I'd just as soon let this computer look pretty and provide nice (and, shock!, fun) features.  I'm not too keen on bragging about how much of my computer's work that I do for it.  I bought the thing; it can darn well work for <em>me</em> and not the other way around.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is far too much of a trend these days of writing bloated , horribly inefficient crap , simply because in hardware terms we can get away with it.I think you 're wrong [ slashdot.org ] .There 's a reason why I have Ratpoison as a window manager for daily use , despite having a gigabyte of ram at my disposal .
It 's because I 've used a C64 with a tape drive , and a portable IBM XT with a 2400 baud modem , and I 'm thus able to recognise a graphical user interface for exactly what it really is.No , it 's not .
I upgraded to a C64 from a TS-1000 ( and an Atari 2600 with the " BASIC Programming " cartridge and 63 bytes of RAM before that ) , and I use KDE on my desktop and Netbook Remix on my Eee PC .
You use Ratpoison because you want to , not because exposure to old computers automatically makes a person allergic to new systems.If someone told me I was stuck at a text console from now on , I 'd be OK ( if grousy ) about it .
Until that day comes , I 'd just as soon let this computer look pretty and provide nice ( and , shock ! , fun ) features .
I 'm not too keen on bragging about how much of my computer 's work that I do for it .
I bought the thing ; it can darn well work for me and not the other way around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is far too much of a trend these days of writing bloated, horribly inefficient crap, simply because in hardware terms we can get away with it.I think you're wrong [slashdot.org].There's a reason why I have Ratpoison as a window manager for daily use, despite having a gigabyte of ram at my disposal.
It's because I've used a C64 with a tape drive, and a portable IBM XT with a 2400 baud modem, and I'm thus able to recognise a graphical user interface for exactly what it really is.No, it's not.
I upgraded to a C64 from a TS-1000 (and an Atari 2600 with the "BASIC Programming" cartridge and 63 bytes of RAM before that), and I use KDE on my desktop and Netbook Remix on my Eee PC.
You use Ratpoison because you want to, not because exposure to old computers automatically makes a person allergic to new systems.If someone told me I was stuck at a text console from now on, I'd be OK (if grousy) about it.
Until that day comes, I'd just as soon let this computer look pretty and provide nice (and, shock!, fun) features.
I'm not too keen on bragging about how much of my computer's work that I do for it.
I bought the thing; it can darn well work for me and not the other way around.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326405</id>
	<title>Re:Twitter isn't exactly an intensive application</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244992860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The guy who made the video of it in action loaded from the menu of the 5 1/4" disk by cursoring up to the filename, typing the equivalent of load in front of the filename, and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,8,1: after the filename to indicate:</p><p>by<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,8 that it was the first disk drive attached, by<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,1 that it was supposed to run in immediate mode, and by<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:, that it was supposed to ignore the characters after the 1 in interpreting the load command.</p><p>But if I remember, I think the : was redundant. I think<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,8,1 also ignores characters after the 1. So I think he could've omitted the :</p><p>It's a slow Sunday.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The guy who made the video of it in action loaded from the menu of the 5 1/4 " disk by cursoring up to the filename , typing the equivalent of load in front of the filename , and ,8,1 : after the filename to indicate : by ,8 that it was the first disk drive attached , by ,1 that it was supposed to run in immediate mode , and by : , that it was supposed to ignore the characters after the 1 in interpreting the load command.But if I remember , I think the : was redundant .
I think ,8,1 also ignores characters after the 1 .
So I think he could 've omitted the : It 's a slow Sunday .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The guy who made the video of it in action loaded from the menu of the 5 1/4" disk by cursoring up to the filename, typing the equivalent of load in front of the filename, and ,8,1: after the filename to indicate:by ,8 that it was the first disk drive attached, by ,1 that it was supposed to run in immediate mode, and by :, that it was supposed to ignore the characters after the 1 in interpreting the load command.But if I remember, I think the : was redundant.
I think ,8,1 also ignores characters after the 1.
So I think he could've omitted the :It's a slow Sunday.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325537</id>
	<title>Re:Software really has yet to catch up to hardware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244977200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hardware has different fundamental constraints from software.</p><p>A given hardware process permits a certain amount of computing capacity and the designers have the task of using that capacity in the most effective way. The primary form of their inherent limitations are physical constraints.</p><p>Software has the task of taking what the hardware provides, and adapting it to human needs, which are much more difficult to understand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hardware has different fundamental constraints from software.A given hardware process permits a certain amount of computing capacity and the designers have the task of using that capacity in the most effective way .
The primary form of their inherent limitations are physical constraints.Software has the task of taking what the hardware provides , and adapting it to human needs , which are much more difficult to understand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hardware has different fundamental constraints from software.A given hardware process permits a certain amount of computing capacity and the designers have the task of using that capacity in the most effective way.
The primary form of their inherent limitations are physical constraints.Software has the task of taking what the hardware provides, and adapting it to human needs, which are much more difficult to understand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28329585</id>
	<title>Re:i can feel a tv series comming</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244977380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Until they get the Ronco Clonomatic 5000 with accelerated aging.</p><p>Today the basement, tomorrow the world!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Until they get the Ronco Clonomatic 5000 with accelerated aging.Today the basement , tomorrow the world !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until they get the Ronco Clonomatic 5000 with accelerated aging.Today the basement, tomorrow the world!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325531</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325441</id>
	<title>Contiki?</title>
	<author>kwark</author>
	<datestamp>1244975040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>But will it run on <a href="http://lng.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net">LUnix</a> [sourceforge.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>But will it run on LUnix [ sourceforge.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But will it run on LUnix [sourceforge.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325813</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>harry666t</author>
	<datestamp>1244984340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is this a new fucking meme? Are all these guys asking "why" kidding or what? It's been a hacker/geek tradition since the very first days after the world has been created to pull off amazingly weird hacks just for the sake of the fun involved. What's wrong with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., god damn!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this a new fucking meme ?
Are all these guys asking " why " kidding or what ?
It 's been a hacker/geek tradition since the very first days after the world has been created to pull off amazingly weird hacks just for the sake of the fun involved .
What 's wrong with /. , god damn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this a new fucking meme?
Are all these guys asking "why" kidding or what?
It's been a hacker/geek tradition since the very first days after the world has been created to pull off amazingly weird hacks just for the sake of the fun involved.
What's wrong with /., god damn!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325963</id>
	<title>Wrong why?</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1244987400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>You are on Slashdot and you need explanation to see that implementing a Twitter client on a C64 is totally cool?
</i> <br> <br>I think the question isn't "Why are they implementing a Twitter client on a C64?".  I think it's the same question I had: Why are they loading this from 5.25" floppies?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are on Slashdot and you need explanation to see that implementing a Twitter client on a C64 is totally cool ?
I think the question is n't " Why are they implementing a Twitter client on a C64 ? " .
I think it 's the same question I had : Why are they loading this from 5.25 " floppies ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are on Slashdot and you need explanation to see that implementing a Twitter client on a C64 is totally cool?
I think the question isn't "Why are they implementing a Twitter client on a C64?".
I think it's the same question I had: Why are they loading this from 5.25" floppies?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325507</id>
	<title>Sure</title>
	<author>SlothDead</author>
	<datestamp>1244976600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The tweets are generated algorithmically inside the C64. As good as the real thing.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)

No, serious, why do you ask that? Even without reading the article it should be obvious (especially to a slashdotter) that in order to read what's on twitter you have to get it from there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The tweets are generated algorithmically inside the C64 .
As good as the real thing .
; ) No , serious , why do you ask that ?
Even without reading the article it should be obvious ( especially to a slashdotter ) that in order to read what 's on twitter you have to get it from there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The tweets are generated algorithmically inside the C64.
As good as the real thing.
;)

No, serious, why do you ask that?
Even without reading the article it should be obvious (especially to a slashdotter) that in order to read what's on twitter you have to get it from there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405</id>
	<title>FW</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244974140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First "Why"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First " Why "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First "Why"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325809</id>
	<title>Not necessarily so funny</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244984280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any success in developing resource-efficient software is to be celebrated, IMHO.  There is far too much of a trend these days of writing bloated, horribly inefficient crap, simply because in hardware terms we can get away with it.</p><p>The Windows refugees desperately need to stop being listened to.  All they care about is superficial usability.  They don't care about design quality, code quality, robustness, security, or resource (RAM/cpu/power) efficiency.  The only important thing is that whatever they want to do is, "easy," and also, preferably, that it includes pretty lights.</p><p>We need software that is resource efficient, and well designed.  We need it because we're not always in scenarios where we've got access to a 4 Ghz processor, 32 odd GB of ram, and a terrabyte hard drive.  Such machines tend to be expensive, and also to require a lot of power.</p><p>If the world underwent some sort of disaster next week which included a loss of mains power, the 4 Ghz desktops with KDE wouldn't be what people would be running, if they were using a computer at all; because they wouldn't have the electricity to be able to waste it on such hardware.  It'd be iPods or other power-efficient ARM-based machines running NetBSD or minimalist Linux configurations, with something like Blackbox as a window manager.</p><p>There's a reason why I have Ratpoison as a window manager for daily use, despite having a gigabyte of ram at my disposal.  It's because I've used a C64 with a tape drive, and a portable IBM XT with a 2400 baud modem, and I'm thus able to recognise a graphical user interface for exactly what it really is.</p><p>A <b>convenience.</b>  Not a necessity.  There's a very big difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any success in developing resource-efficient software is to be celebrated , IMHO .
There is far too much of a trend these days of writing bloated , horribly inefficient crap , simply because in hardware terms we can get away with it.The Windows refugees desperately need to stop being listened to .
All they care about is superficial usability .
They do n't care about design quality , code quality , robustness , security , or resource ( RAM/cpu/power ) efficiency .
The only important thing is that whatever they want to do is , " easy , " and also , preferably , that it includes pretty lights.We need software that is resource efficient , and well designed .
We need it because we 're not always in scenarios where we 've got access to a 4 Ghz processor , 32 odd GB of ram , and a terrabyte hard drive .
Such machines tend to be expensive , and also to require a lot of power.If the world underwent some sort of disaster next week which included a loss of mains power , the 4 Ghz desktops with KDE would n't be what people would be running , if they were using a computer at all ; because they would n't have the electricity to be able to waste it on such hardware .
It 'd be iPods or other power-efficient ARM-based machines running NetBSD or minimalist Linux configurations , with something like Blackbox as a window manager.There 's a reason why I have Ratpoison as a window manager for daily use , despite having a gigabyte of ram at my disposal .
It 's because I 've used a C64 with a tape drive , and a portable IBM XT with a 2400 baud modem , and I 'm thus able to recognise a graphical user interface for exactly what it really is.A convenience .
Not a necessity .
There 's a very big difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any success in developing resource-efficient software is to be celebrated, IMHO.
There is far too much of a trend these days of writing bloated, horribly inefficient crap, simply because in hardware terms we can get away with it.The Windows refugees desperately need to stop being listened to.
All they care about is superficial usability.
They don't care about design quality, code quality, robustness, security, or resource (RAM/cpu/power) efficiency.
The only important thing is that whatever they want to do is, "easy," and also, preferably, that it includes pretty lights.We need software that is resource efficient, and well designed.
We need it because we're not always in scenarios where we've got access to a 4 Ghz processor, 32 odd GB of ram, and a terrabyte hard drive.
Such machines tend to be expensive, and also to require a lot of power.If the world underwent some sort of disaster next week which included a loss of mains power, the 4 Ghz desktops with KDE wouldn't be what people would be running, if they were using a computer at all; because they wouldn't have the electricity to be able to waste it on such hardware.
It'd be iPods or other power-efficient ARM-based machines running NetBSD or minimalist Linux configurations, with something like Blackbox as a window manager.There's a reason why I have Ratpoison as a window manager for daily use, despite having a gigabyte of ram at my disposal.
It's because I've used a C64 with a tape drive, and a portable IBM XT with a 2400 baud modem, and I'm thus able to recognise a graphical user interface for exactly what it really is.A convenience.
Not a necessity.
There's a very big difference.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325769</id>
	<title>Re:FW</title>
	<author>jones\_supa</author>
	<datestamp>1244983380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just for fun?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just for fun ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just for fun?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326181</id>
	<title>Contiki</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244990340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thats cheating, really its not a C64, its an embedded machine that happens to have composite video output.</p><p>Running an embedded OS on an 8 bit processor is common place. REAL common place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats cheating , really its not a C64 , its an embedded machine that happens to have composite video output.Running an embedded OS on an 8 bit processor is common place .
REAL common place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats cheating, really its not a C64, its an embedded machine that happens to have composite video output.Running an embedded OS on an 8 bit processor is common place.
REAL common place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28334031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28330151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325509
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28329585
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325531
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325507
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325879
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28330455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325509
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327091
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28333777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325545
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325421
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28333151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28329627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28328865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325509
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326405
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28334655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325813
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325745
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28328039
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28332237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28329487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28333537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325545
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326107
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326843
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28425911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325839
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_14_0218212_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326231
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326843
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325485
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28334031
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325545
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28333537
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28333777
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325397
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327951
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325507
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325555
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28333151
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325745
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28330455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325583
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326123
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326611
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325839
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28425911
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325933
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325425
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325531
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28329585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325469
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325453
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326405
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326341
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325405
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325461
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28332237
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325769
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28328039
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28334655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325945
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28328865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325563
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325963
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326913
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325813
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325421
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326181
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325609
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326107
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325879
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325805
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325635
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28330151
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326589
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28329627
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28327091
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325695
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325809
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28329487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326111
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326197
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28326379
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_14_0218212.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_14_0218212.28325439
</commentlist>
</conversation>
