<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_17_147244</id>
	<title>Aussie Scientists Build a Cluster To Map the Sky</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1245249240000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.cio.com.au/" rel="nofollow">Tri</a> writes <i>"Scientists at the Siding Spring Observatory have built a new system to <a href="http://www.cio.com.au/article/307446/aussie\_skymapper\_telescope\_open\_new\_windows\_exploration?pp=1">map and record over 1 billion objects</a> in the southern hemisphere sky. They collect 700 GB of data every night, which they then crunch down using some perl scripts and make available to other scientists through a web interface backed on Postgresql. 'Unsurprisingly, the Southern Sky Survey will result in a large volume of raw data &mdash; about 470 terabytes ... when complete. ... the bulk of the analysis of the SkyMapper data will be done on a brand new, next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores. Due to be fully online by December, the supercomputer will offer a tenfold increase in performance over the facility's <a href="http://www.cio.com.au/article/307436/skymapper\_slideshow?ssid=0&amp;fp=2&amp;fpid=2&amp;img=17631">current set up of two SGI machines</a>, each with just under 3500 cores in total.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tri writes " Scientists at the Siding Spring Observatory have built a new system to map and record over 1 billion objects in the southern hemisphere sky .
They collect 700 GB of data every night , which they then crunch down using some perl scripts and make available to other scientists through a web interface backed on Postgresql .
'Unsurprisingly , the Southern Sky Survey will result in a large volume of raw data    about 470 terabytes ... when complete .
... the bulk of the analysis of the SkyMapper data will be done on a brand new , next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores .
Due to be fully online by December , the supercomputer will offer a tenfold increase in performance over the facility 's current set up of two SGI machines , each with just under 3500 cores in total .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tri writes "Scientists at the Siding Spring Observatory have built a new system to map and record over 1 billion objects in the southern hemisphere sky.
They collect 700 GB of data every night, which they then crunch down using some perl scripts and make available to other scientists through a web interface backed on Postgresql.
'Unsurprisingly, the Southern Sky Survey will result in a large volume of raw data — about 470 terabytes ... when complete.
... the bulk of the analysis of the SkyMapper data will be done on a brand new, next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores.
Due to be fully online by December, the supercomputer will offer a tenfold increase in performance over the facility's current set up of two SGI machines, each with just under 3500 cores in total.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361673</id>
	<title>Hmmm...</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1245254460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With that much data we might finally have enough information to generate a singular point of reference in space and time so we can retrofit a poorly designed all stainless steel car and travel back in time 200 years and not find out selves drifting in the middle of nowhere since 200 years ago, relative to some unknown non-moving reference point, our planet, solar system, and galaxy is probably no where near where it was 200 years ago!</p><p>FLUX CAPACITOR FTW!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With that much data we might finally have enough information to generate a singular point of reference in space and time so we can retrofit a poorly designed all stainless steel car and travel back in time 200 years and not find out selves drifting in the middle of nowhere since 200 years ago , relative to some unknown non-moving reference point , our planet , solar system , and galaxy is probably no where near where it was 200 years ago ! FLUX CAPACITOR FTW !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With that much data we might finally have enough information to generate a singular point of reference in space and time so we can retrofit a poorly designed all stainless steel car and travel back in time 200 years and not find out selves drifting in the middle of nowhere since 200 years ago, relative to some unknown non-moving reference point, our planet, solar system, and galaxy is probably no where near where it was 200 years ago!FLUX CAPACITOR FTW!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364053</id>
	<title>Google Universe?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245265500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Question - when can i cruise a model of the galaxy from my laptop? I wanna see some of the cosmos up close before i die. I think thats what everyone who's not a super geek wants to get out of this (and the geeks want it too I'm sure).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Question - when can i cruise a model of the galaxy from my laptop ?
I wan na see some of the cosmos up close before i die .
I think thats what everyone who 's not a super geek wants to get out of this ( and the geeks want it too I 'm sure ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Question - when can i cruise a model of the galaxy from my laptop?
I wanna see some of the cosmos up close before i die.
I think thats what everyone who's not a super geek wants to get out of this (and the geeks want it too I'm sure).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28363407</id>
	<title>Supercomputer power</title>
	<author>binkzz</author>
	<datestamp>1245262860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores." " They collect 700 GB of data every night, which they then crunch down using some perl scripts "</p><p>Doesn't that mean it could be run from a home computer running c code instead?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores .
" " They collect 700 GB of data every night , which they then crunch down using some perl scripts " Does n't that mean it could be run from a home computer running c code instead ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores.
" " They collect 700 GB of data every night, which they then crunch down using some perl scripts "Doesn't that mean it could be run from a home computer running c code instead?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28363443</id>
	<title>Re:Two Words Beowolf Cluster...</title>
	<author>davidsyes</author>
	<datestamp>1245263040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can be bay like wolves and sing Men At Work's "Land Down Under"?</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNT7uZf7lew" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNT7uZf7lew</a> [youtube.com]</p><p>But, change the song to Chips At Work's "Skies Up Over", hehehehehe....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can be bay like wolves and sing Men At Work 's " Land Down Under " ? http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = DNT7uZf7lew [ youtube.com ] But , change the song to Chips At Work 's " Skies Up Over " , hehehehehe... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can be bay like wolves and sing Men At Work's "Land Down Under"?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNT7uZf7lew [youtube.com]But, change the song to Chips At Work's "Skies Up Over", hehehehehe....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364731</id>
	<title>Re:The Math! It hurts the brain</title>
	<author>Xtifr</author>
	<datestamp>1245268860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>From what I gather the whole 10 Fold, 3 Fold, was more about the progressive thickness of cloth in relation to the number of folds</p></div><p>That's an...<em>interesting</em> theory, but I can't find <em>anything</em> to support it.  My M-W dictionary says the phrase goes back to the 12th century (so it has nothing to do with making planes of any type), and clearly states that "tenfold" means <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tenfold" title="merriam-webster.com">ten times</a> [merriam-webster.com], so your suggestion that it "really" means 2^10 is simply false.  My own guess is that this ancient phrase has more to do with "in the fold" (where you find sheep, or perhaps wolves) than with cloth, but I can't prove that either.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I gather the whole 10 Fold , 3 Fold , was more about the progressive thickness of cloth in relation to the number of foldsThat 's an...interesting theory , but I ca n't find anything to support it .
My M-W dictionary says the phrase goes back to the 12th century ( so it has nothing to do with making planes of any type ) , and clearly states that " tenfold " means ten times [ merriam-webster.com ] , so your suggestion that it " really " means 2 ^ 10 is simply false .
My own guess is that this ancient phrase has more to do with " in the fold " ( where you find sheep , or perhaps wolves ) than with cloth , but I ca n't prove that either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I gather the whole 10 Fold, 3 Fold, was more about the progressive thickness of cloth in relation to the number of foldsThat's an...interesting theory, but I can't find anything to support it.
My M-W dictionary says the phrase goes back to the 12th century (so it has nothing to do with making planes of any type), and clearly states that "tenfold" means ten times [merriam-webster.com], so your suggestion that it "really" means 2^10 is simply false.
My own guess is that this ancient phrase has more to do with "in the fold" (where you find sheep, or perhaps wolves) than with cloth, but I can't prove that either.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361777</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607</id>
	<title>The Math!  It hurts the brain</title>
	<author>dmomo</author>
	<datestamp>1245254160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  will offer a tenfold increase in performance over the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. two SGI machines, each with just under 3500 cores in total</p><p>How is that 10x faster?  I imagine because the new v. old cores are not equally comparable.  In that case, why talk number of cores at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores ... will offer a tenfold increase in performance over the .. two SGI machines , each with just under 3500 cores in totalHow is that 10x faster ?
I imagine because the new v. old cores are not equally comparable .
In that case , why talk number of cores at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores ...  will offer a tenfold increase in performance over the .. two SGI machines, each with just under 3500 cores in totalHow is that 10x faster?
I imagine because the new v. old cores are not equally comparable.
In that case, why talk number of cores at all?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28362503</id>
	<title>PostgreSQL capacity?</title>
	<author>johannesg</author>
	<datestamp>1245258540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do they store so much data into PostgreSQL? I thought it had a limit of 32TB per table, so are they using some sort of table partitioning scheme?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do they store so much data into PostgreSQL ?
I thought it had a limit of 32TB per table , so are they using some sort of table partitioning scheme ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do they store so much data into PostgreSQL?
I thought it had a limit of 32TB per table, so are they using some sort of table partitioning scheme?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364623</id>
	<title>Re:Google Universe?</title>
	<author>roguegramma</author>
	<datestamp>1245268380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is what you can get for free at at the moment:</p><p><a href="http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove\_list.php?form\_cat=134" title="sourceforge.net" rel="nofollow">http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove\_list.php?form\_cat=134</a> [sourceforge.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what you can get for free at at the moment : http : //sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove \ _list.php ? form \ _cat = 134 [ sourceforge.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what you can get for free at at the moment:http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove\_list.php?form\_cat=134 [sourceforge.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361415</id>
	<title>I wonder</title>
	<author>downix</author>
	<datestamp>1245253140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder which CPU the supercomputer will be using.  Could be Opterons, or SPARC.  I could easily imagine 12000 out of a SPARC Niagra or SPARC VIIfx (8 cores per-die) and would use less wattage than the same number of cores in Opteron.  Plus, if they're doing dual or quad-precision, the SPARCs will hold their own.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder which CPU the supercomputer will be using .
Could be Opterons , or SPARC .
I could easily imagine 12000 out of a SPARC Niagra or SPARC VIIfx ( 8 cores per-die ) and would use less wattage than the same number of cores in Opteron .
Plus , if they 're doing dual or quad-precision , the SPARCs will hold their own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder which CPU the supercomputer will be using.
Could be Opterons, or SPARC.
I could easily imagine 12000 out of a SPARC Niagra or SPARC VIIfx (8 cores per-die) and would use less wattage than the same number of cores in Opteron.
Plus, if they're doing dual or quad-precision, the SPARCs will hold their own.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364397</id>
	<title>Re:The Math! It hurts the brain</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245267540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Couple of items. First, the term is much older. Old enough that we're not certain when it starts, so a number of traditional industries are candidates for the origin once we wrote things down. Second, not canvas, but doped linen for fabric-covered aircraft of the Great War. (There were also plywood and metal covered aircraft at the time.) Sometimes cotton, then more recently dacron, and around the time I was getting out of it (80s), there was a sort-of thin fiberglass-like covering being introduced. Maybe called 'razorback'? I keep meaning to check to see how that one worked out for longevity, and for fuss during inevitable renewal.</p><p>"Canvas" \_is\_ a fairly broad term, but the stuff used for aircraft isn't the same sort of weight as what's used for canoes and paintings, and should not be included. The term to use is "fabric", when not being specific about which fabric.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Couple of items .
First , the term is much older .
Old enough that we 're not certain when it starts , so a number of traditional industries are candidates for the origin once we wrote things down .
Second , not canvas , but doped linen for fabric-covered aircraft of the Great War .
( There were also plywood and metal covered aircraft at the time .
) Sometimes cotton , then more recently dacron , and around the time I was getting out of it ( 80s ) , there was a sort-of thin fiberglass-like covering being introduced .
Maybe called 'razorback ' ?
I keep meaning to check to see how that one worked out for longevity , and for fuss during inevitable renewal .
" Canvas " \ _is \ _ a fairly broad term , but the stuff used for aircraft is n't the same sort of weight as what 's used for canoes and paintings , and should not be included .
The term to use is " fabric " , when not being specific about which fabric .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Couple of items.
First, the term is much older.
Old enough that we're not certain when it starts, so a number of traditional industries are candidates for the origin once we wrote things down.
Second, not canvas, but doped linen for fabric-covered aircraft of the Great War.
(There were also plywood and metal covered aircraft at the time.
) Sometimes cotton, then more recently dacron, and around the time I was getting out of it (80s), there was a sort-of thin fiberglass-like covering being introduced.
Maybe called 'razorback'?
I keep meaning to check to see how that one worked out for longevity, and for fuss during inevitable renewal.
"Canvas" \_is\_ a fairly broad term, but the stuff used for aircraft isn't the same sort of weight as what's used for canoes and paintings, and should not be included.
The term to use is "fabric", when not being specific about which fabric.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361777</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364209</id>
	<title>Re:So basically</title>
	<author>sdpuppy</author>
	<datestamp>1245266460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Certainly.  They're uploading to the Sun, no?  <p>
They're also uploading to SGI since the Sun only has one core.
</p><p>
ducks</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Certainly .
They 're uploading to the Sun , no ?
They 're also uploading to SGI since the Sun only has one core .
ducks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Certainly.
They're uploading to the Sun, no?
They're also uploading to SGI since the Sun only has one core.
ducks</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364153</id>
	<title>Re:The Math! It hurts the brain</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245266040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe we should use expressions like "a 10dB increase in cores" or "a 3dB increase in memory"? How about the current chips features are -1.7dB those of the old chips?</p><p>Whatever...I'm going back to trying to get 120.827dBm into my flux capacitor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe we should use expressions like " a 10dB increase in cores " or " a 3dB increase in memory " ?
How about the current chips features are -1.7dB those of the old chips ? Whatever...I 'm going back to trying to get 120.827dBm into my flux capacitor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe we should use expressions like "a 10dB increase in cores" or "a 3dB increase in memory"?
How about the current chips features are -1.7dB those of the old chips?Whatever...I'm going back to trying to get 120.827dBm into my flux capacitor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361777</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28363107</id>
	<title>Yes, but</title>
	<author>KiwiCanuck</author>
	<datestamp>1245261420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores."

Can it run Crysis with full eye-candy?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores .
" Can it run Crysis with full eye-candy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores.
"

Can it run Crysis with full eye-candy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28372269</id>
	<title>Re:The Math! It hurts the brain</title>
	<author>Plagued by Penguins</author>
	<datestamp>1245331020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's ~10x faster on specfp\_rate than the itanium2 altix.<br>specfp turns out to be a good representation of the codes we typically run...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's ~ 10x faster on specfp \ _rate than the itanium2 altix.specfp turns out to be a good representation of the codes we typically run.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's ~10x faster on specfp\_rate than the itanium2 altix.specfp turns out to be a good representation of the codes we typically run...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28365487</id>
	<title>Re:The Math! It hurts the brain</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245272340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>1 -&gt; 2 -&gt; 4 -&gt; 8 mm thick. Ten fold would then be 512 mm thick...</p></div></blockquote><p>

2^10=1024. It's a pretty useful fact actually.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 - &gt; 2 - &gt; 4 - &gt; 8 mm thick .
Ten fold would then be 512 mm thick.. . 2 ^ 10 = 1024. It 's a pretty useful fact actually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 -&gt; 2 -&gt; 4 -&gt; 8 mm thick.
Ten fold would then be 512 mm thick...

2^10=1024. It's a pretty useful fact actually.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361777</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28362673</id>
	<title>Per usual - I'm confused</title>
	<author>earlymon</author>
	<datestamp>1245259320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like a great step forward - and I want to be on record saying that I'm pulling for them.</p><p>However - I'm confused, per usual.  As Oracle now owns Sun, what's to say that the camel won't stick his nose into the tent, seeing a database opportunity (read: marketing opportunity) and try to pressure, cajole, coerce, or otherwise influence them to drop a working PostgreSQL in favor of an all-Oracle (Sun) solution?  I'm not saying that one is better than the other - I'm just concerned that a political motive on the supplier's part can have ripple effects to the tech guys making it happen.</p><p>I freely admit my confusion, so this may be a big non-issue.  I just don't know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like a great step forward - and I want to be on record saying that I 'm pulling for them.However - I 'm confused , per usual .
As Oracle now owns Sun , what 's to say that the camel wo n't stick his nose into the tent , seeing a database opportunity ( read : marketing opportunity ) and try to pressure , cajole , coerce , or otherwise influence them to drop a working PostgreSQL in favor of an all-Oracle ( Sun ) solution ?
I 'm not saying that one is better than the other - I 'm just concerned that a political motive on the supplier 's part can have ripple effects to the tech guys making it happen.I freely admit my confusion , so this may be a big non-issue .
I just do n't know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like a great step forward - and I want to be on record saying that I'm pulling for them.However - I'm confused, per usual.
As Oracle now owns Sun, what's to say that the camel won't stick his nose into the tent, seeing a database opportunity (read: marketing opportunity) and try to pressure, cajole, coerce, or otherwise influence them to drop a working PostgreSQL in favor of an all-Oracle (Sun) solution?
I'm not saying that one is better than the other - I'm just concerned that a political motive on the supplier's part can have ripple effects to the tech guys making it happen.I freely admit my confusion, so this may be a big non-issue.
I just don't know.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361699</id>
	<title>So...</title>
	<author>Ltap</author>
	<datestamp>1245254580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's the Skynet?

In all seriousness, it sounds awesome and it's good to know that they're using the right tools for the job (perl to organize, postgreSQL to manage large amounts of data).</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the Skynet ?
In all seriousness , it sounds awesome and it 's good to know that they 're using the right tools for the job ( perl to organize , postgreSQL to manage large amounts of data ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the Skynet?
In all seriousness, it sounds awesome and it's good to know that they're using the right tools for the job (perl to organize, postgreSQL to manage large amounts of data).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361777</id>
	<title>Re:The Math! It hurts the brain</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245254940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Old Man Rant"</p><p>Why do I cring every time I hear people use terms like Tenfold and order of magnatitude....</p><p>From what I gather the whole 10 Fold, 3 Fold, was more about the progressive thickness of cloth in relation to the number of folds back in the war when we made planes out of canvas.</p><p>1mm thick material when increase 3 fold is</p><p>1 -&gt; 2 -&gt; 4 -&gt; 8 mm thick. Ten fold would then be 512 mm thick...</p><p>Why are we talking about folding stuff? Where are the protients... WHa? I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE PILLS! WHO ARE YOU PEOPLE! LEAVE ME ALONE!</p><p>I'M NOT DOING ANY LAUNDRY!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Old Man Rant " Why do I cring every time I hear people use terms like Tenfold and order of magnatitude....From what I gather the whole 10 Fold , 3 Fold , was more about the progressive thickness of cloth in relation to the number of folds back in the war when we made planes out of canvas.1mm thick material when increase 3 fold is1 - &gt; 2 - &gt; 4 - &gt; 8 mm thick .
Ten fold would then be 512 mm thick...Why are we talking about folding stuff ?
Where are the protients... WHa ? I DO N'T WANT TO TAKE THE PILLS !
WHO ARE YOU PEOPLE !
LEAVE ME ALONE ! I 'M NOT DOING ANY LAUNDRY !
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Old Man Rant"Why do I cring every time I hear people use terms like Tenfold and order of magnatitude....From what I gather the whole 10 Fold, 3 Fold, was more about the progressive thickness of cloth in relation to the number of folds back in the war when we made planes out of canvas.1mm thick material when increase 3 fold is1 -&gt; 2 -&gt; 4 -&gt; 8 mm thick.
Ten fold would then be 512 mm thick...Why are we talking about folding stuff?
Where are the protients... WHa? I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE PILLS!
WHO ARE YOU PEOPLE!
LEAVE ME ALONE!I'M NOT DOING ANY LAUNDRY!
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364669</id>
	<title>Almost good enough</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1245268560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It sounds like it almost has enough power to run Windows Vista with options turned on. Too bad you can only run three programs at a time though.</p><p>Imagine a beowulf cluster of these...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds like it almost has enough power to run Windows Vista with options turned on .
Too bad you can only run three programs at a time though.Imagine a beowulf cluster of these.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds like it almost has enough power to run Windows Vista with options turned on.
Too bad you can only run three programs at a time though.Imagine a beowulf cluster of these...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361431</id>
	<title>Google</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245253260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google has already mapped the moon, mars, earth, working on the oceans, why not just leave the sky to them? they have a pretty good sucess rate</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google has already mapped the moon , mars , earth , working on the oceans , why not just leave the sky to them ?
they have a pretty good sucess rate</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google has already mapped the moon, mars, earth, working on the oceans, why not just leave the sky to them?
they have a pretty good sucess rate</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28362999</id>
	<title>Sounds like a job for...</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1245260880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like a job for <a href="http://boinc.berkeley.edu/" title="berkeley.edu">BOINC</a> [berkeley.edu].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like a job for BOINC [ berkeley.edu ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like a job for BOINC [berkeley.edu].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28362191</id>
	<title>standard GPU board beats an SGI super these days</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1245257100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>SGI stopped making supers many years ago.</htmltext>
<tokenext>SGI stopped making supers many years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SGI stopped making supers many years ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361477</id>
	<title>Two Words</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245253440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Beowulf Cluster</htmltext>
<tokenext>Beowulf Cluster</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Beowulf Cluster</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361677</id>
	<title>MMMMmmm....</title>
	<author>amstrad</author>
	<datestamp>1245254460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Imagine a open/globular cluster of those....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine a open/globular cluster of those... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine a open/globular cluster of those....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361863</id>
	<title>Re:Marvel of efficiency</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245255360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PERL's interpreted -- wouldn't there be a significant speed increase if they switched to something compiled? Like C? I'm sure that's now always that case, but just curious...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PERL 's interpreted -- would n't there be a significant speed increase if they switched to something compiled ?
Like C ?
I 'm sure that 's now always that case , but just curious.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PERL's interpreted -- wouldn't there be a significant speed increase if they switched to something compiled?
Like C?
I'm sure that's now always that case, but just curious...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361615</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28366237</id>
	<title>Perl - One of the best for ETLs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245232920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back in 2004 I calculated contract interests for Columbia Pictures in PERL the data 2.4 Terabytes(took a day using 24 crappy pentium IVs). This doesn't surprise me check this out</p><p>look for duplicated words in a line<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; perl -0777 -ne 'print "$.: doubled $\_\n" while<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/\b(\w+)\b\s+\b\1\b/gi' foo.txt</p><p>or to cheat in scrabble in Unix</p><p>input: tolkien</p><p>perl -lne'print if<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/t/ &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/o/ &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/l/ &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/k/ &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/i/ &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/e/ &amp;&amp;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/n/ &amp;&amp; length($\_)==8'<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/share/dict/words</p><p>output:<br>knotlike<br>townlike</p><p>Just try writing that in C,<br>Perl is actually quite fast if you use a bunch of one-liners -</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in 2004 I calculated contract interests for Columbia Pictures in PERL the data 2.4 Terabytes ( took a day using 24 crappy pentium IVs ) .
This does n't surprise me check this outlook for duplicated words in a line         perl -0777 -ne 'print " $ .
: doubled $ \ _ \ n " while / \ b ( \ w + ) \ b \ s + \ b \ 1 \ b/gi ' foo.txtor to cheat in scrabble in Unixinput : tolkienperl -lne'print if /t/ &amp;&amp; /o/ &amp;&amp; /l/ &amp;&amp; /k/ &amp;&amp; /i/ &amp;&amp; /e/ &amp;&amp; /n/ &amp;&amp; length ( $ \ _ ) = = 8 ' /usr/share/dict/wordsoutput : knotliketownlikeJust try writing that in C,Perl is actually quite fast if you use a bunch of one-liners -</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in 2004 I calculated contract interests for Columbia Pictures in PERL the data 2.4 Terabytes(took a day using 24 crappy pentium IVs).
This doesn't surprise me check this outlook for duplicated words in a line
        perl -0777 -ne 'print "$.
: doubled $\_\n" while /\b(\w+)\b\s+\b\1\b/gi' foo.txtor to cheat in scrabble in Unixinput: tolkienperl -lne'print if /t/ &amp;&amp; /o/ &amp;&amp; /l/ &amp;&amp; /k/ &amp;&amp; /i/ &amp;&amp; /e/ &amp;&amp; /n/ &amp;&amp; length($\_)==8' /usr/share/dict/wordsoutput:knotliketownlikeJust try writing that in C,Perl is actually quite fast if you use a bunch of one-liners -</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361725</id>
	<title>Re:The Math! It hurts the brain</title>
	<author>evol262</author>
	<datestamp>1245254700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're moving from 1.6Ghz single core Itaniums to dual quad core Xeon blades.  I suspect they're talking about cores to emphasize the density gain, and because people like huge numbers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're moving from 1.6Ghz single core Itaniums to dual quad core Xeon blades .
I suspect they 're talking about cores to emphasize the density gain , and because people like huge numbers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're moving from 1.6Ghz single core Itaniums to dual quad core Xeon blades.
I suspect they're talking about cores to emphasize the density gain, and because people like huge numbers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28369613</id>
	<title>spare core cycles</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245259680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...so are they going to use the 12000 cores spare CPU cycles for F@H or SETI....lol</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...so are they going to use the 12000 cores spare CPU cycles for F @ H or SETI....lol</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...so are they going to use the 12000 cores spare CPU cycles for F@H or SETI....lol</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28368919</id>
	<title>western NSW???</title>
	<author>gfim</author>
	<datestamp>1245252540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The article describes Coonabarabran as being the "central-west NSW location". Now, <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&amp;source=s\_q&amp;hl=en&amp;q=Coonabarabran+NSW,+Australia&amp;sll=37.579413,-95.712891&amp;sspn=50.932448,79.101563&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;cd=1&amp;geocode=FSHOIv4dWMrlCA&amp;split=0&amp;ll=-31.278551,149.282227&amp;spn=27.73575,39.550781&amp;z=5&amp;iwloc=A" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">Coonabarabran certainly isn't very far west</a> [google.com] in NSW. But, then I realised that they mean population-wise. There aren't too many people west of there!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article describes Coonabarabran as being the " central-west NSW location " .
Now , Coonabarabran certainly is n't very far west [ google.com ] in NSW .
But , then I realised that they mean population-wise .
There are n't too many people west of there ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article describes Coonabarabran as being the "central-west NSW location".
Now, Coonabarabran certainly isn't very far west [google.com] in NSW.
But, then I realised that they mean population-wise.
There aren't too many people west of there!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361639</id>
	<title>Perl power!!!</title>
	<author>Murpster</author>
	<datestamp>1245254340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good to see the coolest language around being put to a(nother) cool use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good to see the coolest language around being put to a ( nother ) cool use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good to see the coolest language around being put to a(nother) cool use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361615</id>
	<title>Marvel of efficiency</title>
	<author>nightfire-unique</author>
	<datestamp>1245254220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sun servers running perl you say?</p><p>I'd say that has the price:performance ratio of a Rolls Royce.  And that's not a good thing.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sun servers running perl you say ? I 'd say that has the price : performance ratio of a Rolls Royce .
And that 's not a good thing .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sun servers running perl you say?I'd say that has the price:performance ratio of a Rolls Royce.
And that's not a good thing.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361451</id>
	<title>So basically</title>
	<author>Norsefire</author>
	<datestamp>1245253320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>it's a skynet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's a skynet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's a skynet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361745</id>
	<title>Re:Marvel of efficiency</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245254760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You ever try running a regex on a 470 terabyte string?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ever try running a regex on a 470 terabyte string ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You ever try running a regex on a 470 terabyte string?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361615</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28363443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361477
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361745
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361725
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28365487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28372269
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_17_147244_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364053
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28362503
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361677
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364053
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364623
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361639
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361431
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361477
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28363443
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28362191
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361607
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28372269
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361725
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361777
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364397
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364153
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28365487
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364731
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28364209
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361745
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_17_147244.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_17_147244.28361415
</commentlist>
</conversation>
