<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_21_2023210</id>
	<title><em>Google Suggest</em> Disabled In China Due To Porn</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1245573900000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=29820456570" rel="nofollow">I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property</a> writes <i>"The Chinese government has <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/20/world/asia/20beijing.html?\_r=1&amp;partner=rss&amp;emc=rss">asked Google to disable Google Suggest</a> because it has been suggesting that people search for pornography based on its analysis of the most popular search terms in China. This comes on the heels of a <a href="http://www.chinasmack.com/more/cctv-attacks-google-porn-links-fake-interview-exposed/">fake CCTV interview</a> being used to support the <a href="http://government.zdnet.com/?p=4988">government requirement that all new computers ship with the 'Green Dam' Internet censoring program</a>, which is still in force, despite <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/09/06/16/1422235/">reports to the contrary</a>."</i> The story on the chinaSMACK site demonstrates that Chinese search engine Baidu features a comparable search-suggestion function, which similarly recommends adult-themed sites, but that the government has not attacked Baidu over the issue of porn.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I Do n't Believe in Imaginary Property writes " The Chinese government has asked Google to disable Google Suggest because it has been suggesting that people search for pornography based on its analysis of the most popular search terms in China .
This comes on the heels of a fake CCTV interview being used to support the government requirement that all new computers ship with the 'Green Dam ' Internet censoring program , which is still in force , despite reports to the contrary .
" The story on the chinaSMACK site demonstrates that Chinese search engine Baidu features a comparable search-suggestion function , which similarly recommends adult-themed sites , but that the government has not attacked Baidu over the issue of porn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "The Chinese government has asked Google to disable Google Suggest because it has been suggesting that people search for pornography based on its analysis of the most popular search terms in China.
This comes on the heels of a fake CCTV interview being used to support the government requirement that all new computers ship with the 'Green Dam' Internet censoring program, which is still in force, despite reports to the contrary.
" The story on the chinaSMACK site demonstrates that Chinese search engine Baidu features a comparable search-suggestion function, which similarly recommends adult-themed sites, but that the government has not attacked Baidu over the issue of porn.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415293</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245594180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>:D. Glad the mods "get" the parent post!</htmltext>
<tokenext>: D. Glad the mods " get " the parent post !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>:D. Glad the mods "get" the parent post!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28420755</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1245680760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree. Also, even if Google aren't going to do the same thing in the US - it's still relevant interest if a US company is complying with censorship requests for China.</p><p>Not to mention that there are other countries besides China and the US, that don't have freedom of speech in the way that the US has, e.g., there are many readers from Europe (including myself).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
Also , even if Google are n't going to do the same thing in the US - it 's still relevant interest if a US company is complying with censorship requests for China.Not to mention that there are other countries besides China and the US , that do n't have freedom of speech in the way that the US has , e.g. , there are many readers from Europe ( including myself ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
Also, even if Google aren't going to do the same thing in the US - it's still relevant interest if a US company is complying with censorship requests for China.Not to mention that there are other countries besides China and the US, that don't have freedom of speech in the way that the US has, e.g., there are many readers from Europe (including myself).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415415</id>
	<title>My favorite Google Suggest search terms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245595440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>why is everything</tt>
<br> <br>
Try typing that in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>why is everything Try typing that in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why is everything
 
Try typing that in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413841</id>
	<title>Consumers are not that dumb.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245580980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even if Beijing required every computer to be installed with filtering software, the typical consumer can just take his pirated copy of Windows XP and use it to do a fresh installation of the operating system, creating a clean, blank slate without any censoring software.  China is, after all, the software piracy capital of the world.  If a Chinese customer has the intellect to overcome various anti-piracy mechanisms and to rip DVDs, then he surely has the intellect to install a fresh copy of Windows XP.
<p>
Given the user friendliness of the Windows installer, installing Windows XP should be quite easy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if Beijing required every computer to be installed with filtering software , the typical consumer can just take his pirated copy of Windows XP and use it to do a fresh installation of the operating system , creating a clean , blank slate without any censoring software .
China is , after all , the software piracy capital of the world .
If a Chinese customer has the intellect to overcome various anti-piracy mechanisms and to rip DVDs , then he surely has the intellect to install a fresh copy of Windows XP .
Given the user friendliness of the Windows installer , installing Windows XP should be quite easy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if Beijing required every computer to be installed with filtering software, the typical consumer can just take his pirated copy of Windows XP and use it to do a fresh installation of the operating system, creating a clean, blank slate without any censoring software.
China is, after all, the software piracy capital of the world.
If a Chinese customer has the intellect to overcome various anti-piracy mechanisms and to rip DVDs, then he surely has the intellect to install a fresh copy of Windows XP.
Given the user friendliness of the Windows installer, installing Windows XP should be quite easy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414213</id>
	<title>Am I the only one who read that wrong?</title>
	<author>CharityA</author>
	<datestamp>1245584160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google suggests that the disabled are in China due to porn... Seriously, that is the way I read it. Brain fart.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google suggests that the disabled are in China due to porn... Seriously , that is the way I read it .
Brain fart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google suggests that the disabled are in China due to porn... Seriously, that is the way I read it.
Brain fart.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415209</id>
	<title>Re:Caucasian porn?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245593460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, you're not too far from the truth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , you 're not too far from the truth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, you're not too far from the truth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413481</id>
	<title>Government hasn't attacked Baidu over...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245578040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...the issue of porn.</p><p>Because porn is not the issue, democratic porn is!</p><p>God forbid the Chinese learn how free sex is!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...the issue of porn.Because porn is not the issue , democratic porn is ! God forbid the Chinese learn how free sex is !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the issue of porn.Because porn is not the issue, democratic porn is!God forbid the Chinese learn how free sex is!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415737</id>
	<title>Obligatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245598620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i9ddm5\_njw" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i9ddm5\_njw</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 9i9ddm5 \ _njw [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i9ddm5\_njw [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413555</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245578580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>...Its Google, its an American company. They can do the same thing over here. When you think about it and the recent "block everything" mentality from both democrats and republicans, soon China's internet might just be your internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Its Google , its an American company .
They can do the same thing over here .
When you think about it and the recent " block everything " mentality from both democrats and republicans , soon China 's internet might just be your internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Its Google, its an American company.
They can do the same thing over here.
When you think about it and the recent "block everything" mentality from both democrats and republicans, soon China's internet might just be your internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414215</id>
	<title>Baidu....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245584160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is not going to return any sites that I host - find it far to abusive a search bot - uses 10x the bandwidth of even NineMSN's bot...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is not going to return any sites that I host - find it far to abusive a search bot - uses 10x the bandwidth of even NineMSN 's bot.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is not going to return any sites that I host - find it far to abusive a search bot - uses 10x the bandwidth of even NineMSN's bot...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413665</id>
	<title>Who you know</title>
	<author>PineHall</author>
	<datestamp>1245579480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The story on the chinaSMACK site demonstrates that Chinese search engine Baidu features a comparable search-suggestion function, which similarly recommends adult-themed sites, but that the government has not attacked Baidu over the issue of porn.</p></div></blockquote><p>
China was a rule by decree country.  Who you know is very important in China.  Laws are considered by many Chinese to by somewhat flexible if you know the right person.  Laws are administered at the local and provincial levels of government. This means consistency in law enforcement is lacking.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The story on the chinaSMACK site demonstrates that Chinese search engine Baidu features a comparable search-suggestion function , which similarly recommends adult-themed sites , but that the government has not attacked Baidu over the issue of porn .
China was a rule by decree country .
Who you know is very important in China .
Laws are considered by many Chinese to by somewhat flexible if you know the right person .
Laws are administered at the local and provincial levels of government .
This means consistency in law enforcement is lacking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The story on the chinaSMACK site demonstrates that Chinese search engine Baidu features a comparable search-suggestion function, which similarly recommends adult-themed sites, but that the government has not attacked Baidu over the issue of porn.
China was a rule by decree country.
Who you know is very important in China.
Laws are considered by many Chinese to by somewhat flexible if you know the right person.
Laws are administered at the local and provincial levels of government.
This means consistency in law enforcement is lacking.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413557</id>
	<title>Not news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245578640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It isn't a big news and <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578\_3-10132348-38.html" title="cnet.com" rel="nofollow">it is not new</a> [cnet.com] for sure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't a big news and it is not new [ cnet.com ] for sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't a big news and it is not new [cnet.com] for sure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417181</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245609060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What's one more stupid internet filter in light of all this?</i> </p><p>You forgot a really important one.</p><p>The customs area at entry points to the US is now declared to be "in no country". Therefore customs officers can inspect, seize and retain for an unlimited time (eighteen months and counting, in at least one case) any object they care to.</p><p>You would think that "in no country", your rights as an American citizen would follow you. Not so. Some who are familiar with the New Testament may remember that the apostle Paul was once arrested and bound somewhere in the Roman Empire. He had only to say, "I am a Roman citizen" and his captors could not have made greater haste to release his bonds. It was a staple of Roman law that a Roman citizen could not be bound. Penalties for doing so were severe.</p><p>As a result of this US policy, some large corporations will do a clean install on a laptop to protect proprietary or trade secret data. A complete, restorable backup is then transmitted to the foreign destination. Before return, the offsite backup is destroyed and a clean system is reinstalled.</p><p>Apropos of government power over information, I'm now listening to a program on PBS about premonitions. One woman canceled a flight to the UN on 9/11 because of a premonition. Canceling such a trip is most strongly discouraged. In response to an idle comment where the interviewer wondered how many people had canceled flights that day, it turns out that any available data that has been collected by the airlines on such cancellations has been seized by the FBI and will not be made available for study or analysis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's one more stupid internet filter in light of all this ?
You forgot a really important one.The customs area at entry points to the US is now declared to be " in no country " .
Therefore customs officers can inspect , seize and retain for an unlimited time ( eighteen months and counting , in at least one case ) any object they care to.You would think that " in no country " , your rights as an American citizen would follow you .
Not so .
Some who are familiar with the New Testament may remember that the apostle Paul was once arrested and bound somewhere in the Roman Empire .
He had only to say , " I am a Roman citizen " and his captors could not have made greater haste to release his bonds .
It was a staple of Roman law that a Roman citizen could not be bound .
Penalties for doing so were severe.As a result of this US policy , some large corporations will do a clean install on a laptop to protect proprietary or trade secret data .
A complete , restorable backup is then transmitted to the foreign destination .
Before return , the offsite backup is destroyed and a clean system is reinstalled.Apropos of government power over information , I 'm now listening to a program on PBS about premonitions .
One woman canceled a flight to the UN on 9/11 because of a premonition .
Canceling such a trip is most strongly discouraged .
In response to an idle comment where the interviewer wondered how many people had canceled flights that day , it turns out that any available data that has been collected by the airlines on such cancellations has been seized by the FBI and will not be made available for study or analysis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's one more stupid internet filter in light of all this?
You forgot a really important one.The customs area at entry points to the US is now declared to be "in no country".
Therefore customs officers can inspect, seize and retain for an unlimited time (eighteen months and counting, in at least one case) any object they care to.You would think that "in no country", your rights as an American citizen would follow you.
Not so.
Some who are familiar with the New Testament may remember that the apostle Paul was once arrested and bound somewhere in the Roman Empire.
He had only to say, "I am a Roman citizen" and his captors could not have made greater haste to release his bonds.
It was a staple of Roman law that a Roman citizen could not be bound.
Penalties for doing so were severe.As a result of this US policy, some large corporations will do a clean install on a laptop to protect proprietary or trade secret data.
A complete, restorable backup is then transmitted to the foreign destination.
Before return, the offsite backup is destroyed and a clean system is reinstalled.Apropos of government power over information, I'm now listening to a program on PBS about premonitions.
One woman canceled a flight to the UN on 9/11 because of a premonition.
Canceling such a trip is most strongly discouraged.
In response to an idle comment where the interviewer wondered how many people had canceled flights that day, it turns out that any available data that has been collected by the airlines on such cancellations has been seized by the FBI and will not be made available for study or analysis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415055</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414795</id>
	<title>So is it *wrong*?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245589320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe porn is the most popular search in China. You don't get to a billion people by being prudish...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe porn is the most popular search in China .
You do n't get to a billion people by being prudish.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe porn is the most popular search in China.
You don't get to a billion people by being prudish...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413509</id>
	<title>miibeian.gov.cn</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1245578280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That site must have some freaking amazing pagerank, since every single site hosted in China is required to register and link to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That site must have some freaking amazing pagerank , since every single site hosted in China is required to register and link to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That site must have some freaking amazing pagerank, since every single site hosted in China is required to register and link to it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413625</id>
	<title>Filtering is the Hijab of the Internet</title>
	<author>unlametheweak</author>
	<datestamp>1245579240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The day that government's and people in general get over their neurotic reactions to pornography is the day when you will see Authoritarianism die and Civilization  flourish. Pornography, like it or lump it, is a signpost of Civilization and Freedom.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The day that government 's and people in general get over their neurotic reactions to pornography is the day when you will see Authoritarianism die and Civilization flourish .
Pornography , like it or lump it , is a signpost of Civilization and Freedom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The day that government's and people in general get over their neurotic reactions to pornography is the day when you will see Authoritarianism die and Civilization  flourish.
Pornography, like it or lump it, is a signpost of Civilization and Freedom.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415483</id>
	<title>Re:Protectionism</title>
	<author>mynickslongerthanurs</author>
	<datestamp>1245596220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly. Consider Baidu.com (Google China's largest competitor) donated 40 million RMB to CCTV (who has been doing substantial exposure on "Google's key role in spreading pornography"). So it's likely there is econimical reasons as well as political ones behind this one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
Consider Baidu.com ( Google China 's largest competitor ) donated 40 million RMB to CCTV ( who has been doing substantial exposure on " Google 's key role in spreading pornography " ) .
So it 's likely there is econimical reasons as well as political ones behind this one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
Consider Baidu.com (Google China's largest competitor) donated 40 million RMB to CCTV (who has been doing substantial exposure on "Google's key role in spreading pornography").
So it's likely there is econimical reasons as well as political ones behind this one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28416601</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245604500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/06/20/2018255" title="slashdot.org">really?</a> [slashdot.org]<br>Surely <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/06/19/1438235" title="slashdot.org">your slippery slope</a> [slashdot.org] nonsense could <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/22/0622222" title="slashdot.org">never be considered here.</a> [slashdot.org]<br>Especially nothing involving <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/10/1444259" title="slashdot.org"> <i>'...an "Advanced Electronic Surveillance" project, and $97.6 million to establish the Biometric Technology Center.'</i> </a> [slashdot.org], or maybe <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/01/1247258" title="slashdot.org">the FBI's "Everything Bucket" </a> [slashdot.org], not to mention the <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/20/1427259" title="slashdot.org">FBI's spy trojan</a> [slashdot.org], or maybe <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/18/1850221" title="slashdot.org">the <i>'FBI and States Vastly Expand DNA Collection, Databases'</i> </a> [slashdot.org], and lest we forget, the <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/20/1556259" title="slashdot.org">warrantless wiretapping</a> [slashdot.org], PATRIOT Act, and others.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Please stop this slippery slope nonsense.</p></div><p>We will do so when the gov't. stops greasing the slope, spraying it with oil, and coating it in teflon as they are currently doing.</p><p>If I missed the 'sarcasm tag', ignore this reply, and my apologies for the miscommunication.(I <b>truly</b> hope this was the case)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh really ?
[ slashdot.org ] Surely your slippery slope [ slashdot.org ] nonsense could never be considered here .
[ slashdot.org ] Especially nothing involving '...an " Advanced Electronic Surveillance " project , and $ 97.6 million to establish the Biometric Technology Center .
' [ slashdot.org ] , or maybe the FBI 's " Everything Bucket " [ slashdot.org ] , not to mention the FBI 's spy trojan [ slashdot.org ] , or maybe the 'FBI and States Vastly Expand DNA Collection , Databases ' [ slashdot.org ] , and lest we forget , the warrantless wiretapping [ slashdot.org ] , PATRIOT Act , and others.Please stop this slippery slope nonsense.We will do so when the gov't .
stops greasing the slope , spraying it with oil , and coating it in teflon as they are currently doing.If I missed the 'sarcasm tag ' , ignore this reply , and my apologies for the miscommunication .
( I truly hope this was the case )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh really?
[slashdot.org]Surely your slippery slope [slashdot.org] nonsense could never be considered here.
[slashdot.org]Especially nothing involving  '...an "Advanced Electronic Surveillance" project, and $97.6 million to establish the Biometric Technology Center.
'  [slashdot.org], or maybe the FBI's "Everything Bucket"  [slashdot.org], not to mention the FBI's spy trojan [slashdot.org], or maybe the 'FBI and States Vastly Expand DNA Collection, Databases'  [slashdot.org], and lest we forget, the warrantless wiretapping [slashdot.org], PATRIOT Act, and others.Please stop this slippery slope nonsense.We will do so when the gov't.
stops greasing the slope, spraying it with oil, and coating it in teflon as they are currently doing.If I missed the 'sarcasm tag', ignore this reply, and my apologies for the miscommunication.
(I truly hope this was the case)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414897</id>
	<title>Re:Protectionism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245590160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Canada is very similar in this respect. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission requires 60\% Canadian content to be broadcast.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Canada is very similar in this respect .
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission requires 60 \ % Canadian content to be broadcast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Canada is very similar in this respect.
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission requires 60\% Canadian content to be broadcast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28419773</id>
	<title>Funny</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1245675000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Funny how every repressive regime from the extremely non-religous to the extremely religous are obsessed with contolling their captors' sexuality.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny how every repressive regime from the extremely non-religous to the extremely religous are obsessed with contolling their captors ' sexuality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny how every repressive regime from the extremely non-religous to the extremely religous are obsessed with contolling their captors' sexuality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414153</id>
	<title>Accurate?</title>
	<author>supernova\_hq</author>
	<datestamp>1245583620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>My guess is that if google is suggesting porn, then it is probably for a reason...
<br> <br>
Sir! Sir! I type "hot naked" into google and it suggested girls! We must stop this monstrosity!!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>My guess is that if google is suggesting porn , then it is probably for a reason.. . Sir ! Sir !
I type " hot naked " into google and it suggested girls !
We must stop this monstrosity ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My guess is that if google is suggesting porn, then it is probably for a reason...
 
Sir! Sir!
I type "hot naked" into google and it suggested girls!
We must stop this monstrosity!!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28418181</id>
	<title>I'm glad. Google Suggest proves search profiling</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245704340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whenever I'm at Google's search box, it keeps suggesting all kinds of profanity as though it's trying to distract me with `Lesbian Strapon "index of" "name last modified" 'and whatnot.  Most useless feature they can allow.  I do however like when after I make a search that it has a URL on the resulting collection that would recommend a more accurate search string.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whenever I 'm at Google 's search box , it keeps suggesting all kinds of profanity as though it 's trying to distract me with ` Lesbian Strapon " index of " " name last modified " 'and whatnot .
Most useless feature they can allow .
I do however like when after I make a search that it has a URL on the resulting collection that would recommend a more accurate search string .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whenever I'm at Google's search box, it keeps suggesting all kinds of profanity as though it's trying to distract me with `Lesbian Strapon "index of" "name last modified" 'and whatnot.
Most useless feature they can allow.
I do however like when after I make a search that it has a URL on the resulting collection that would recommend a more accurate search string.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413481</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413811</id>
	<title>Porn causes disabilities?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245580740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did anyone else misread the title as "google suggests disabled [people] in china due to porn"?.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone else misread the title as " google suggests disabled [ people ] in china due to porn " ? .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone else misread the title as "google suggests disabled [people] in china due to porn"?.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415055</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245591780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes we have the rule of law.<br>We have due process, yet we know of people held by our government for years without trial.<br>We have the Geneva conventions, yet we know people have been recently tortured by our government.<br>We have the right against unlawful search, yet we know the government has been listening on our domestic correspondence without permission from the courts.<br>We have the right against unlawful seizure, yet the government regularly seizes items (such as cash and property) it considers unlawful and without process.<br>Congress alone can declare war, yet we have armies engaged without war being declared.</p><p>What's one more stupid internet filter in light of all this?<br>If you don't act to maintain your rule of law, you will lose it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes we have the rule of law.We have due process , yet we know of people held by our government for years without trial.We have the Geneva conventions , yet we know people have been recently tortured by our government.We have the right against unlawful search , yet we know the government has been listening on our domestic correspondence without permission from the courts.We have the right against unlawful seizure , yet the government regularly seizes items ( such as cash and property ) it considers unlawful and without process.Congress alone can declare war , yet we have armies engaged without war being declared.What 's one more stupid internet filter in light of all this ? If you do n't act to maintain your rule of law , you will lose it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes we have the rule of law.We have due process, yet we know of people held by our government for years without trial.We have the Geneva conventions, yet we know people have been recently tortured by our government.We have the right against unlawful search, yet we know the government has been listening on our domestic correspondence without permission from the courts.We have the right against unlawful seizure, yet the government regularly seizes items (such as cash and property) it considers unlawful and without process.Congress alone can declare war, yet we have armies engaged without war being declared.What's one more stupid internet filter in light of all this?If you don't act to maintain your rule of law, you will lose it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414739</id>
	<title>simple</title>
	<author>binaryseraph</author>
	<datestamp>1245588900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google should disable the internet in china.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google should disable the internet in china .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google should disable the internet in china.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413589</id>
	<title>Protectionism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245578880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China is just doing this to give its own search engines a competitive edge.  It does this with the film industry by only allowing 10 foreign films to be shown in China per year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China is just doing this to give its own search engines a competitive edge .
It does this with the film industry by only allowing 10 foreign films to be shown in China per year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China is just doing this to give its own search engines a competitive edge.
It does this with the film industry by only allowing 10 foreign films to be shown in China per year.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413637</id>
	<title>New name suggestion?</title>
	<author>427\_ci\_505</author>
	<datestamp>1245579300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google Suggestive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google Suggestive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google Suggestive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28429857</id>
	<title>Re:Green Dam is not mandarory to run</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245668520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; This hole thing in the media about censorshipware sounds like yet another propaganda campagne by the West.</p><p>"The West"?  C'mon.  The thing has horrible security flaws, plagiarizes other software, and was adopted by the government in spite of backlash from common citizens.  And you're trying to blame "The West"?  I'm sorry, but I really don't believe that the noises about it being "non mandatory" are true.  If you use it to "protect children", how do you turn it off when an adult is using the PC?</p><p>Oh, there's no off switch?  Then how does it know when it has to protect children and when it doesn't?  We just went through a huge bout of censorship to keep people from learning about the Tienanmen Square massacres on their anniversary.  Was that "The West's" fault, too?</p><p>China's problems are caused by China.  Quit blaming everyone else for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; This hole thing in the media about censorshipware sounds like yet another propaganda campagne by the West .
" The West " ?
C'mon. The thing has horrible security flaws , plagiarizes other software , and was adopted by the government in spite of backlash from common citizens .
And you 're trying to blame " The West " ?
I 'm sorry , but I really do n't believe that the noises about it being " non mandatory " are true .
If you use it to " protect children " , how do you turn it off when an adult is using the PC ? Oh , there 's no off switch ?
Then how does it know when it has to protect children and when it does n't ?
We just went through a huge bout of censorship to keep people from learning about the Tienanmen Square massacres on their anniversary .
Was that " The West 's " fault , too ? China 's problems are caused by China .
Quit blaming everyone else for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; This hole thing in the media about censorshipware sounds like yet another propaganda campagne by the West.
"The West"?
C'mon.  The thing has horrible security flaws, plagiarizes other software, and was adopted by the government in spite of backlash from common citizens.
And you're trying to blame "The West"?
I'm sorry, but I really don't believe that the noises about it being "non mandatory" are true.
If you use it to "protect children", how do you turn it off when an adult is using the PC?Oh, there's no off switch?
Then how does it know when it has to protect children and when it doesn't?
We just went through a huge bout of censorship to keep people from learning about the Tienanmen Square massacres on their anniversary.
Was that "The West's" fault, too?China's problems are caused by China.
Quit blaming everyone else for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417437</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417295</id>
	<title>Re:Baidu benefits from being Chinese</title>
	<author>Uber Banker</author>
	<datestamp>1245610080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>And sadly it's nothing special.  When typing a URL that doesn't resolve on a mainland China ISP a Baidu-sponsored search page (full of ads, no simple search box) appears.

It was only in 2006 when google.com itself was redirected to baidu.com by some ISPs some of the time.

Some of the country (in major cities, forget the countryside) has the facade of development, but with basic corruption endemic at the bottom and top levels, it has a whole lot further to go.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And sadly it 's nothing special .
When typing a URL that does n't resolve on a mainland China ISP a Baidu-sponsored search page ( full of ads , no simple search box ) appears .
It was only in 2006 when google.com itself was redirected to baidu.com by some ISPs some of the time .
Some of the country ( in major cities , forget the countryside ) has the facade of development , but with basic corruption endemic at the bottom and top levels , it has a whole lot further to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And sadly it's nothing special.
When typing a URL that doesn't resolve on a mainland China ISP a Baidu-sponsored search page (full of ads, no simple search box) appears.
It was only in 2006 when google.com itself was redirected to baidu.com by some ISPs some of the time.
Some of the country (in major cities, forget the countryside) has the facade of development, but with basic corruption endemic at the bottom and top levels, it has a whole lot further to go.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417</id>
	<title>Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245577680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's face it, the Chinese government censors and blocks whatever they feel like, the Chinese people know and accept it.<br>So why does slashdot post these stories anytime XXX blocks/censors anything in China?  Let's face it, it's not news anymore.  It doesn't affect my rights online or anybody else's outside China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's face it , the Chinese government censors and blocks whatever they feel like , the Chinese people know and accept it.So why does slashdot post these stories anytime XXX blocks/censors anything in China ?
Let 's face it , it 's not news anymore .
It does n't affect my rights online or anybody else 's outside China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's face it, the Chinese government censors and blocks whatever they feel like, the Chinese people know and accept it.So why does slashdot post these stories anytime XXX blocks/censors anything in China?
Let's face it, it's not news anymore.
It doesn't affect my rights online or anybody else's outside China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28416781</id>
	<title>Re:Baidu benefits from being Chinese</title>
	<author>rts008</author>
	<datestamp>1245605700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Perhaps I am completely wrong but it seems like China is giving preferential treatment to the Chinese owned competitor to Google, Baidu, by not taking it to task for the same offending practices, even though it holds a lead over Google in searches in China. I certainly would not put it above China to be using government intervention to give favor to Chinese company.</p></div></blockquote><p>This is likely a part of the issue.<br>China has a history/tradition of being isolationist and xenophobic of other cultures and societies, with an attitude of superiority.<br>China has a long and much copied culture that has a tendency to back those attitudes, but is now having to experience 'growing pains' trying to establish itself as a 'player' in the modern global setting that most of the rest of the world is participating in.</p><p>I notice this same issue with many Middle Eastern nations trying to come into the modern global world setting.(between the Middle East and China...two of the oldest cultures around)<br>Maybe all of that ancient culture induces a mindset that is detrimental to easily adapting to the modern world?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps I am completely wrong but it seems like China is giving preferential treatment to the Chinese owned competitor to Google , Baidu , by not taking it to task for the same offending practices , even though it holds a lead over Google in searches in China .
I certainly would not put it above China to be using government intervention to give favor to Chinese company.This is likely a part of the issue.China has a history/tradition of being isolationist and xenophobic of other cultures and societies , with an attitude of superiority.China has a long and much copied culture that has a tendency to back those attitudes , but is now having to experience 'growing pains ' trying to establish itself as a 'player ' in the modern global setting that most of the rest of the world is participating in.I notice this same issue with many Middle Eastern nations trying to come into the modern global world setting .
( between the Middle East and China...two of the oldest cultures around ) Maybe all of that ancient culture induces a mindset that is detrimental to easily adapting to the modern world ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps I am completely wrong but it seems like China is giving preferential treatment to the Chinese owned competitor to Google, Baidu, by not taking it to task for the same offending practices, even though it holds a lead over Google in searches in China.
I certainly would not put it above China to be using government intervention to give favor to Chinese company.This is likely a part of the issue.China has a history/tradition of being isolationist and xenophobic of other cultures and societies, with an attitude of superiority.China has a long and much copied culture that has a tendency to back those attitudes, but is now having to experience 'growing pains' trying to establish itself as a 'player' in the modern global setting that most of the rest of the world is participating in.I notice this same issue with many Middle Eastern nations trying to come into the modern global world setting.
(between the Middle East and China...two of the oldest cultures around)Maybe all of that ancient culture induces a mindset that is detrimental to easily adapting to the modern world?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245579420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No you are wrong.  They can't do the same thing over here.  We have something called the rule of law here.  We have a 1st Amendment.  The stuff that happens in China can't even be remotely applied to the United States.  Please stop this slippery slope nonsense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No you are wrong .
They ca n't do the same thing over here .
We have something called the rule of law here .
We have a 1st Amendment .
The stuff that happens in China ca n't even be remotely applied to the United States .
Please stop this slippery slope nonsense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No you are wrong.
They can't do the same thing over here.
We have something called the rule of law here.
We have a 1st Amendment.
The stuff that happens in China can't even be remotely applied to the United States.
Please stop this slippery slope nonsense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28416893</id>
	<title>What I don't understand</title>
	<author>nightfire-unique</author>
	<datestamp>1245606540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I don't understand is why anyone would want to ban sex related sites in the absence of religion.</p><p>You would think that of all nations, <i>China</i> would be encouraging as much private sexual release as possible given their male:female ratio and large population.  Honestly; I am baffled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I do n't understand is why anyone would want to ban sex related sites in the absence of religion.You would think that of all nations , China would be encouraging as much private sexual release as possible given their male : female ratio and large population .
Honestly ; I am baffled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I don't understand is why anyone would want to ban sex related sites in the absence of religion.You would think that of all nations, China would be encouraging as much private sexual release as possible given their male:female ratio and large population.
Honestly; I am baffled.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413725</id>
	<title>Wha?</title>
	<author>nih</author>
	<datestamp>1245579960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I for one welcome our new Chinese porn addicted disabled overlords!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one welcome our new Chinese porn addicted disabled overlords !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one welcome our new Chinese porn addicted disabled overlords!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413893</id>
	<title>Anonymous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245581400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>go to</p><p>www.adulthd-video.com/hello-world/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>go towww.adulthd-video.com/hello-world/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>go towww.adulthd-video.com/hello-world/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413563</id>
	<title>Caucasian porn?</title>
	<author>JustShootMe</author>
	<datestamp>1245578700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, in China, do they look for caucasian porn?</p><p>The cutest Oklahoma schoolgirls!  Now with all their teeth!*</p><p>*schoolgirls is 18 in America, so tough, you caucasian fetishists you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , in China , do they look for caucasian porn ? The cutest Oklahoma schoolgirls !
Now with all their teeth !
* * schoolgirls is 18 in America , so tough , you caucasian fetishists you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, in China, do they look for caucasian porn?The cutest Oklahoma schoolgirls!
Now with all their teeth!
**schoolgirls is 18 in America, so tough, you caucasian fetishists you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413461</id>
	<title>Baidu benefits from being Chinese</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245577920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps I am completely wrong but it seems like China is giving preferential treatment to the Chinese owned competitor to Google, Baidu, by not taking it to task for the same offending practices, even though it holds a lead over Google in searches in China. I certainly would not put it above China to be using government intervention to give favor to Chinese company. But I must admit I really don't like China, The chinese are great people but their government is scary.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps I am completely wrong but it seems like China is giving preferential treatment to the Chinese owned competitor to Google , Baidu , by not taking it to task for the same offending practices , even though it holds a lead over Google in searches in China .
I certainly would not put it above China to be using government intervention to give favor to Chinese company .
But I must admit I really do n't like China , The chinese are great people but their government is scary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps I am completely wrong but it seems like China is giving preferential treatment to the Chinese owned competitor to Google, Baidu, by not taking it to task for the same offending practices, even though it holds a lead over Google in searches in China.
I certainly would not put it above China to be using government intervention to give favor to Chinese company.
But I must admit I really don't like China, The chinese are great people but their government is scary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415439</id>
	<title>Re:Filtering is the Hijab of the Internet</title>
	<author>cmseagle</author>
	<datestamp>1245595800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, filtering and the hijab are not the same at all.  The hijab is a something which many women freely choose to wear because of their religious and cultural beliefs.  The fact that some women are forced to wear the hijab does not make it analogous to filtering.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , filtering and the hijab are not the same at all .
The hijab is a something which many women freely choose to wear because of their religious and cultural beliefs .
The fact that some women are forced to wear the hijab does not make it analogous to filtering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, filtering and the hijab are not the same at all.
The hijab is a something which many women freely choose to wear because of their religious and cultural beliefs.
The fact that some women are forced to wear the hijab does not make it analogous to filtering.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413625</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28421811</id>
	<title>baidu..Chinese Porn</title>
	<author>Obd1Kenobe</author>
	<datestamp>1245684420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Has anyone considered that they have not pressured the baidu search engine because it points to CHINESE porn sites and doesn't display sex acts by these barbarian round eyed animals like Google does??</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone considered that they have not pressured the baidu search engine because it points to CHINESE porn sites and does n't display sex acts by these barbarian round eyed animals like Google does ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone considered that they have not pressured the baidu search engine because it points to CHINESE porn sites and doesn't display sex acts by these barbarian round eyed animals like Google does?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413805</id>
	<title>Re:Protectionism</title>
	<author>Celeste R</author>
	<datestamp>1245580740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Limiting the competition doesn't give a competitive edge, it creates a monopoly mentality.</p><p>Baidu won't get better as quickly without that competition; and lowering the bar doesn't make competition a driving force.</p><p>This is akin to saying "lightbulbs only have to be this good; and because this brand is local, we're removing the competition."</p><p>If they want to give Baidu a competitive edge, I'd suggest limitations to the thoroughput that Google can attribute to Google Suggest.  This would be like putting import restrictions on foreign bulbs, which doesn't ban them altogether, and still allows local industries to catch up technology-wise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Limiting the competition does n't give a competitive edge , it creates a monopoly mentality.Baidu wo n't get better as quickly without that competition ; and lowering the bar does n't make competition a driving force.This is akin to saying " lightbulbs only have to be this good ; and because this brand is local , we 're removing the competition .
" If they want to give Baidu a competitive edge , I 'd suggest limitations to the thoroughput that Google can attribute to Google Suggest .
This would be like putting import restrictions on foreign bulbs , which does n't ban them altogether , and still allows local industries to catch up technology-wise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Limiting the competition doesn't give a competitive edge, it creates a monopoly mentality.Baidu won't get better as quickly without that competition; and lowering the bar doesn't make competition a driving force.This is akin to saying "lightbulbs only have to be this good; and because this brand is local, we're removing the competition.
"If they want to give Baidu a competitive edge, I'd suggest limitations to the thoroughput that Google can attribute to Google Suggest.
This would be like putting import restrictions on foreign bulbs, which doesn't ban them altogether, and still allows local industries to catch up technology-wise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413753</id>
	<title>Re:Protectionism</title>
	<author>hackingbear</author>
	<datestamp>1245580200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's generally correct. And we can't do anything about it because China is our largest bank that gives us the biggest credit lines. They are now too big to fail as well. Before they became our Big Bank; they were our biggest allied fighting the Soviets in the 70s and 80s, and so the US had to give in to their demand as well. That's called deals.</p><p>For companies like Google, the easiest solution is just to buy up some right officials (via hidden means,) then everything will be fine. China has their weak spot too. In China, you can accomplish anything big by bribing some officials; illegal but doable. In the US, you can accomplish anything big by contributing to the campaign of some politicians, legal and doable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's generally correct .
And we ca n't do anything about it because China is our largest bank that gives us the biggest credit lines .
They are now too big to fail as well .
Before they became our Big Bank ; they were our biggest allied fighting the Soviets in the 70s and 80s , and so the US had to give in to their demand as well .
That 's called deals.For companies like Google , the easiest solution is just to buy up some right officials ( via hidden means , ) then everything will be fine .
China has their weak spot too .
In China , you can accomplish anything big by bribing some officials ; illegal but doable .
In the US , you can accomplish anything big by contributing to the campaign of some politicians , legal and doable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's generally correct.
And we can't do anything about it because China is our largest bank that gives us the biggest credit lines.
They are now too big to fail as well.
Before they became our Big Bank; they were our biggest allied fighting the Soviets in the 70s and 80s, and so the US had to give in to their demand as well.
That's called deals.For companies like Google, the easiest solution is just to buy up some right officials (via hidden means,) then everything will be fine.
China has their weak spot too.
In China, you can accomplish anything big by bribing some officials; illegal but doable.
In the US, you can accomplish anything big by contributing to the campaign of some politicians, legal and doable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414307</id>
	<title>Unusual circuitry</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1245585000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Every now and then I see posts like yours, and can't help thinking "another lunatic with wierd-ass thought process like mine".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every now and then I see posts like yours , and ca n't help thinking " another lunatic with wierd-ass thought process like mine " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every now and then I see posts like yours, and can't help thinking "another lunatic with wierd-ass thought process like mine".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28428749</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245664620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>No you are wrong. They can't do the same thing over here. We have something called the rule of law here. We have a 1st Amendment. The stuff that happens in China can't even be remotely applied to the United States. Please stop this slippery slope nonsense.</i> </p><p>The slippery slope is well greased. Look at the way we used to talk about the great protections of privacy and free speech in Europe and elsewhere. Now the US, Canada, England and Australia are leapfrogging each other in a race to the bottom to destroy anonymity and forcing ISPs to retain logs (at their own expense) for unconscionable lengths of time, to be perused by LE without benefit of a warrant. The slimy justification? It's just like a pen trap, disclosing only addresses, not content.</p><p>Despite Obama reverting the FOIA policies to the Janet Reno position -- absent a national security issue, the default position is to disclose -- he still went along just last week with some bullshit compromise that says remaining unpublished images of torture at Abu Ghraib must forever remain unpublished. What kind of doublespeak bullshit is that?</p><p>If you intentionally hide the truth from me, I'll take the only alternate road - I'll make up my own goddamned truth. I am here asserting my own personal belief that the unpublished images include pictures of Bush personally horse-whipping naked, freezing Iraqi men and women on a secret visit to Abu Ghraib.</p><p>Impossible, you say? Fine, wanna refute me? Just make public all the images of what was done in my name (as a taxpayer) and and let me see the result of pictures taken with my taxpayer money. I'll impartially evaluate the evidence and get back to you. </p><p>Another example -- during the campaign, Obama excoriated the Cheney for the "informal" meetings held with top energy executives when the cabal met to write the national energy policy on the grounds that the meetings were just "informal", not "official".</p><p>So what do we have now? Obama is known to have had recent meetings with top coal industry executives in the White House. (Obama made it clear in the campaign that he was in favor of "clean coal". So am I -- I have signed affidavits from Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy that it's actually possible.) Guess what? White House visitor logs are now deemed to be executive branch material and not subject to FOIA requests. The grounds? Disclosure might <i>possibly</i> reveal classified or sensitive information about confidential goings on. Jesus Christ -- it's nothing but a list of names,not including whomever the visitor visited. Again, if they walk into MY White House, I assert a right to know.</p><p>Despite all the above, I still believe that the nation is in better hands than if Scamp and Tramp had been elected.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No you are wrong .
They ca n't do the same thing over here .
We have something called the rule of law here .
We have a 1st Amendment .
The stuff that happens in China ca n't even be remotely applied to the United States .
Please stop this slippery slope nonsense .
The slippery slope is well greased .
Look at the way we used to talk about the great protections of privacy and free speech in Europe and elsewhere .
Now the US , Canada , England and Australia are leapfrogging each other in a race to the bottom to destroy anonymity and forcing ISPs to retain logs ( at their own expense ) for unconscionable lengths of time , to be perused by LE without benefit of a warrant .
The slimy justification ?
It 's just like a pen trap , disclosing only addresses , not content.Despite Obama reverting the FOIA policies to the Janet Reno position -- absent a national security issue , the default position is to disclose -- he still went along just last week with some bullshit compromise that says remaining unpublished images of torture at Abu Ghraib must forever remain unpublished .
What kind of doublespeak bullshit is that ? If you intentionally hide the truth from me , I 'll take the only alternate road - I 'll make up my own goddamned truth .
I am here asserting my own personal belief that the unpublished images include pictures of Bush personally horse-whipping naked , freezing Iraqi men and women on a secret visit to Abu Ghraib.Impossible , you say ?
Fine , wan na refute me ?
Just make public all the images of what was done in my name ( as a taxpayer ) and and let me see the result of pictures taken with my taxpayer money .
I 'll impartially evaluate the evidence and get back to you .
Another example -- during the campaign , Obama excoriated the Cheney for the " informal " meetings held with top energy executives when the cabal met to write the national energy policy on the grounds that the meetings were just " informal " , not " official " .So what do we have now ?
Obama is known to have had recent meetings with top coal industry executives in the White House .
( Obama made it clear in the campaign that he was in favor of " clean coal " .
So am I -- I have signed affidavits from Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy that it 's actually possible .
) Guess what ?
White House visitor logs are now deemed to be executive branch material and not subject to FOIA requests .
The grounds ?
Disclosure might possibly reveal classified or sensitive information about confidential goings on .
Jesus Christ -- it 's nothing but a list of names,not including whomever the visitor visited .
Again , if they walk into MY White House , I assert a right to know.Despite all the above , I still believe that the nation is in better hands than if Scamp and Tramp had been elected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No you are wrong.
They can't do the same thing over here.
We have something called the rule of law here.
We have a 1st Amendment.
The stuff that happens in China can't even be remotely applied to the United States.
Please stop this slippery slope nonsense.
The slippery slope is well greased.
Look at the way we used to talk about the great protections of privacy and free speech in Europe and elsewhere.
Now the US, Canada, England and Australia are leapfrogging each other in a race to the bottom to destroy anonymity and forcing ISPs to retain logs (at their own expense) for unconscionable lengths of time, to be perused by LE without benefit of a warrant.
The slimy justification?
It's just like a pen trap, disclosing only addresses, not content.Despite Obama reverting the FOIA policies to the Janet Reno position -- absent a national security issue, the default position is to disclose -- he still went along just last week with some bullshit compromise that says remaining unpublished images of torture at Abu Ghraib must forever remain unpublished.
What kind of doublespeak bullshit is that?If you intentionally hide the truth from me, I'll take the only alternate road - I'll make up my own goddamned truth.
I am here asserting my own personal belief that the unpublished images include pictures of Bush personally horse-whipping naked, freezing Iraqi men and women on a secret visit to Abu Ghraib.Impossible, you say?
Fine, wanna refute me?
Just make public all the images of what was done in my name (as a taxpayer) and and let me see the result of pictures taken with my taxpayer money.
I'll impartially evaluate the evidence and get back to you.
Another example -- during the campaign, Obama excoriated the Cheney for the "informal" meetings held with top energy executives when the cabal met to write the national energy policy on the grounds that the meetings were just "informal", not "official".So what do we have now?
Obama is known to have had recent meetings with top coal industry executives in the White House.
(Obama made it clear in the campaign that he was in favor of "clean coal".
So am I -- I have signed affidavits from Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy that it's actually possible.
) Guess what?
White House visitor logs are now deemed to be executive branch material and not subject to FOIA requests.
The grounds?
Disclosure might possibly reveal classified or sensitive information about confidential goings on.
Jesus Christ -- it's nothing but a list of names,not including whomever the visitor visited.
Again, if they walk into MY White House, I assert a right to know.Despite all the above, I still believe that the nation is in better hands than if Scamp and Tramp had been elected.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413693</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245579720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To hell with China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To hell with China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To hell with China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415343</id>
	<title>Re:Filtering is the Hijab of the Internet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245594720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If that's true, then I'm Ben freakfuckin Franklin!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If that 's true , then I 'm Ben freakfuckin Franklin !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If that's true, then I'm Ben freakfuckin Franklin!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413625</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413503</id>
	<title>"ship with" or "must use"?</title>
	<author>speedtux</author>
	<datestamp>1245578220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All the reports about Green Dam I have read have said that computers only need to "ship with" it.   In fact, some reports said that it was OK for manufacturers to just stick a CD in the package. That doesn't mean people are required to use it, merely that they have the software available if they want to.</p><p>So, what's the deal?  Are PCs merely required to "ship with" the software, or are they required to install it?  Are are people required to use it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All the reports about Green Dam I have read have said that computers only need to " ship with " it .
In fact , some reports said that it was OK for manufacturers to just stick a CD in the package .
That does n't mean people are required to use it , merely that they have the software available if they want to.So , what 's the deal ?
Are PCs merely required to " ship with " the software , or are they required to install it ?
Are are people required to use it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the reports about Green Dam I have read have said that computers only need to "ship with" it.
In fact, some reports said that it was OK for manufacturers to just stick a CD in the package.
That doesn't mean people are required to use it, merely that they have the software available if they want to.So, what's the deal?
Are PCs merely required to "ship with" the software, or are they required to install it?
Are are people required to use it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28419639</id>
	<title>Re:My favorite Google Suggest search terms</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1245673800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like that when you typi in "why is" the first suggestion is "why is the rum gone". Apparently this is a very pressing issue in the English-speaking world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like that when you typi in " why is " the first suggestion is " why is the rum gone " .
Apparently this is a very pressing issue in the English-speaking world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like that when you typi in "why is" the first suggestion is "why is the rum gone".
Apparently this is a very pressing issue in the English-speaking world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415415</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414369</id>
	<title>Damn!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245585480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFS : all new computers ship with the 'Green Damn' Internet censoring program.

Is that a typo or the reaction of Chinese men, when they discover, that they can't surf porn anymore?</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFS : all new computers ship with the 'Green Damn ' Internet censoring program .
Is that a typo or the reaction of Chinese men , when they discover , that they ca n't surf porn anymore ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFS : all new computers ship with the 'Green Damn' Internet censoring program.
Is that a typo or the reaction of Chinese men, when they discover, that they can't surf porn anymore?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417437</id>
	<title>Green Dam is not mandarory to run</title>
	<author>trendzetter</author>
	<datestamp>1245611520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The software is required to be delivered with by manufacturers on harddisc or one CD. It was never intended to be required to run as a user [wikipedia.org]. The scope of the software is mainly parental control. This hole thing in the media about censorshipware sounds like yet another propaganda campagne by the West.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The software is required to be delivered with by manufacturers on harddisc or one CD .
It was never intended to be required to run as a user [ wikipedia.org ] .
The scope of the software is mainly parental control .
This hole thing in the media about censorshipware sounds like yet another propaganda campagne by the West .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The software is required to be delivered with by manufacturers on harddisc or one CD.
It was never intended to be required to run as a user [wikipedia.org].
The scope of the software is mainly parental control.
This hole thing in the media about censorshipware sounds like yet another propaganda campagne by the West.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414115</id>
	<title>Re:Baidu benefits from being Chinese</title>
	<author>Frosty Piss</author>
	<datestamp>1245583200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Perhaps I am completely wrong but it seems like China is giving preferential treatment to the Chinese owned competitor to Google, Baidu, by not taking it to task for the same offending practices</p></div><p>Do you know for a fact the Baidu search has the same characteristics that Google is being brought to task for? Maybe not...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps I am completely wrong but it seems like China is giving preferential treatment to the Chinese owned competitor to Google , Baidu , by not taking it to task for the same offending practicesDo you know for a fact the Baidu search has the same characteristics that Google is being brought to task for ?
Maybe not.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps I am completely wrong but it seems like China is giving preferential treatment to the Chinese owned competitor to Google, Baidu, by not taking it to task for the same offending practicesDo you know for a fact the Baidu search has the same characteristics that Google is being brought to task for?
Maybe not...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413891</id>
	<title>Re:Filtering is the Hijab of the Internet</title>
	<author>Celeste R</author>
	<datestamp>1245581400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And from their point of view, pornography is the symptom of undisciplined actions, as well as overextending the activities of people in ways that are ultimately futile.</p><p>Both oversimplified points of view are the result of popularized culture.</p><p>The day when people in general get embrace moderation (the old definition; the kind that keeps things from becoming a controlling factor) and education (not institutionalized, but the uninhibited growth of the mind) will be the day when you see civilization truly start to flourish.</p><p>Our own propagandized signposts of civilization or authoritarianism often serve to cover up the ugly truth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And from their point of view , pornography is the symptom of undisciplined actions , as well as overextending the activities of people in ways that are ultimately futile.Both oversimplified points of view are the result of popularized culture.The day when people in general get embrace moderation ( the old definition ; the kind that keeps things from becoming a controlling factor ) and education ( not institutionalized , but the uninhibited growth of the mind ) will be the day when you see civilization truly start to flourish.Our own propagandized signposts of civilization or authoritarianism often serve to cover up the ugly truth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And from their point of view, pornography is the symptom of undisciplined actions, as well as overextending the activities of people in ways that are ultimately futile.Both oversimplified points of view are the result of popularized culture.The day when people in general get embrace moderation (the old definition; the kind that keeps things from becoming a controlling factor) and education (not institutionalized, but the uninhibited growth of the mind) will be the day when you see civilization truly start to flourish.Our own propagandized signposts of civilization or authoritarianism often serve to cover up the ugly truth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413625</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415025</id>
	<title>it's google.cn, not google.com</title>
	<author>suzerain</author>
	<datestamp>1245591420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Just a point of clarification that this applies to <a href="http://www.google.cn/" title="google.cn">google.cn</a> [google.cn], and obviously does not apply to <a href="http://www.google.com/" title="google.com">google.com</a> [google.com], which those of us in Beijing can also see.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a point of clarification that this applies to google.cn [ google.cn ] , and obviously does not apply to google.com [ google.com ] , which those of us in Beijing can also see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Just a point of clarification that this applies to google.cn [google.cn], and obviously does not apply to google.com [google.com], which those of us in Beijing can also see.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28416503</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245603780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The world is bigger than your backyard. Come out of your cave already.</p><p>Send a mail to Taco to give you some stats on non-US page views of this site.</p><p>and FYI, I am in China atm, you insensitive clod!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The world is bigger than your backyard .
Come out of your cave already.Send a mail to Taco to give you some stats on non-US page views of this site.and FYI , I am in China atm , you insensitive clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The world is bigger than your backyard.
Come out of your cave already.Send a mail to Taco to give you some stats on non-US page views of this site.and FYI, I am in China atm, you insensitive clod!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415649</id>
	<title>By Neruos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245597720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google: Hi, I'm Google, can I haz intertubes find n China?<br>China: Yesh, U can haz interwebs hunt here, but you must disable all non-approved China-no-fun-bag itemz, ktnx?<br>Google: Hmmmmmmmmmmm, block da information packets?<br>China: Yesh, for moneys k.<br>Google: Hmmmmm human rights to information or moneys.... Hmmmm.... OK DEELS!<br>China: Yay!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google : Hi , I 'm Google , can I haz intertubes find n China ? China : Yesh , U can haz interwebs hunt here , but you must disable all non-approved China-no-fun-bag itemz , ktnx ? Google : Hmmmmmmmmmmm , block da information packets ? China : Yesh , for moneys k.Google : Hmmmmm human rights to information or moneys.... Hmmmm.... OK DEELS ! China : Yay !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google: Hi, I'm Google, can I haz intertubes find n China?China: Yesh, U can haz interwebs hunt here, but you must disable all non-approved China-no-fun-bag itemz, ktnx?Google: Hmmmmmmmmmmm, block da information packets?China: Yesh, for moneys k.Google: Hmmmmm human rights to information or moneys.... Hmmmm.... OK DEELS!China: Yay!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414335</id>
	<title>But what about the children?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245585240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Won't someone please think about the children?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wo n't someone please think about the children ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Won't someone please think about the children?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413625</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28422319</id>
	<title>To do</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245686100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>v 2girlz1cup<br>v brazilian fart porn.<br>? Chinese google suggest porn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>v 2girlz1cupv brazilian fart porn. ?
Chinese google suggest porn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>v 2girlz1cupv brazilian fart porn.?
Chinese google suggest porn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413915</id>
	<title>The weird thing about Chinese porn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245581580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An hour later and you're hungry for masturbation again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An hour later and you 're hungry for masturbation again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An hour later and you're hungry for masturbation again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417773</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245614280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it is their selective harassing of search engines.<br>Who cares if chinese are stripped of porn?<br>The problem is that Google is stripped of features while a competing engine isn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it is their selective harassing of search engines.Who cares if chinese are stripped of porn ? The problem is that Google is stripped of features while a competing engine is n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it is their selective harassing of search engines.Who cares if chinese are stripped of porn?The problem is that Google is stripped of features while a competing engine isn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414107</id>
	<title>Re:Why Is Chinese Censorship News On Slashdot??!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245583140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you Americans already started to pretend the patriot act doesn't exist? It's not about the Internet per say, but sure as hell went against half the constitution!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you Americans already started to pretend the patriot act does n't exist ?
It 's not about the Internet per say , but sure as hell went against half the constitution !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you Americans already started to pretend the patriot act doesn't exist?
It's not about the Internet per say, but sure as hell went against half the constitution!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414107
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415483
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413589
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413589
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413563
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417181
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415055
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28429857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417437
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28420755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28419639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415415
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28428749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413563
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28416601
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28418181
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413481
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415343
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413503
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413461
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415439
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415293
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28416503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413461
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413589
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28416781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413461
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_2023210_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413589
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413503
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413841
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415343
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414335
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415439
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413891
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413665
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417437
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28429857
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414369
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413461
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28416781
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417295
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414115
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413557
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413637
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413481
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28418181
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413417
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28416503
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417773
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413555
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28420755
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413659
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28416601
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415293
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415055
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28417181
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414107
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28428749
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415415
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28419639
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413589
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415483
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413805
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414897
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28413563
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414307
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28415209
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_2023210.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_2023210.28414213
</commentlist>
</conversation>
