<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_24_1727231</id>
	<title>Sensing Technology As Open Source's New Frontier</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1245867000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.destinyland.org/" rel="nofollow">destinyland</a> writes <i>"Christine Peterson coined the term 'open source.'  Now <a href="http://www.hplusmagazine.com/articles/politics/we-people-are-watchers">she's proposing the same collaborative sharing approach to sensing technology</a> 'to improve both security and the environment, while preserving &mdash; even strengthening &mdash; privacy, freedom, and civil liberties...'  The Open Source Sensing initiative <a href="http://www.opensourcesensing.org/">welcomes</a> individuals and organizations, and warns that 'We have a short window of opportunity for guiding this technology to protect both our security *and* our privacy.' Peterson says that in the long term, 'open source defensive technologies will likely be the only ones capable of keeping up with rapidly-advancing offensive technologies, just as open source software is faster at addressing computer viruses today.'  And the EFF's Brad Templeton warns that 'Cheap, ubiquitous sensing has the potential to turn the worlds of privacy and civil rights upside-down... It's not enough for governments to watch people; people have to watch governments.' His solution? 'Learning from the bottom-up approaches of the open source community.'</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>destinyland writes " Christine Peterson coined the term 'open source .
' Now she 's proposing the same collaborative sharing approach to sensing technology 'to improve both security and the environment , while preserving    even strengthening    privacy , freedom , and civil liberties... ' The Open Source Sensing initiative welcomes individuals and organizations , and warns that 'We have a short window of opportunity for guiding this technology to protect both our security * and * our privacy .
' Peterson says that in the long term , 'open source defensive technologies will likely be the only ones capable of keeping up with rapidly-advancing offensive technologies , just as open source software is faster at addressing computer viruses today .
' And the EFF 's Brad Templeton warns that 'Cheap , ubiquitous sensing has the potential to turn the worlds of privacy and civil rights upside-down... It 's not enough for governments to watch people ; people have to watch governments .
' His solution ?
'Learning from the bottom-up approaches of the open source community .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>destinyland writes "Christine Peterson coined the term 'open source.
'  Now she's proposing the same collaborative sharing approach to sensing technology 'to improve both security and the environment, while preserving — even strengthening — privacy, freedom, and civil liberties...'  The Open Source Sensing initiative welcomes individuals and organizations, and warns that 'We have a short window of opportunity for guiding this technology to protect both our security *and* our privacy.
' Peterson says that in the long term, 'open source defensive technologies will likely be the only ones capable of keeping up with rapidly-advancing offensive technologies, just as open source software is faster at addressing computer viruses today.
'  And the EFF's Brad Templeton warns that 'Cheap, ubiquitous sensing has the potential to turn the worlds of privacy and civil rights upside-down... It's not enough for governments to watch people; people have to watch governments.
' His solution?
'Learning from the bottom-up approaches of the open source community.
'</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456773</id>
	<title>An eloquent argument for a supremely bad idea</title>
	<author>bzzfzz</author>
	<datestamp>1245874020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TFA doesn't consider the problems of compulsion and access.</p><p>The approach of "open source sensing" may have some validity in public  places, but for the most part the interesting things that governments and other powerful entities do are either done in privacy or are already covered by news media of various kinds.  There's no way to get access that would allow a discussion between police and prosecuting attorneys over the real reasons for a bust, there's no way to get access to the side discussions and dealmaking that a protected by deliberative privilege and not covered by open meeting laws.  </p><p>And private people can't compel searches the way the government can.  The TSA and customs get people to run their possessions through a scanner and remove outer articles of clothing, while the public has no equivalent ability to compel compliance upon the government or other powerful entities.</p><p>And besides, even if the playing field itself were level, I don't believe that a comprehensive ability to see what the government does would further individual rights.  The loss of privacy due to constant surveillance is very real and cannot be overcome or compensated for by observing the actions of the government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA does n't consider the problems of compulsion and access.The approach of " open source sensing " may have some validity in public places , but for the most part the interesting things that governments and other powerful entities do are either done in privacy or are already covered by news media of various kinds .
There 's no way to get access that would allow a discussion between police and prosecuting attorneys over the real reasons for a bust , there 's no way to get access to the side discussions and dealmaking that a protected by deliberative privilege and not covered by open meeting laws .
And private people ca n't compel searches the way the government can .
The TSA and customs get people to run their possessions through a scanner and remove outer articles of clothing , while the public has no equivalent ability to compel compliance upon the government or other powerful entities.And besides , even if the playing field itself were level , I do n't believe that a comprehensive ability to see what the government does would further individual rights .
The loss of privacy due to constant surveillance is very real and can not be overcome or compensated for by observing the actions of the government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA doesn't consider the problems of compulsion and access.The approach of "open source sensing" may have some validity in public  places, but for the most part the interesting things that governments and other powerful entities do are either done in privacy or are already covered by news media of various kinds.
There's no way to get access that would allow a discussion between police and prosecuting attorneys over the real reasons for a bust, there's no way to get access to the side discussions and dealmaking that a protected by deliberative privilege and not covered by open meeting laws.
And private people can't compel searches the way the government can.
The TSA and customs get people to run their possessions through a scanner and remove outer articles of clothing, while the public has no equivalent ability to compel compliance upon the government or other powerful entities.And besides, even if the playing field itself were level, I don't believe that a comprehensive ability to see what the government does would further individual rights.
The loss of privacy due to constant surveillance is very real and cannot be overcome or compensated for by observing the actions of the government.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456011</id>
	<title>Nuclear WMD Sensing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245870840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The proposal lists detection of nuclear WMDs via neutrons and gamma rays<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the proposal itself also correctly notes that <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/28/1517254" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">places like NYC are trying to ban Geiger counters</a> [slashdot.org] and probably wouldn't be too keen on this sort of data being opened up to the masses.  So you find out your neighborhood has an irregular--perhaps even mildly dangerous--amount of radioactive activity.  Watch the lawsuits roll in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br> <br>

The proposal itself stays away from video and on their site they talk about who would have release rights to this video, I'm not sure why the EFF is commenting on that.  It looks like they want to stay away from somone/group grabbing all the video and putting it up on YouTube to make the street in front of your house a public spectacle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The proposal lists detection of nuclear WMDs via neutrons and gamma rays ... the proposal itself also correctly notes that places like NYC are trying to ban Geiger counters [ slashdot.org ] and probably would n't be too keen on this sort of data being opened up to the masses .
So you find out your neighborhood has an irregular--perhaps even mildly dangerous--amount of radioactive activity .
Watch the lawsuits roll in .. . The proposal itself stays away from video and on their site they talk about who would have release rights to this video , I 'm not sure why the EFF is commenting on that .
It looks like they want to stay away from somone/group grabbing all the video and putting it up on YouTube to make the street in front of your house a public spectacle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The proposal lists detection of nuclear WMDs via neutrons and gamma rays ... the proposal itself also correctly notes that places like NYC are trying to ban Geiger counters [slashdot.org] and probably wouldn't be too keen on this sort of data being opened up to the masses.
So you find out your neighborhood has an irregular--perhaps even mildly dangerous--amount of radioactive activity.
Watch the lawsuits roll in ... 

The proposal itself stays away from video and on their site they talk about who would have release rights to this video, I'm not sure why the EFF is commenting on that.
It looks like they want to stay away from somone/group grabbing all the video and putting it up on YouTube to make the street in front of your house a public spectacle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457089</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>Daffy Duck</author>
	<datestamp>1245875220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's get closer to the mark and make it a felony for a candidate to <i>accept</i> money from anyone who isn't eligible to vote for them.  Fewer felons to keep track of that way.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's get closer to the mark and make it a felony for a candidate to accept money from anyone who is n't eligible to vote for them .
Fewer felons to keep track of that way .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's get closer to the mark and make it a felony for a candidate to accept money from anyone who isn't eligible to vote for them.
Fewer felons to keep track of that way.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457611</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>diablovision</author>
	<datestamp>1245834060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I'll go one step farther:</p><p>Make it a felony for any legislator to pass legislation that impacts anyone who wasn't eligible to vote for them. There's an idea....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I 'll go one step farther : Make it a felony for any legislator to pass legislation that impacts anyone who was n't eligible to vote for them .
There 's an idea... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I'll go one step farther:Make it a felony for any legislator to pass legislation that impacts anyone who wasn't eligible to vote for them.
There's an idea....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197</id>
	<title>I propose...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245871620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I propose that politians should have no privacy. All their records should be open long before the regular citizen should go through that. All emails, all text messages, phone calls, bank accounts, credit card records, loans, etc.
<br> <br>
That way we'll know who to trust. Shouldn't politics be required to be like that anyway?
<br> <br>
How will we know who we're really voting for.
<br> <br>
If everything was public ideally the good people would (finally) finish ahead. And thus so would we.
<br> <br>
Any takers?
<br> <br>
PS: ban lobbies too, while we're at it! Let's give democracy a shot for a change.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I propose that politians should have no privacy .
All their records should be open long before the regular citizen should go through that .
All emails , all text messages , phone calls , bank accounts , credit card records , loans , etc .
That way we 'll know who to trust .
Should n't politics be required to be like that anyway ?
How will we know who we 're really voting for .
If everything was public ideally the good people would ( finally ) finish ahead .
And thus so would we .
Any takers ?
PS : ban lobbies too , while we 're at it !
Let 's give democracy a shot for a change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I propose that politians should have no privacy.
All their records should be open long before the regular citizen should go through that.
All emails, all text messages, phone calls, bank accounts, credit card records, loans, etc.
That way we'll know who to trust.
Shouldn't politics be required to be like that anyway?
How will we know who we're really voting for.
If everything was public ideally the good people would (finally) finish ahead.
And thus so would we.
Any takers?
PS: ban lobbies too, while we're at it!
Let's give democracy a shot for a change.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456823</id>
	<title>Re:I must agree</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1245874200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only the design need be open source.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only the design need be open source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only the design need be open source.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456259</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456375</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1245872400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then you run the risk of completely skewing elections for very silly reasons.</p><p>Perhaps that guy who would have been a kick ass administrator never gets voted for because people just don't like the fact that he downloads horse porn.</p><p>Or the guy who leads a regular, dull, and boring life turns out to be a horrible politician. Oh wait, we just had one of those.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then you run the risk of completely skewing elections for very silly reasons.Perhaps that guy who would have been a kick ass administrator never gets voted for because people just do n't like the fact that he downloads horse porn.Or the guy who leads a regular , dull , and boring life turns out to be a horrible politician .
Oh wait , we just had one of those .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then you run the risk of completely skewing elections for very silly reasons.Perhaps that guy who would have been a kick ass administrator never gets voted for because people just don't like the fact that he downloads horse porn.Or the guy who leads a regular, dull, and boring life turns out to be a horrible politician.
Oh wait, we just had one of those.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456477</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>thedonger</author>
	<datestamp>1245872760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>propose that politians should have no privacy. All their records should be open long before the regular citizen should go through that.</p></div><p>Politicians <em>are</em> regular citizens. Maybe if more people realized that fact it would be easier to not be afraid of them, and we then could really get some change going in this country.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>propose that politians should have no privacy .
All their records should be open long before the regular citizen should go through that.Politicians are regular citizens .
Maybe if more people realized that fact it would be easier to not be afraid of them , and we then could really get some change going in this country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>propose that politians should have no privacy.
All their records should be open long before the regular citizen should go through that.Politicians are regular citizens.
Maybe if more people realized that fact it would be easier to not be afraid of them, and we then could really get some change going in this country.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245874020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>PS: ban lobbies too, while we're at it! Let's give democracy a shot for a change.</i></p><p>I'd go two steps farther.</p><ol> <li>Make it a felony to contribute to any candidate one isn't eligible to vote for. This would pretty much stop all lobbying from corporations, unions, and other organizations. The CEO of a company could still contribute to his own senatorial and congressional candidates, but only the ones he's allowed to vote for. Why should Bill gates have any say on Illinois politicians? Or ADM's exec have any say in Oregon's politics?</li><li>Make it a felony to contribute to more than one candidate for any election. Face it, a grand for the Repub abd another grand for the Dem, and no matter which candidate loses, the briber/contributor wins. Contributing to more than one candidate in any given race is an ill-disguised bribe, and it should be a felony.</li></ol></htmltext>
<tokenext>PS : ban lobbies too , while we 're at it !
Let 's give democracy a shot for a change.I 'd go two steps farther .
Make it a felony to contribute to any candidate one is n't eligible to vote for .
This would pretty much stop all lobbying from corporations , unions , and other organizations .
The CEO of a company could still contribute to his own senatorial and congressional candidates , but only the ones he 's allowed to vote for .
Why should Bill gates have any say on Illinois politicians ?
Or ADM 's exec have any say in Oregon 's politics ? Make it a felony to contribute to more than one candidate for any election .
Face it , a grand for the Repub abd another grand for the Dem , and no matter which candidate loses , the briber/contributor wins .
Contributing to more than one candidate in any given race is an ill-disguised bribe , and it should be a felony .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PS: ban lobbies too, while we're at it!
Let's give democracy a shot for a change.I'd go two steps farther.
Make it a felony to contribute to any candidate one isn't eligible to vote for.
This would pretty much stop all lobbying from corporations, unions, and other organizations.
The CEO of a company could still contribute to his own senatorial and congressional candidates, but only the ones he's allowed to vote for.
Why should Bill gates have any say on Illinois politicians?
Or ADM's exec have any say in Oregon's politics?Make it a felony to contribute to more than one candidate for any election.
Face it, a grand for the Repub abd another grand for the Dem, and no matter which candidate loses, the briber/contributor wins.
Contributing to more than one candidate in any given race is an ill-disguised bribe, and it should be a felony.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28460231</id>
	<title>Sense what?</title>
	<author>htdrifter</author>
	<datestamp>1245844980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read the article and watched the video and it set off my BS sensor.  The video reminded me of the first time I heard the term "symbiosis" used in a merger meeting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read the article and watched the video and it set off my BS sensor .
The video reminded me of the first time I heard the term " symbiosis " used in a merger meeting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read the article and watched the video and it set off my BS sensor.
The video reminded me of the first time I heard the term "symbiosis" used in a merger meeting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28459801</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>javelinco</author>
	<datestamp>1245842700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Okay, here's another step:

1. Make it illegal for candidates or sitting politicians to accept money from anyone, for any reason.
2. Make it illegal for a candidate to use their own money to promote an issue, or for their re-election.
3. Set aside a small amount of money for very basic advertising, and don't give it to the candidates - give them air time, etc. - just like with the homeless guy - buy him lunch, don't give him a $20.
4. Make sure that the qualifications for running for an office (to register and be considered a candidate) are standardized within a given state, or, for federal positions, federally - with citizens being able to directly vote on those provisions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , here 's another step : 1 .
Make it illegal for candidates or sitting politicians to accept money from anyone , for any reason .
2. Make it illegal for a candidate to use their own money to promote an issue , or for their re-election .
3. Set aside a small amount of money for very basic advertising , and do n't give it to the candidates - give them air time , etc .
- just like with the homeless guy - buy him lunch , do n't give him a $ 20 .
4. Make sure that the qualifications for running for an office ( to register and be considered a candidate ) are standardized within a given state , or , for federal positions , federally - with citizens being able to directly vote on those provisions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, here's another step:

1.
Make it illegal for candidates or sitting politicians to accept money from anyone, for any reason.
2. Make it illegal for a candidate to use their own money to promote an issue, or for their re-election.
3. Set aside a small amount of money for very basic advertising, and don't give it to the candidates - give them air time, etc.
- just like with the homeless guy - buy him lunch, don't give him a $20.
4. Make sure that the qualifications for running for an office (to register and be considered a candidate) are standardized within a given state, or, for federal positions, federally - with citizens being able to directly vote on those provisions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28458265</id>
	<title>Given Sen. Mark Sanford's recent admission...</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1245836520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>maybe we should be putting radio collars on our congresscritters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe we should be putting radio collars on our congresscritters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe we should be putting radio collars on our congresscritters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28461663</id>
	<title>who cares about the code</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245854580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work in biological threat detection. The software involved is trivial. We couldn't care less who looks at the code involved in our system, it's the chemistry, biology, sample prep, and materials science that take real development and require the leaping of significant hurdles. I'm willing to bet many other systems are similar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in biological threat detection .
The software involved is trivial .
We could n't care less who looks at the code involved in our system , it 's the chemistry , biology , sample prep , and materials science that take real development and require the leaping of significant hurdles .
I 'm willing to bet many other systems are similar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in biological threat detection.
The software involved is trivial.
We couldn't care less who looks at the code involved in our system, it's the chemistry, biology, sample prep, and materials science that take real development and require the leaping of significant hurdles.
I'm willing to bet many other systems are similar.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456659</id>
	<title>Totally Different Ideals</title>
	<author>Ohio Calvinist</author>
	<datestamp>1245873420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is that a lot of the OSS community breathes the philosophy that "all information should and must be free... except for information about me, which should be confidential or not exist in digestable form at all." While an overstated and oversimplified sumation of reality... if those are two guiding principals, then where the rubber hits the road is quite difficult, if you're designing multipurposed software that doesn't have a very narrow scoped-purpose at design time, and you're really concerned that your work is going to be used in ways that violate either of those provlems. FOSS is a widget... if some company builds gears it has to know that one buyer might be using them to build hospital machinery and the other harpoon guns for whales. If OSS says you can use it, execpt for these purposes, it isn't very free as in freedom anymore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that a lot of the OSS community breathes the philosophy that " all information should and must be free... except for information about me , which should be confidential or not exist in digestable form at all .
" While an overstated and oversimplified sumation of reality... if those are two guiding principals , then where the rubber hits the road is quite difficult , if you 're designing multipurposed software that does n't have a very narrow scoped-purpose at design time , and you 're really concerned that your work is going to be used in ways that violate either of those provlems .
FOSS is a widget... if some company builds gears it has to know that one buyer might be using them to build hospital machinery and the other harpoon guns for whales .
If OSS says you can use it , execpt for these purposes , it is n't very free as in freedom anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that a lot of the OSS community breathes the philosophy that "all information should and must be free... except for information about me, which should be confidential or not exist in digestable form at all.
" While an overstated and oversimplified sumation of reality... if those are two guiding principals, then where the rubber hits the road is quite difficult, if you're designing multipurposed software that doesn't have a very narrow scoped-purpose at design time, and you're really concerned that your work is going to be used in ways that violate either of those provlems.
FOSS is a widget... if some company builds gears it has to know that one buyer might be using them to build hospital machinery and the other harpoon guns for whales.
If OSS says you can use it, execpt for these purposes, it isn't very free as in freedom anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456281</id>
	<title>The "Bad Guys" can look at the source...</title>
	<author>Bakkster</author>
	<datestamp>1245871980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But so can the smart good guys.  More (and possibly better) penetration testing and verification also means that there are fewer exploitable holes.  Sounds like a win-win, both from the standpoint of security and privacy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But so can the smart good guys .
More ( and possibly better ) penetration testing and verification also means that there are fewer exploitable holes .
Sounds like a win-win , both from the standpoint of security and privacy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But so can the smart good guys.
More (and possibly better) penetration testing and verification also means that there are fewer exploitable holes.
Sounds like a win-win, both from the standpoint of security and privacy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457159</id>
	<title>seeensing ....</title>
	<author>x4r</author>
	<datestamp>1245875520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>i like to sense my girlfriend.
and warmly welcome any technology, that can improve it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>i like to sense my girlfriend .
and warmly welcome any technology , that can improve it : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i like to sense my girlfriend.
and warmly welcome any technology, that can improve it :-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456093</id>
	<title>Citation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245871260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"just as open source software is faster at addressing computer viruses today"<br> <br>
citation needed...</htmltext>
<tokenext>" just as open source software is faster at addressing computer viruses today " citation needed.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"just as open source software is faster at addressing computer viruses today" 
citation needed...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28464645</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245931860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Suppose campaign donations were anonymous?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Suppose campaign donations were anonymous ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suppose campaign donations were anonymous?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457095</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1245875280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Make it a felony to contribute to more than one candidate for any election. Face it, a grand for the Repub abd another grand for the Dem, and no matter which candidate loses, the briber/contributor wins. Contributing to more than one candidate in any given race is an ill-disguised bribe, and it should be a felony.</p></div><p>Maybe you could restrict it a little further and market it better as "contributing twice is like voting twice".  Exactly one contribution per election seems fair to me, just like one vote per election seems fair to me.</p><p>This also cuts back slightly on bribery, as you'd be unable to do the "half the money upfront to prove we're serious, then the other half the money after the politician makes the correct/profitable decision"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Make it a felony to contribute to more than one candidate for any election .
Face it , a grand for the Repub abd another grand for the Dem , and no matter which candidate loses , the briber/contributor wins .
Contributing to more than one candidate in any given race is an ill-disguised bribe , and it should be a felony.Maybe you could restrict it a little further and market it better as " contributing twice is like voting twice " .
Exactly one contribution per election seems fair to me , just like one vote per election seems fair to me.This also cuts back slightly on bribery , as you 'd be unable to do the " half the money upfront to prove we 're serious , then the other half the money after the politician makes the correct/profitable decision "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make it a felony to contribute to more than one candidate for any election.
Face it, a grand for the Repub abd another grand for the Dem, and no matter which candidate loses, the briber/contributor wins.
Contributing to more than one candidate in any given race is an ill-disguised bribe, and it should be a felony.Maybe you could restrict it a little further and market it better as "contributing twice is like voting twice".
Exactly one contribution per election seems fair to me, just like one vote per election seems fair to me.This also cuts back slightly on bribery, as you'd be unable to do the "half the money upfront to prove we're serious, then the other half the money after the politician makes the correct/profitable decision"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457407</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>Score Whore</author>
	<datestamp>1245876480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well that is just... broken?... dumb?</p><p>Actually, on item 1 I'd go along with you as long as you change it to you can donate to anyone who can vote on legislation that will affect you. I mean if the Senator from New Mexico gets to vote on a law regulating ocean fishing, it's only fair that residents of coastal states should have some small amount of influence in the senator's race for office.</p><p>On item 2, that really is just dumb. If there are three candidates running for office, one a democrat, one a republican and the other the nambla candidate, I may have a much larger desire for the pedophile not to get elected than I do for either of the others to be elected.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well that is just.. .
broken ? ... dumb ? Actually , on item 1 I 'd go along with you as long as you change it to you can donate to anyone who can vote on legislation that will affect you .
I mean if the Senator from New Mexico gets to vote on a law regulating ocean fishing , it 's only fair that residents of coastal states should have some small amount of influence in the senator 's race for office.On item 2 , that really is just dumb .
If there are three candidates running for office , one a democrat , one a republican and the other the nambla candidate , I may have a much larger desire for the pedophile not to get elected than I do for either of the others to be elected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well that is just...
broken?... dumb?Actually, on item 1 I'd go along with you as long as you change it to you can donate to anyone who can vote on legislation that will affect you.
I mean if the Senator from New Mexico gets to vote on a law regulating ocean fishing, it's only fair that residents of coastal states should have some small amount of influence in the senator's race for office.On item 2, that really is just dumb.
If there are three candidates running for office, one a democrat, one a republican and the other the nambla candidate, I may have a much larger desire for the pedophile not to get elected than I do for either of the others to be elected.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28459609</id>
	<title>whatever</title>
	<author>jackspenn</author>
	<datestamp>1245841680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Christine Peterson coined the term 'open source.'</p></div><p>
Oh no she didn't.
<br> <br>
It was Eric S. Raymond.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Christine Peterson coined the term 'open source .
' Oh no she did n't .
It was Eric S. Raymond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Christine Peterson coined the term 'open source.
'
Oh no she didn't.
It was Eric S. Raymond.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456259</id>
	<title>I must agree</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1245871920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is an interesting concept. However I think there's a major flaw:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Open source software development works because it consists of people willing to sacrifice some of their spare time doing something that they enjoy. The actual cost is nil, or close to it. Distribution and collaboration are made easy via the internet.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; However here you're talking hardware. Hardware has to be manufactured. It has cost. Then it has to be physically shipped to where you want to install it. Then you have to find (and pay) a guy to go up a ladder and bolt your hardware to that building, etc.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; The real up front cost - without taking into account actually monitoring and administering the flow of information - is staggering if you aim to do this on a nationwide scale. So much so that even the governments (with apparently endless resources as 2008 has just taught us) haven't done it. And if it was cheap, I'm sure they would have.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I hate to be a naysayer, but I wouldn't like to see the bill for this project.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is an interesting concept .
However I think there 's a major flaw :       Open source software development works because it consists of people willing to sacrifice some of their spare time doing something that they enjoy .
The actual cost is nil , or close to it .
Distribution and collaboration are made easy via the internet .
      However here you 're talking hardware .
Hardware has to be manufactured .
It has cost .
Then it has to be physically shipped to where you want to install it .
Then you have to find ( and pay ) a guy to go up a ladder and bolt your hardware to that building , etc .
      The real up front cost - without taking into account actually monitoring and administering the flow of information - is staggering if you aim to do this on a nationwide scale .
So much so that even the governments ( with apparently endless resources as 2008 has just taught us ) have n't done it .
And if it was cheap , I 'm sure they would have .
      I hate to be a naysayer , but I would n't like to see the bill for this project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is an interesting concept.
However I think there's a major flaw:
      Open source software development works because it consists of people willing to sacrifice some of their spare time doing something that they enjoy.
The actual cost is nil, or close to it.
Distribution and collaboration are made easy via the internet.
      However here you're talking hardware.
Hardware has to be manufactured.
It has cost.
Then it has to be physically shipped to where you want to install it.
Then you have to find (and pay) a guy to go up a ladder and bolt your hardware to that building, etc.
      The real up front cost - without taking into account actually monitoring and administering the flow of information - is staggering if you aim to do this on a nationwide scale.
So much so that even the governments (with apparently endless resources as 2008 has just taught us) haven't done it.
And if it was cheap, I'm sure they would have.
      I hate to be a naysayer, but I wouldn't like to see the bill for this project.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456235</id>
	<title>It's Not News</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245871800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>        Other articles have been pointing to sensors as the hot new arena for about two years now. Computers are getting more and more able and now having them observe and react to their surroundings is a hot area for making money. The medical uses alone will be world changers and the ability to sniff our bombs, terrorists etc. is also much sought after. Using illegal substances is also going to get harder and harder as sensors evolve to detect telltale chemicals and odors. Agriculture can also greatly benefit when remote sensors are more and more able to report the needs of crops to farmers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Other articles have been pointing to sensors as the hot new arena for about two years now .
Computers are getting more and more able and now having them observe and react to their surroundings is a hot area for making money .
The medical uses alone will be world changers and the ability to sniff our bombs , terrorists etc .
is also much sought after .
Using illegal substances is also going to get harder and harder as sensors evolve to detect telltale chemicals and odors .
Agriculture can also greatly benefit when remote sensors are more and more able to report the needs of crops to farmers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>        Other articles have been pointing to sensors as the hot new arena for about two years now.
Computers are getting more and more able and now having them observe and react to their surroundings is a hot area for making money.
The medical uses alone will be world changers and the ability to sniff our bombs, terrorists etc.
is also much sought after.
Using illegal substances is also going to get harder and harder as sensors evolve to detect telltale chemicals and odors.
Agriculture can also greatly benefit when remote sensors are more and more able to report the needs of crops to farmers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456851</id>
	<title>Sensing Technology</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1245874320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, how do you sense technology?</p><p>"Technology sense...tingling!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , how do you sense technology ?
" Technology sense...tingling !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, how do you sense technology?
"Technology sense...tingling!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456029</id>
	<title>Linux can win...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245870960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...the nosetop!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...the nosetop !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the nosetop!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456619</id>
	<title>Re:I must agree</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1245873300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your point is valid, in that hardware has a higher cost of entry than software(and the relative levels of maturity of OSS vs. Open Hardware reflect this); but I'm not sure that it applies as much as you suggest.<br> <br>

Designing, fabbing and installing specialized sensors is one aspect of "sensor technology" and one that OSS is, as you say, arguably of limited use as a model. However, co-ordination of sensor values, turning the data points into some meaningful picture of the world, is more or less completely a software problem.<br> <br>
Also of note is the idea of building distributed sensor networks out of what already exists, which is largely a problem of software, creativity, and social structuring. For instance, consider the sheer number of cameras, accelerometers, and RF receivers, all connected to programmable computers and radio modems, that are running around the streets in the form of cell phones. For that matter, think of the giant crowds of happy-snapping tourists in most tourist destinations as constituting a sort of camera network.<br> <br>

The business of actually putting hardware into the field will, as you say, likely remain a more or less closed commercial enterprise, with some open source/DIY projects here and there(just as most software, even OSS, runs on commercial hardware); but there is a lot of room for OSS models in the systems and software that tie the sensors together, and make something useful of their output.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your point is valid , in that hardware has a higher cost of entry than software ( and the relative levels of maturity of OSS vs. Open Hardware reflect this ) ; but I 'm not sure that it applies as much as you suggest .
Designing , fabbing and installing specialized sensors is one aspect of " sensor technology " and one that OSS is , as you say , arguably of limited use as a model .
However , co-ordination of sensor values , turning the data points into some meaningful picture of the world , is more or less completely a software problem .
Also of note is the idea of building distributed sensor networks out of what already exists , which is largely a problem of software , creativity , and social structuring .
For instance , consider the sheer number of cameras , accelerometers , and RF receivers , all connected to programmable computers and radio modems , that are running around the streets in the form of cell phones .
For that matter , think of the giant crowds of happy-snapping tourists in most tourist destinations as constituting a sort of camera network .
The business of actually putting hardware into the field will , as you say , likely remain a more or less closed commercial enterprise , with some open source/DIY projects here and there ( just as most software , even OSS , runs on commercial hardware ) ; but there is a lot of room for OSS models in the systems and software that tie the sensors together , and make something useful of their output .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your point is valid, in that hardware has a higher cost of entry than software(and the relative levels of maturity of OSS vs. Open Hardware reflect this); but I'm not sure that it applies as much as you suggest.
Designing, fabbing and installing specialized sensors is one aspect of "sensor technology" and one that OSS is, as you say, arguably of limited use as a model.
However, co-ordination of sensor values, turning the data points into some meaningful picture of the world, is more or less completely a software problem.
Also of note is the idea of building distributed sensor networks out of what already exists, which is largely a problem of software, creativity, and social structuring.
For instance, consider the sheer number of cameras, accelerometers, and RF receivers, all connected to programmable computers and radio modems, that are running around the streets in the form of cell phones.
For that matter, think of the giant crowds of happy-snapping tourists in most tourist destinations as constituting a sort of camera network.
The business of actually putting hardware into the field will, as you say, likely remain a more or less closed commercial enterprise, with some open source/DIY projects here and there(just as most software, even OSS, runs on commercial hardware); but there is a lot of room for OSS models in the systems and software that tie the sensors together, and make something useful of their output.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456259</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457623</id>
	<title>mod down</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245834060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>feel an obligation those uber-,asshole</htmltext>
<tokenext>feel an obligation those uber-,asshole</tokentext>
<sentencetext>feel an obligation those uber-,asshole</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456059</id>
	<title>Knowing the government's level of incompetence?</title>
	<author>AnonGCB</author>
	<datestamp>1245871140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll bet right before a large attack all of our technology will recieve a killall command.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll bet right before a large attack all of our technology will recieve a killall command .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll bet right before a large attack all of our technology will recieve a killall command.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457709</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1245834420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be pretty hard for the candidate to check out each and every contributor, and the chances of making a mistale one way or another would be enormous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be pretty hard for the candidate to check out each and every contributor , and the chances of making a mistale one way or another would be enormous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be pretty hard for the candidate to check out each and every contributor, and the chances of making a mistale one way or another would be enormous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457089</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28459133</id>
	<title>Re:I propose...</title>
	<author>whopub</author>
	<datestamp>1245839520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you kidding me?! Good people run from politics like it's the plague. That's how bad it is now. We need a way to figure out which of those asses stinks less. If any.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you kidding me ? !
Good people run from politics like it 's the plague .
That 's how bad it is now .
We need a way to figure out which of those asses stinks less .
If any .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you kidding me?!
Good people run from politics like it's the plague.
That's how bad it is now.
We need a way to figure out which of those asses stinks less.
If any.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456477</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1727231_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28459133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1727231_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1727231_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1727231_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1727231_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1727231_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28459801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1727231_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457407
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1727231_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28464645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1727231_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1727231_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1727231.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456011
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1727231.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28461663
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1727231.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28459609
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1727231.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456059
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1727231.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28458265
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1727231.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456093
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1727231.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456259
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456823
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1727231.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456197
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456771
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457095
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457407
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28464645
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457611
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457089
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28457709
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28459801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456477
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28459133
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1727231.28456375
</commentlist>
</conversation>
