<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_25_1220232</id>
	<title>China Starts/Stops Blocking Google</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1245933480000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:eshekar@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">shekared</a> was one of a number of readers to write in to tell a similar story.  He says <i>"I'm an American currently living and working in Chongqing, China.  As of 9am (UTC +8) <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/167282/china\_appears\_to\_block\_google\_sites.html">China began blocking google.com</a>, gmail.com, google analytics and many if not most other google sites other than google.cn.  Internet speed for connections outside the mainland have in general have come to a crawl.  Surprisingly this has yet to pick up major coverage in the press.  Using an open proxy or VPN for connection to hosts outside of the mainland continues to allow access to google, as does connecting directly to a google.com IP address.

As of 6pm (UTC +8) access to gmail and google.com have returned to normal."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>shekared was one of a number of readers to write in to tell a similar story .
He says " I 'm an American currently living and working in Chongqing , China .
As of 9am ( UTC + 8 ) China began blocking google.com , gmail.com , google analytics and many if not most other google sites other than google.cn .
Internet speed for connections outside the mainland have in general have come to a crawl .
Surprisingly this has yet to pick up major coverage in the press .
Using an open proxy or VPN for connection to hosts outside of the mainland continues to allow access to google , as does connecting directly to a google.com IP address .
As of 6pm ( UTC + 8 ) access to gmail and google.com have returned to normal .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>shekared was one of a number of readers to write in to tell a similar story.
He says "I'm an American currently living and working in Chongqing, China.
As of 9am (UTC +8) China began blocking google.com, gmail.com, google analytics and many if not most other google sites other than google.cn.
Internet speed for connections outside the mainland have in general have come to a crawl.
Surprisingly this has yet to pick up major coverage in the press.
Using an open proxy or VPN for connection to hosts outside of the mainland continues to allow access to google, as does connecting directly to a google.com IP address.
As of 6pm (UTC +8) access to gmail and google.com have returned to normal.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465181</id>
	<title>Block Google Since Bing Will Play Ball</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1245937980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find it interesting that their little "trial run" of blocking Google comes so soon after <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/167337/bing\_filters\_out\_sensitive\_results\_for\_chinese\_searches.html" title="pcworld.com" rel="nofollow">Bing decides to filter out anything sensitive (you know porn, skeletons, pandas)</a> [pcworld.com] to China.  So if we've got on big player playing ball, let the other one know what will happen to them if they don't.  Another motive could be a <a href="http://www.physorg.com/news165124849.html" title="physorg.com" rel="nofollow">a display of defiance to the West's requests</a> [physorg.com] to stop with all the blocking and blocking software?  Maybe it's coincidence, maybe it's many factors.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it interesting that their little " trial run " of blocking Google comes so soon after Bing decides to filter out anything sensitive ( you know porn , skeletons , pandas ) [ pcworld.com ] to China .
So if we 've got on big player playing ball , let the other one know what will happen to them if they do n't .
Another motive could be a a display of defiance to the West 's requests [ physorg.com ] to stop with all the blocking and blocking software ?
Maybe it 's coincidence , maybe it 's many factors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it interesting that their little "trial run" of blocking Google comes so soon after Bing decides to filter out anything sensitive (you know porn, skeletons, pandas) [pcworld.com] to China.
So if we've got on big player playing ball, let the other one know what will happen to them if they don't.
Another motive could be a a display of defiance to the West's requests [physorg.com] to stop with all the blocking and blocking software?
Maybe it's coincidence, maybe it's many factors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465991</id>
	<title>Re:Google should block China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So the government did the bad thing, and you want to punish the people? Smart.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So the government did the bad thing , and you want to punish the people ?
Smart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the government did the bad thing, and you want to punish the people?
Smart.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466659</id>
	<title>DNS issue</title>
	<author>tekniq</author>
	<datestamp>1245946200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How do you know it is not a DNS issue from your ISP? You can still access it through IP, don't you. If it is filtering, I doubt it can still working that way. Because it is in China, so any technical issue must be government doing evil.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you know it is not a DNS issue from your ISP ?
You can still access it through IP , do n't you .
If it is filtering , I doubt it can still working that way .
Because it is in China , so any technical issue must be government doing evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you know it is not a DNS issue from your ISP?
You can still access it through IP, don't you.
If it is filtering, I doubt it can still working that way.
Because it is in China, so any technical issue must be government doing evil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466371</id>
	<title>If the IP works, it's not a block</title>
	<author>thoth\_amon</author>
	<datestamp>1245944760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the IP works, then routing to the Google servers obviously works.  It sounds like an intermittent nameserver problem.  China's DNS servers are having difficulty resolving names in a reasonable time.  There could be any number of reasons for this, it's not necessarily that China is blocking Google.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the IP works , then routing to the Google servers obviously works .
It sounds like an intermittent nameserver problem .
China 's DNS servers are having difficulty resolving names in a reasonable time .
There could be any number of reasons for this , it 's not necessarily that China is blocking Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the IP works, then routing to the Google servers obviously works.
It sounds like an intermittent nameserver problem.
China's DNS servers are having difficulty resolving names in a reasonable time.
There could be any number of reasons for this, it's not necessarily that China is blocking Google.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465135</id>
	<title>Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245937680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm posting from China. At least slashdot still wo</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm posting from China .
At least slashdot still wo</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm posting from China.
At least slashdot still wo</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28474159</id>
	<title>Proxies don't always work with google</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245931740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been having problems connecting to google services in Nanjing for the past month or so.  For a while, I was using gappproxy to access unaccessible sites.  For a while, it worked to access youtube, but that stopped, always giving me an "an error has occurred" in the video window.  Then, just a day or two ago, when accessing google through gappproxy, I get a message from google saying that I look like a spam request.  Same thing happens if I try to access google through tor.  Whatever the case, it now makes accessing google through those two proxies impossible.  I wonder whether google is attempting to block access to those who circumvent the great firewall...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been having problems connecting to google services in Nanjing for the past month or so .
For a while , I was using gappproxy to access unaccessible sites .
For a while , it worked to access youtube , but that stopped , always giving me an " an error has occurred " in the video window .
Then , just a day or two ago , when accessing google through gappproxy , I get a message from google saying that I look like a spam request .
Same thing happens if I try to access google through tor .
Whatever the case , it now makes accessing google through those two proxies impossible .
I wonder whether google is attempting to block access to those who circumvent the great firewall.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been having problems connecting to google services in Nanjing for the past month or so.
For a while, I was using gappproxy to access unaccessible sites.
For a while, it worked to access youtube, but that stopped, always giving me an "an error has occurred" in the video window.
Then, just a day or two ago, when accessing google through gappproxy, I get a message from google saying that I look like a spam request.
Same thing happens if I try to access google through tor.
Whatever the case, it now makes accessing google through those two proxies impossible.
I wonder whether google is attempting to block access to those who circumvent the great firewall...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28479105</id>
	<title>We need UUCP again...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246009020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>All this governemnt censorship tells me we need to reinvent and re-deploy uccp.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All this governemnt censorship tells me we need to reinvent and re-deploy uccp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All this governemnt censorship tells me we need to reinvent and re-deploy uccp.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193</id>
	<title>Local Laws</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245938040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As an American working in China you should realise that you have forfeit your American rights and are now living under Chinese law. As such the Chinese can block your access to whatever they choose. And, amazingly, they also have the right to block access to services provided by American companies.
<br> <br>
This is not news, nor should it be news. China is a sovereign nation and can do as it pleases within its own borders as long as no international laws are broken; and I'm pretty sure that denying access to Google does not fall into that category.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As an American working in China you should realise that you have forfeit your American rights and are now living under Chinese law .
As such the Chinese can block your access to whatever they choose .
And , amazingly , they also have the right to block access to services provided by American companies .
This is not news , nor should it be news .
China is a sovereign nation and can do as it pleases within its own borders as long as no international laws are broken ; and I 'm pretty sure that denying access to Google does not fall into that category .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an American working in China you should realise that you have forfeit your American rights and are now living under Chinese law.
As such the Chinese can block your access to whatever they choose.
And, amazingly, they also have the right to block access to services provided by American companies.
This is not news, nor should it be news.
China is a sovereign nation and can do as it pleases within its own borders as long as no international laws are broken; and I'm pretty sure that denying access to Google does not fall into that category.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28477333</id>
	<title>Re:Please come to the local station</title>
	<author>akayani</author>
	<datestamp>1245950040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please not to impersonate me. Please to note we rov Google.<br><br>Liu Cheng</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please not to impersonate me .
Please to note we rov Google.Liu Cheng</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please not to impersonate me.
Please to note we rov Google.Liu Cheng</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465051</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28523961</id>
	<title>Re:my experiences...</title>
	<author>jarod\_tang</author>
	<datestamp>1246294080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a native Chinese, my knowledge is that the high end user prefer google than baidu, but else will prefer baidu just because they are unaware baidu is doing a bad job.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a native Chinese , my knowledge is that the high end user prefer google than baidu , but else will prefer baidu just because they are unaware baidu is doing a bad job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a native Chinese, my knowledge is that the high end user prefer google than baidu, but else will prefer baidu just because they are unaware baidu is doing a bad job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465241</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465877</id>
	<title>Re:Google should block China</title>
	<author>ctrl-alt-canc</author>
	<datestamp>1245942300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not a good idea: imagine what happens when they discover that life can be better and more productive when they do not waste their time with google services...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not a good idea : imagine what happens when they discover that life can be better and more productive when they do not waste their time with google services.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not a good idea: imagine what happens when they discover that life can be better and more productive when they do not waste their time with google services...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28469055</id>
	<title>Re:regardless of china's public claims</title>
	<author>number17</author>
	<datestamp>1245955740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>its a subtle and effective form of protectionism</p></div><p>If a company, such as baidu, pays the government for this "flicker" service, is it still called protectionism?  I would rather call it capitalistic.  The government is merely opening up its doors to different streams of revenue.  I wouldn't be surprised if other Chinese companies have been hurt with similar tactics.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>its a subtle and effective form of protectionismIf a company , such as baidu , pays the government for this " flicker " service , is it still called protectionism ?
I would rather call it capitalistic .
The government is merely opening up its doors to different streams of revenue .
I would n't be surprised if other Chinese companies have been hurt with similar tactics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its a subtle and effective form of protectionismIf a company, such as baidu, pays the government for this "flicker" service, is it still called protectionism?
I would rather call it capitalistic.
The government is merely opening up its doors to different streams of revenue.
I wouldn't be surprised if other Chinese companies have been hurt with similar tactics.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466169</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465577</id>
	<title>Re:What do you expect?</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1245940560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Chinese version of Barack Obama</i>
<br>
We did. They was reagan and W.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese version of Barack Obama We did .
They was reagan and W .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese version of Barack Obama

We did.
They was reagan and W.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466843</id>
	<title>Also Covered by BBC</title>
	<author>Joren</author>
	<datestamp>1245947160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Surprisingly this has yet to pick up major coverage in the press.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

The BBC is covering it <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8118055.stm" title="bbc.co.uk" rel="nofollow">here</a> [bbc.co.uk], and adds that China has accused Google of spreading pornography.  This comes as China is requiring all new computers to come with "Green Dam" filtering software.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Surprisingly this has yet to pick up major coverage in the press .
The BBC is covering it here [ bbc.co.uk ] , and adds that China has accused Google of spreading pornography .
This comes as China is requiring all new computers to come with " Green Dam " filtering software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surprisingly this has yet to pick up major coverage in the press.
The BBC is covering it here [bbc.co.uk], and adds that China has accused Google of spreading pornography.
This comes as China is requiring all new computers to come with "Green Dam" filtering software.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465637</id>
	<title>Re:Let's all go shop at Walmart to Protest!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245940860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Funny thing is, that there are more Western made products at Wally world these days, though Target remains a front-end for China (little there is NOT made in china). What is funny is that I have noticed that generics at places like King Soopers and safeway is being made In America, Mexico and Canada. Perhaps America can get the trade imbalance back into shape. My guess is that if oil continues upwards slowly, we will see more items move back to the west, and more trade by countries that are close.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny thing is , that there are more Western made products at Wally world these days , though Target remains a front-end for China ( little there is NOT made in china ) .
What is funny is that I have noticed that generics at places like King Soopers and safeway is being made In America , Mexico and Canada .
Perhaps America can get the trade imbalance back into shape .
My guess is that if oil continues upwards slowly , we will see more items move back to the west , and more trade by countries that are close .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny thing is, that there are more Western made products at Wally world these days, though Target remains a front-end for China (little there is NOT made in china).
What is funny is that I have noticed that generics at places like King Soopers and safeway is being made In America, Mexico and Canada.
Perhaps America can get the trade imbalance back into shape.
My guess is that if oil continues upwards slowly, we will see more items move back to the west, and more trade by countries that are close.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466055</id>
	<title>It's a TRAP!</title>
	<author>ChinaLumberjack</author>
	<datestamp>1245943140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Advice for Google and Bing. GTFO of China.
The Chinese will not allow foreigners to control massive industries like search. Their approach to foreigners can be summarized in the following words:
<br> <br>
<b>Thanks for your technology!<br>
Thanks for your money!<br>
Now we own you, bitches.</b> <br> <br>
The above incident sent a clear message to Google: <i>We can and will shut you down.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Advice for Google and Bing .
GTFO of China .
The Chinese will not allow foreigners to control massive industries like search .
Their approach to foreigners can be summarized in the following words : Thanks for your technology !
Thanks for your money !
Now we own you , bitches .
The above incident sent a clear message to Google : We can and will shut you down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Advice for Google and Bing.
GTFO of China.
The Chinese will not allow foreigners to control massive industries like search.
Their approach to foreigners can be summarized in the following words:
 
Thanks for your technology!
Thanks for your money!
Now we own you, bitches.
The above incident sent a clear message to Google: We can and will shut you down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465845</id>
	<title>Re:Google should block China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I already block china on my ftp servers.  It was getting annoying that every single day yet another ftp hackbot was trying to hack me from there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I already block china on my ftp servers .
It was getting annoying that every single day yet another ftp hackbot was trying to hack me from there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I already block china on my ftp servers.
It was getting annoying that every single day yet another ftp hackbot was trying to hack me from there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465189</id>
	<title>calm down chinaphiles...</title>
	<author>nimbius</author>
	<datestamp>1245938040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>it sounds like a simple case of a misconfigured great wall of china.  of course, ill stay tuned for the round-the-clock coverage from CNN on this critical human rights violation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>it sounds like a simple case of a misconfigured great wall of china .
of course , ill stay tuned for the round-the-clock coverage from CNN on this critical human rights violation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it sounds like a simple case of a misconfigured great wall of china.
of course, ill stay tuned for the round-the-clock coverage from CNN on this critical human rights violation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465889</id>
	<title>Re:Local Laws</title>
	<author>cyberjessy</author>
	<datestamp>1245942300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have great respect for America's determination to protect freedom and free speech. That word means a lot to you, as it does to me.</p><p>But wait, before you call it a Tiananmen square "massacre" - do you consider that <a href="http://www.iraqbodycount.org/" title="iraqbodycount.org">ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND</a> [iraqbodycount.org] people are now dead in Iraq. Last week, a drone killed 140 people in Afganistan, mostly innocents.</p><p>So, as opposed to thousands of their own people killed by the Chinese, you went to another country and killed much much more.</p><p>I am not saying it is worse; just saying that taking a stance on moral issues is difficult. And often becomes very subjective.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have great respect for America 's determination to protect freedom and free speech .
That word means a lot to you , as it does to me.But wait , before you call it a Tiananmen square " massacre " - do you consider that ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND [ iraqbodycount.org ] people are now dead in Iraq .
Last week , a drone killed 140 people in Afganistan , mostly innocents.So , as opposed to thousands of their own people killed by the Chinese , you went to another country and killed much much more.I am not saying it is worse ; just saying that taking a stance on moral issues is difficult .
And often becomes very subjective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have great respect for America's determination to protect freedom and free speech.
That word means a lot to you, as it does to me.But wait, before you call it a Tiananmen square "massacre" - do you consider that ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND [iraqbodycount.org] people are now dead in Iraq.
Last week, a drone killed 140 people in Afganistan, mostly innocents.So, as opposed to thousands of their own people killed by the Chinese, you went to another country and killed much much more.I am not saying it is worse; just saying that taking a stance on moral issues is difficult.
And often becomes very subjective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465219</id>
	<title>Let's all go shop at Walmart to Protest!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245938280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a great idea!  Let's show our support for Democracy and condemn the actions of the fascist dicatorship with a big shopping spree at Walmart.  Maybe if we give these guys 500 billion dollars a year, they will be nice to us and freedom will reign and shower everyone with joy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a great idea !
Let 's show our support for Democracy and condemn the actions of the fascist dicatorship with a big shopping spree at Walmart .
Maybe if we give these guys 500 billion dollars a year , they will be nice to us and freedom will reign and shower everyone with joy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a great idea!
Let's show our support for Democracy and condemn the actions of the fascist dicatorship with a big shopping spree at Walmart.
Maybe if we give these guys 500 billion dollars a year, they will be nice to us and freedom will reign and shower everyone with joy!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465341</id>
	<title>This happens all the time.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245939180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>International connections slow to a crawl on any politically sensitive event(most likely green dam filtering in this case). Any major news source that carries said political news(say hello google news) will slow down to a crawl, or not load at all. The major news doesn't carry this because it happens at least a half dozen times a year....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>International connections slow to a crawl on any politically sensitive event ( most likely green dam filtering in this case ) .
Any major news source that carries said political news ( say hello google news ) will slow down to a crawl , or not load at all .
The major news does n't carry this because it happens at least a half dozen times a year... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>International connections slow to a crawl on any politically sensitive event(most likely green dam filtering in this case).
Any major news source that carries said political news(say hello google news) will slow down to a crawl, or not load at all.
The major news doesn't carry this because it happens at least a half dozen times a year....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466251</id>
	<title>BIG MISTAKE</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1245944100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Chinese Govt WANTS that. They are busy pushing Baidu, and about to push Baidu into western world. Right now, Baidu controls ~65\% of chinese search, while Google is only ~25\%. The reason is that Chinese gov PUSHES Baidu and creates rules to help them. For example, Baidu copied Google's 'Im feeling Lucky', so the gov told Google to no longer allow it because it was leading to too many porn sites, but did not do the same on Baidu. What was interesting is that a study was done, it showed that Baidu had either the same rate or possibly more of porn. The big difference is that Baidu will not lead to anti-gov stuff while google might.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese Govt WANTS that .
They are busy pushing Baidu , and about to push Baidu into western world .
Right now , Baidu controls ~ 65 \ % of chinese search , while Google is only ~ 25 \ % .
The reason is that Chinese gov PUSHES Baidu and creates rules to help them .
For example , Baidu copied Google 's 'Im feeling Lucky ' , so the gov told Google to no longer allow it because it was leading to too many porn sites , but did not do the same on Baidu .
What was interesting is that a study was done , it showed that Baidu had either the same rate or possibly more of porn .
The big difference is that Baidu will not lead to anti-gov stuff while google might .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese Govt WANTS that.
They are busy pushing Baidu, and about to push Baidu into western world.
Right now, Baidu controls ~65\% of chinese search, while Google is only ~25\%.
The reason is that Chinese gov PUSHES Baidu and creates rules to help them.
For example, Baidu copied Google's 'Im feeling Lucky', so the gov told Google to no longer allow it because it was leading to too many porn sites, but did not do the same on Baidu.
What was interesting is that a study was done, it showed that Baidu had either the same rate or possibly more of porn.
The big difference is that Baidu will not lead to anti-gov stuff while google might.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466297</id>
	<title>Re:Local Laws</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1245944340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>China is a sovereign nation and can do as it pleases within its own borders as long as no international laws are broken; </i> <br>Trade restriction. And EU is bringing that up to UN. Just like America did recently about CHina restricting EXPORTS of Steel making minerals. China is cheating all the way to the bank, and the west either needs to crack down on China, or better yet, SLOWLY raise similar barriers. For example, slowly drop the dollar and Euro against the Yuan on imports. That will encourage China to free their money. Likewise, if China does not drop their trade barriers like they agreed to do by 2002, then we should slowly and methodically raise ours.</htmltext>
<tokenext>China is a sovereign nation and can do as it pleases within its own borders as long as no international laws are broken ; Trade restriction .
And EU is bringing that up to UN .
Just like America did recently about CHina restricting EXPORTS of Steel making minerals .
China is cheating all the way to the bank , and the west either needs to crack down on China , or better yet , SLOWLY raise similar barriers .
For example , slowly drop the dollar and Euro against the Yuan on imports .
That will encourage China to free their money .
Likewise , if China does not drop their trade barriers like they agreed to do by 2002 , then we should slowly and methodically raise ours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China is a sovereign nation and can do as it pleases within its own borders as long as no international laws are broken;  Trade restriction.
And EU is bringing that up to UN.
Just like America did recently about CHina restricting EXPORTS of Steel making minerals.
China is cheating all the way to the bank, and the west either needs to crack down on China, or better yet, SLOWLY raise similar barriers.
For example, slowly drop the dollar and Euro against the Yuan on imports.
That will encourage China to free their money.
Likewise, if China does not drop their trade barriers like they agreed to do by 2002, then we should slowly and methodically raise ours.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465253</id>
	<title>Re:Local Laws</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245938580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes because obviously he's complaining that "The great evil china is violating my rights".</p><p>No.. it simply stated that china started blocking google.  When one of the most censorship happy regimes starts blocking the biggest search provider in the world IT IS NEWS.</p><p>Your rock, go back under it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes because obviously he 's complaining that " The great evil china is violating my rights " .No.. it simply stated that china started blocking google .
When one of the most censorship happy regimes starts blocking the biggest search provider in the world IT IS NEWS.Your rock , go back under it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes because obviously he's complaining that "The great evil china is violating my rights".No.. it simply stated that china started blocking google.
When one of the most censorship happy regimes starts blocking the biggest search provider in the world IT IS NEWS.Your rock, go back under it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466831</id>
	<title>Does MS ever resist?</title>
	<author>Midnight Thunder</author>
	<datestamp>1245947100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry for being cynical, but I always get the feeling that if there is something authoritarian to participate in Microsoft is first in line. Examples:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - Windows DRM<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - Windows Media DRM<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - Zune DRM - incompatible with Windows Media DRM<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - Windows Advantage - when it works<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - Site blocking<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - HDCP<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - Paying Zune royalties to the media industry<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; - Others?</p><p>Sure, Microsoft did not come up with all these solutions, but they have shown zero signs of trying to resist. In fact I get the opposite feeling.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry for being cynical , but I always get the feeling that if there is something authoritarian to participate in Microsoft is first in line .
Examples :     - Windows DRM     - Windows Media DRM     - Zune DRM - incompatible with Windows Media DRM     - Windows Advantage - when it works     - Site blocking     - HDCP     - Paying Zune royalties to the media industry     - Others ? Sure , Microsoft did not come up with all these solutions , but they have shown zero signs of trying to resist .
In fact I get the opposite feeling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry for being cynical, but I always get the feeling that if there is something authoritarian to participate in Microsoft is first in line.
Examples:
    - Windows DRM
    - Windows Media DRM
    - Zune DRM - incompatible with Windows Media DRM
    - Windows Advantage - when it works
    - Site blocking
    - HDCP
    - Paying Zune royalties to the media industry
    - Others?Sure, Microsoft did not come up with all these solutions, but they have shown zero signs of trying to resist.
In fact I get the opposite feeling.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465181</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28477703</id>
	<title>Surprising indeed</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1245953520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Surprisingly this has yet to pick up major coverage in the press.</p></div><p>Major coverage? In mainstream press? When Michael Jackson has just died?</p><p>Not that I am a great fan, but let's face it, a lot more people know and care about MJ than about whether China blocks one or more aspects of Google. And even without big news stories and things happening in the world, a story about a minor, technical upset in a foreign country is hardly Earth shattering any way.</p><p>As for the poor Chinese, who can now no longer access Google's mixture of real search results with undisclosed, sponsored ones and propaganda - they have other ways of getting news from around the world. Foreigners travel to China, Chinese travel abroad; they are hardly left without contact to the rest of the planet, and of course they hear news from abroad at least that way.</p><p>It's a tempest in a teacup, frankly - some people seriously need to take off their blinkers and shake off the cold-war thinking. The world has changed while you were spaced out.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Surprisingly this has yet to pick up major coverage in the press.Major coverage ?
In mainstream press ?
When Michael Jackson has just died ? Not that I am a great fan , but let 's face it , a lot more people know and care about MJ than about whether China blocks one or more aspects of Google .
And even without big news stories and things happening in the world , a story about a minor , technical upset in a foreign country is hardly Earth shattering any way.As for the poor Chinese , who can now no longer access Google 's mixture of real search results with undisclosed , sponsored ones and propaganda - they have other ways of getting news from around the world .
Foreigners travel to China , Chinese travel abroad ; they are hardly left without contact to the rest of the planet , and of course they hear news from abroad at least that way.It 's a tempest in a teacup , frankly - some people seriously need to take off their blinkers and shake off the cold-war thinking .
The world has changed while you were spaced out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surprisingly this has yet to pick up major coverage in the press.Major coverage?
In mainstream press?
When Michael Jackson has just died?Not that I am a great fan, but let's face it, a lot more people know and care about MJ than about whether China blocks one or more aspects of Google.
And even without big news stories and things happening in the world, a story about a minor, technical upset in a foreign country is hardly Earth shattering any way.As for the poor Chinese, who can now no longer access Google's mixture of real search results with undisclosed, sponsored ones and propaganda - they have other ways of getting news from around the world.
Foreigners travel to China, Chinese travel abroad; they are hardly left without contact to the rest of the planet, and of course they hear news from abroad at least that way.It's a tempest in a teacup, frankly - some people seriously need to take off their blinkers and shake off the cold-war thinking.
The world has changed while you were spaced out.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465047</id>
	<title>In Soviet China...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245937200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>pron eats you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>pron eats you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pron eats you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28479219</id>
	<title>Re:Please come to the local station</title>
	<author>wujing</author>
	<datestamp>1246010040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.watches-space.com/Jaeger-LeCoultre-Watches.html" title="watches-space.com" rel="nofollow">Jaeger LeCoultre Watches</a> [watches-space.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jaeger LeCoultre Watches [ watches-space.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jaeger LeCoultre Watches [watches-space.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465051</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466111</id>
	<title>Chinese people would be great schoolteachers</title>
	<author>ZarathustraDK</author>
	<datestamp>1245943440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean, going by the median they apparantly just <b>can't</b> get pissed off when somebody treats them like trash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , going by the median they apparantly just ca n't get pissed off when somebody treats them like trash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, going by the median they apparantly just can't get pissed off when somebody treats them like trash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28479299</id>
	<title>I hate to be a grammar nazi, but..</title>
	<author>sqldr</author>
	<datestamp>1246011060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"China Starts/Stops Blocking Google"</p><p>"China briefly blocks Google" would've done.  Honestly, the quality of English in Slashdot stories these days is deteriorating below 5th grade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" China Starts/Stops Blocking Google " " China briefly blocks Google " would 've done .
Honestly , the quality of English in Slashdot stories these days is deteriorating below 5th grade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"China Starts/Stops Blocking Google""China briefly blocks Google" would've done.
Honestly, the quality of English in Slashdot stories these days is deteriorating below 5th grade.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465427</id>
	<title>Planning for the future?</title>
	<author>lightningrod220</author>
	<datestamp>1245939780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is it possible they're merely testing to see if they can pull a full-scale blockade of Internet communications, if they ever have the need? I know if I was running a tyrannical government, I'd be looking to avoid the problems that Iran's government is having. You can't block them after things go bad, but if you do it *quietly* shortly before, you might have a better chance. Possibly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it possible they 're merely testing to see if they can pull a full-scale blockade of Internet communications , if they ever have the need ?
I know if I was running a tyrannical government , I 'd be looking to avoid the problems that Iran 's government is having .
You ca n't block them after things go bad , but if you do it * quietly * shortly before , you might have a better chance .
Possibly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it possible they're merely testing to see if they can pull a full-scale blockade of Internet communications, if they ever have the need?
I know if I was running a tyrannical government, I'd be looking to avoid the problems that Iran's government is having.
You can't block them after things go bad, but if you do it *quietly* shortly before, you might have a better chance.
Possibly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465875</id>
	<title>Trends</title>
	<author>Yogiz</author>
	<datestamp>1245942240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>20$ on China being the first country in the 21st century to make encryption illegal. Things are only going to be worse, not better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>20 $ on China being the first country in the 21st century to make encryption illegal .
Things are only going to be worse , not better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>20$ on China being the first country in the 21st century to make encryption illegal.
Things are only going to be worse, not better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28468381</id>
	<title>Re:Block Google Since Bing Will Play Ball</title>
	<author>sunderland56</author>
	<datestamp>1245953340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If a foreign government blocked Bing, would anyone even notice?
<br> <br>
And if they did, would it be newsworthy?
<br> <br>
After all, Google is a household word almost everywhere on the planet. Most people think that Bing is a kind of cherry, or a movie star from the '40s.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If a foreign government blocked Bing , would anyone even notice ?
And if they did , would it be newsworthy ?
After all , Google is a household word almost everywhere on the planet .
Most people think that Bing is a kind of cherry , or a movie star from the '40s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a foreign government blocked Bing, would anyone even notice?
And if they did, would it be newsworthy?
After all, Google is a household word almost everywhere on the planet.
Most people think that Bing is a kind of cherry, or a movie star from the '40s.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465181</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465241</id>
	<title>my experiences...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245938460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>im traveling in china for the last 6 weeks and the state of internet connections here is very random.</p><p>domestic sites, like the immensely popular QQ and baidu, are always \_very\_ responsive.</p><p>google sometimes gets a slow down to the extend that it is nearly unusable (that really help people here to move over to the super fast and slightly more chineese friendly baidu).</p><p>the main thing is the randomness, if it is connectivity/ congestion issues, or some conspiracy: no-one knows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>im traveling in china for the last 6 weeks and the state of internet connections here is very random.domestic sites , like the immensely popular QQ and baidu , are always \ _very \ _ responsive.google sometimes gets a slow down to the extend that it is nearly unusable ( that really help people here to move over to the super fast and slightly more chineese friendly baidu ) .the main thing is the randomness , if it is connectivity/ congestion issues , or some conspiracy : no-one knows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>im traveling in china for the last 6 weeks and the state of internet connections here is very random.domestic sites, like the immensely popular QQ and baidu, are always \_very\_ responsive.google sometimes gets a slow down to the extend that it is nearly unusable (that really help people here to move over to the super fast and slightly more chineese friendly baidu).the main thing is the randomness, if it is connectivity/ congestion issues, or some conspiracy: no-one knows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28467191</id>
	<title>Thought Police</title>
	<author>omegahelix</author>
	<datestamp>1245948840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When are they going to learn that the flow of information can't be stopped?</p><p>Shame on Google, Yahoo and Microsoft if they continue to bow down to the dictators so they can make money in China!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When are they going to learn that the flow of information ca n't be stopped ? Shame on Google , Yahoo and Microsoft if they continue to bow down to the dictators so they can make money in China !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When are they going to learn that the flow of information can't be stopped?Shame on Google, Yahoo and Microsoft if they continue to bow down to the dictators so they can make money in China!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465231</id>
	<title>Google analytics</title>
	<author>ickleberry</author>
	<datestamp>1245938340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd block them too. In fact the practice of blocking google analytics isn't unheard of at all outside of China. It only wastes bandwidth and google/site owners have too much information on your surfing habits already. All these statistics/advertising things just slow shit down and don't really do anything for you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd block them too .
In fact the practice of blocking google analytics is n't unheard of at all outside of China .
It only wastes bandwidth and google/site owners have too much information on your surfing habits already .
All these statistics/advertising things just slow shit down and do n't really do anything for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd block them too.
In fact the practice of blocking google analytics isn't unheard of at all outside of China.
It only wastes bandwidth and google/site owners have too much information on your surfing habits already.
All these statistics/advertising things just slow shit down and don't really do anything for you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28471657</id>
	<title>Re:my experiences...</title>
	<author>Malc</author>
	<datestamp>1245922260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I lived in Shanghai last year.  It's definitely the randomness that's the killer.  Some sites would work for me at home, but not in the office, and vice versa.  Some sites would be responsive, but then grind to a halt.  Latency to sites outside of China was variable, and often incredibly high.  Packet loss sometimes became high enough to make some sites inaccessible.  I ended up installing Squid on a machine on our corporate network in California and then accessed it over the VPN (which also seems to be more robust when there's packet loss).  It had the added advantage of letting me continue to play Scrabble with my friends in Canada.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I lived in Shanghai last year .
It 's definitely the randomness that 's the killer .
Some sites would work for me at home , but not in the office , and vice versa .
Some sites would be responsive , but then grind to a halt .
Latency to sites outside of China was variable , and often incredibly high .
Packet loss sometimes became high enough to make some sites inaccessible .
I ended up installing Squid on a machine on our corporate network in California and then accessed it over the VPN ( which also seems to be more robust when there 's packet loss ) .
It had the added advantage of letting me continue to play Scrabble with my friends in Canada .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I lived in Shanghai last year.
It's definitely the randomness that's the killer.
Some sites would work for me at home, but not in the office, and vice versa.
Some sites would be responsive, but then grind to a halt.
Latency to sites outside of China was variable, and often incredibly high.
Packet loss sometimes became high enough to make some sites inaccessible.
I ended up installing Squid on a machine on our corporate network in California and then accessed it over the VPN (which also seems to be more robust when there's packet loss).
It had the added advantage of letting me continue to play Scrabble with my friends in Canada.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465241</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465927</id>
	<title>Re:Let's all go shop at Walmart to Protest!</title>
	<author>nobodylocalhost</author>
	<datestamp>1245942480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And of course, walmart itself is a fascist dictatorship if you think about it. A rather hostile fascist dictatorship that economically destroys local small businesses, lowers overall GDP of the area, and subverts nations' economic control. IMO it is worse than China, it's like early stages of the soviet union but without communism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And of course , walmart itself is a fascist dictatorship if you think about it .
A rather hostile fascist dictatorship that economically destroys local small businesses , lowers overall GDP of the area , and subverts nations ' economic control .
IMO it is worse than China , it 's like early stages of the soviet union but without communism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And of course, walmart itself is a fascist dictatorship if you think about it.
A rather hostile fascist dictatorship that economically destroys local small businesses, lowers overall GDP of the area, and subverts nations' economic control.
IMO it is worse than China, it's like early stages of the soviet union but without communism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466169</id>
	<title>regardless of china's public claims</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245943740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>making google unreliable is a subtle argument for chinese citizens to depend upon chinese competitors to google, such as baidu</p><p><a href="http://www.baidu.com/" title="baidu.com">http://www.baidu.com/</a> [baidu.com]</p><p>does the outlay of that page look familiar to you?</p><p>for example, if my gmail account in china is unreliable- due to no fault of google, but unreliable nonetheless, that means i would tend to use some other email provider for that vital service. for baidu, all you have to do is have a fellow nationalist stooge in the government hit the flicker switch on google's traffic every now and then. since china is filtering everything anyway via centralized national authority, that's not hard to arrange</p><p>its a subtle and effective form of protectionism, something which the usa and other trading partners of china have noticed a severe uptick of recently, due to the global economic climate. which is especially hypocritical, since china, as a major exporter, is always complaining about protectionism</p><p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/business/economy/24yuan.html" title="nytimes.com">http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/business/economy/24yuan.html</a> [nytimes.com] </p><blockquote><div><p>HONG KONG -- China has begun a concerted effort to keep its export economy humming, even as demand for its goods has plummeted with the global downturn.</p><p>Risking the ire of the United States and other trading partners, the Chinese government has quietly started adopting policies aimed at encouraging exports while curbing imports, even though China, as one of the world's largest exporters, has aggressively criticized protectionism in other countries.</p><p>The government has sharply expanded three programs to help exporters, giving them larger tax rebates, more generous loans from state-owned banks to finance trade, and more government-paid travel to promote themselves at trade shows around the world.</p><p>At the same time, Beijing has banned all local, provincial and national government agencies from buying imported goods except in cases where no local substitute exists.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>making google unreliable is a subtle argument for chinese citizens to depend upon chinese competitors to google , such as baiduhttp : //www.baidu.com/ [ baidu.com ] does the outlay of that page look familiar to you ? for example , if my gmail account in china is unreliable- due to no fault of google , but unreliable nonetheless , that means i would tend to use some other email provider for that vital service .
for baidu , all you have to do is have a fellow nationalist stooge in the government hit the flicker switch on google 's traffic every now and then .
since china is filtering everything anyway via centralized national authority , that 's not hard to arrangeits a subtle and effective form of protectionism , something which the usa and other trading partners of china have noticed a severe uptick of recently , due to the global economic climate .
which is especially hypocritical , since china , as a major exporter , is always complaining about protectionismhttp : //www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/business/economy/24yuan.html [ nytimes.com ] HONG KONG -- China has begun a concerted effort to keep its export economy humming , even as demand for its goods has plummeted with the global downturn.Risking the ire of the United States and other trading partners , the Chinese government has quietly started adopting policies aimed at encouraging exports while curbing imports , even though China , as one of the world 's largest exporters , has aggressively criticized protectionism in other countries.The government has sharply expanded three programs to help exporters , giving them larger tax rebates , more generous loans from state-owned banks to finance trade , and more government-paid travel to promote themselves at trade shows around the world.At the same time , Beijing has banned all local , provincial and national government agencies from buying imported goods except in cases where no local substitute exists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>making google unreliable is a subtle argument for chinese citizens to depend upon chinese competitors to google, such as baiduhttp://www.baidu.com/ [baidu.com]does the outlay of that page look familiar to you?for example, if my gmail account in china is unreliable- due to no fault of google, but unreliable nonetheless, that means i would tend to use some other email provider for that vital service.
for baidu, all you have to do is have a fellow nationalist stooge in the government hit the flicker switch on google's traffic every now and then.
since china is filtering everything anyway via centralized national authority, that's not hard to arrangeits a subtle and effective form of protectionism, something which the usa and other trading partners of china have noticed a severe uptick of recently, due to the global economic climate.
which is especially hypocritical, since china, as a major exporter, is always complaining about protectionismhttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/business/economy/24yuan.html [nytimes.com] HONG KONG -- China has begun a concerted effort to keep its export economy humming, even as demand for its goods has plummeted with the global downturn.Risking the ire of the United States and other trading partners, the Chinese government has quietly started adopting policies aimed at encouraging exports while curbing imports, even though China, as one of the world's largest exporters, has aggressively criticized protectionism in other countries.The government has sharply expanded three programs to help exporters, giving them larger tax rebates, more generous loans from state-owned banks to finance trade, and more government-paid travel to promote themselves at trade shows around the world.At the same time, Beijing has banned all local, provincial and national government agencies from buying imported goods except in cases where no local substitute exists.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465297</id>
	<title>Re:Local Laws</title>
	<author>fiordhraoi</author>
	<datestamp>1245938880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sure, they CAN do as they please.  That doesn't mean they're going to make correct/good decisions.<p>Saying that something is okay as long as it's not covered by existing international law is saying "do anything you want as long as the rest of us haven't thought of it yet."  Indeed, international law barely exists - at core it's nothing more than the various treaties and agreements between states.  It tends to have very little to do with individuals.  There is no international Congress that can pass a law that affects all nations - don't even get me started on the UN (or as I've taken to calling it lately, the League of United Nations).</p><p>If China wanted to execute all couples who had more than two children, they could do so.  It wouldn't be against any international law.  Does that make it right?  Does that mean humanitarian organizations should back off and shut up?  Hell no.</p><p>Being a sovereign nation gives you the ABILITY (not the right) to do as you wish in many circumstances.  It sure as hell doesn't give a "Mandate of Heaven" that says all your decisions will be correct and good for people.  </p><p>Sure, censoring Google may seem like a small thing, but compare it to the censorship that still exists regarding things like the Tiananmen square massacre - or as it's euphemized in China, the "June 4th incident."  It's still a completely forbidden topic in media and print.  That's the kind of BS that overarching censorship can lead to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , they CAN do as they please .
That does n't mean they 're going to make correct/good decisions.Saying that something is okay as long as it 's not covered by existing international law is saying " do anything you want as long as the rest of us have n't thought of it yet .
" Indeed , international law barely exists - at core it 's nothing more than the various treaties and agreements between states .
It tends to have very little to do with individuals .
There is no international Congress that can pass a law that affects all nations - do n't even get me started on the UN ( or as I 've taken to calling it lately , the League of United Nations ) .If China wanted to execute all couples who had more than two children , they could do so .
It would n't be against any international law .
Does that make it right ?
Does that mean humanitarian organizations should back off and shut up ?
Hell no.Being a sovereign nation gives you the ABILITY ( not the right ) to do as you wish in many circumstances .
It sure as hell does n't give a " Mandate of Heaven " that says all your decisions will be correct and good for people .
Sure , censoring Google may seem like a small thing , but compare it to the censorship that still exists regarding things like the Tiananmen square massacre - or as it 's euphemized in China , the " June 4th incident .
" It 's still a completely forbidden topic in media and print .
That 's the kind of BS that overarching censorship can lead to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, they CAN do as they please.
That doesn't mean they're going to make correct/good decisions.Saying that something is okay as long as it's not covered by existing international law is saying "do anything you want as long as the rest of us haven't thought of it yet.
"  Indeed, international law barely exists - at core it's nothing more than the various treaties and agreements between states.
It tends to have very little to do with individuals.
There is no international Congress that can pass a law that affects all nations - don't even get me started on the UN (or as I've taken to calling it lately, the League of United Nations).If China wanted to execute all couples who had more than two children, they could do so.
It wouldn't be against any international law.
Does that make it right?
Does that mean humanitarian organizations should back off and shut up?
Hell no.Being a sovereign nation gives you the ABILITY (not the right) to do as you wish in many circumstances.
It sure as hell doesn't give a "Mandate of Heaven" that says all your decisions will be correct and good for people.
Sure, censoring Google may seem like a small thing, but compare it to the censorship that still exists regarding things like the Tiananmen square massacre - or as it's euphemized in China, the "June 4th incident.
"  It's still a completely forbidden topic in media and print.
That's the kind of BS that overarching censorship can lead to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466939</id>
	<title>directly to a google.com IP address</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1245947700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thats funny, so just use alternate DNS servers and you are home free.</p><p>Pretty lame if you ask me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats funny , so just use alternate DNS servers and you are home free.Pretty lame if you ask me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats funny, so just use alternate DNS servers and you are home free.Pretty lame if you ask me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28475991</id>
	<title>Re:my experiences...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245940260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ummm, strange, I live in China and I use Google.com daily (at least 20 searches a day), never experienced any slowdown (before the block, of course), it was always only a little bit slower than Baidu, and this is, of course, due to the fact that the servers are on the other side of the Pacific.</p><p>BTW, now that Google was blocked yesterday and I had to use Yahoo and Bing (Baidu doesn't have a good (if any) English support), only to find the two so much worse than Google now. Especially Bing, it was simply unusable. Can't believe that MS, with so much $$$ and so much emphasis on web search, produces such a rubbish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ummm , strange , I live in China and I use Google.com daily ( at least 20 searches a day ) , never experienced any slowdown ( before the block , of course ) , it was always only a little bit slower than Baidu , and this is , of course , due to the fact that the servers are on the other side of the Pacific.BTW , now that Google was blocked yesterday and I had to use Yahoo and Bing ( Baidu does n't have a good ( if any ) English support ) , only to find the two so much worse than Google now .
Especially Bing , it was simply unusable .
Ca n't believe that MS , with so much $ $ $ and so much emphasis on web search , produces such a rubbish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ummm, strange, I live in China and I use Google.com daily (at least 20 searches a day), never experienced any slowdown (before the block, of course), it was always only a little bit slower than Baidu, and this is, of course, due to the fact that the servers are on the other side of the Pacific.BTW, now that Google was blocked yesterday and I had to use Yahoo and Bing (Baidu doesn't have a good (if any) English support), only to find the two so much worse than Google now.
Especially Bing, it was simply unusable.
Can't believe that MS, with so much $$$ and so much emphasis on web search, produces such a rubbish.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465241</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465151</id>
	<title>go get a coffee</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245937740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah... You are a America, the typical one:ignorant and naive but with full wagon of pride.</p><p>Even British knows: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/google/4797727/Googles-Gmail-service-crashes-across-world.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah... You are a America , the typical one : ignorant and naive but with full wagon of pride.Even British knows : http : //www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/google/4797727/Googles-Gmail-service-crashes-across-world.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah... You are a America, the typical one:ignorant and naive but with full wagon of pride.Even British knows: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/google/4797727/Googles-Gmail-service-crashes-across-world.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465683</id>
	<title>Re:What do you expect?</title>
	<author>mk\_is\_here</author>
	<datestamp>1245941160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In China, you don't have the opportunity to elect someone to run the government...<br>No, you have no rights to choose your leader (even false hope is not given)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In China , you do n't have the opportunity to elect someone to run the government...No , you have no rights to choose your leader ( even false hope is not given )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In China, you don't have the opportunity to elect someone to run the government...No, you have no rights to choose your leader (even false hope is not given)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28472995</id>
	<title>Oh not again ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245926760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to support our China based sales office from another country. I've had to move our email hosting 3 times already this month because the hosts we have been using get all of their services slowed down to a crawl. Yesterday, I just finished testing routing it through gmail and I was just preparing to deploy it to our China office. Now I read this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>I think the Chinese government must be testing some form of restriction with a lot of different hosts around the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to support our China based sales office from another country .
I 've had to move our email hosting 3 times already this month because the hosts we have been using get all of their services slowed down to a crawl .
Yesterday , I just finished testing routing it through gmail and I was just preparing to deploy it to our China office .
Now I read this ...I think the Chinese government must be testing some form of restriction with a lot of different hosts around the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to support our China based sales office from another country.
I've had to move our email hosting 3 times already this month because the hosts we have been using get all of their services slowed down to a crawl.
Yesterday, I just finished testing routing it through gmail and I was just preparing to deploy it to our China office.
Now I read this ...I think the Chinese government must be testing some form of restriction with a lot of different hosts around the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466709</id>
	<title>Re:Gauging response?</title>
	<author>Sinbios</author>
	<datestamp>1245946440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google is a real part of YOUR life. Most Chinese haven't even heard of it.</p><p>In any event, google.cn is apparently still available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google is a real part of YOUR life .
Most Chinese have n't even heard of it.In any event , google.cn is apparently still available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google is a real part of YOUR life.
Most Chinese haven't even heard of it.In any event, google.cn is apparently still available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28469797</id>
	<title>Software to bypass China's filtering</title>
	<author>JumperCable</author>
	<datestamp>1245958560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.internetfreedom.org/Products-and-Services" title="internetfreedom.org">http://www.internetfreedom.org/Products-and-Services</a> [internetfreedom.org] <br>
^ Above software packages are free for Chinese &amp; Iranian citizens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.internetfreedom.org/Products-and-Services [ internetfreedom.org ] ^ Above software packages are free for Chinese &amp; Iranian citizens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.internetfreedom.org/Products-and-Services [internetfreedom.org] 
^ Above software packages are free for Chinese &amp; Iranian citizens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347</id>
	<title>Google should block China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245939240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Give them a week with no google, no gmail, no google maps, and see what kind of reaction the chinese government gets. Then say they can have their google back when they agree to stop blocking it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Give them a week with no google , no gmail , no google maps , and see what kind of reaction the chinese government gets .
Then say they can have their google back when they agree to stop blocking it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give them a week with no google, no gmail, no google maps, and see what kind of reaction the chinese government gets.
Then say they can have their google back when they agree to stop blocking it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465901</id>
	<title>Re:Local Laws</title>
	<author>BlackBloq</author>
	<datestamp>1245942360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seems like businesses probably started to yell... (or make polite calls to high officials). I wonder how much Chinese commerce depends on those services to facilitate profit for companies based in the Mainland? And what the incurred loss per minute to China would be?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems like businesses probably started to yell... ( or make polite calls to high officials ) .
I wonder how much Chinese commerce depends on those services to facilitate profit for companies based in the Mainland ?
And what the incurred loss per minute to China would be ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems like businesses probably started to yell... (or make polite calls to high officials).
I wonder how much Chinese commerce depends on those services to facilitate profit for companies based in the Mainland?
And what the incurred loss per minute to China would be?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465297</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466615</id>
	<title>Re:Local Laws</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1245945960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyhow - your statement looks, hmm "canned"...blink twice if you were forced to write that message<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)<br> <br>

No, really. I find no fault in your words. It sucks that China does this but it is their choice. Denying people access to Google is not a crime in the international courts. People may not like it but gov't doesn't always make choices that people like.

OT: I particularly enjoyed how the mod trolls moded you as troll.  If i had mod points I'd give you a point UP. Unfortunately I used it all yesterday<br> <br>

Hey morons..i mean mods - the point system is not for you to mod down posts you don't agree with.  Notice the mod up points are for interesting, informative, insightful....there is no "uninsightful" mods.  There is troll but the OP posters falls short of troll. It would be informative and insightful.<br> <br>

Anyhow - that's why i post on slashdot ala karma excellente'</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyhow - your statement looks , hmm " canned " ...blink twice if you were forced to write that message ; ) No , really .
I find no fault in your words .
It sucks that China does this but it is their choice .
Denying people access to Google is not a crime in the international courts .
People may not like it but gov't does n't always make choices that people like .
OT : I particularly enjoyed how the mod trolls moded you as troll .
If i had mod points I 'd give you a point UP .
Unfortunately I used it all yesterday Hey morons..i mean mods - the point system is not for you to mod down posts you do n't agree with .
Notice the mod up points are for interesting , informative , insightful....there is no " uninsightful " mods .
There is troll but the OP posters falls short of troll .
It would be informative and insightful .
Anyhow - that 's why i post on slashdot ala karma excellente'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyhow - your statement looks, hmm "canned"...blink twice if you were forced to write that message ;) 

No, really.
I find no fault in your words.
It sucks that China does this but it is their choice.
Denying people access to Google is not a crime in the international courts.
People may not like it but gov't doesn't always make choices that people like.
OT: I particularly enjoyed how the mod trolls moded you as troll.
If i had mod points I'd give you a point UP.
Unfortunately I used it all yesterday 

Hey morons..i mean mods - the point system is not for you to mod down posts you don't agree with.
Notice the mod up points are for interesting, informative, insightful....there is no "uninsightful" mods.
There is troll but the OP posters falls short of troll.
It would be informative and insightful.
Anyhow - that's why i post on slashdot ala karma excellente'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28469203</id>
	<title>A reply to the "it's not a block" comments...</title>
	<author>shekared</author>
	<datestamp>1245956220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Chinese governments approach to internet censorship is hardly random, but a heavy handed approach meant to blind just those citizens who aren't savvy enough to get around "The Great Firewall."  Many of the other foreigners and even Chinese I know do not bother to employ VPN or proxy setups unless the government is currently blocking certain content or specific domains they are interested in (ie. youtube since March).  Keyword based filtering, blocking entire netblocks, domain names, and messing with DNS are all within the usual bag of tricks the government employs.  While I was able to get to the google.com main page via an IP address, most google owned sites outside of google.cn were blocked, unable to locate the domain via Chinese based DNS servers or incurring TCP resets at random.  Forcing my DNS to my VPN provider's servers did solve the problem, but again, most people within the PRC don't bother to keep a list of proxies or have a paid VPN account, let alone know how to implement these solutions.  Even forcing your DNS outside of the mainland, you're still at the mercy of the governments packet snooping, resets, and IP blocking.  So while you're now able to connect to google.com via an IP address, you're still hoping the government hasn't begun blocking those IP addresses or started implementing random resets based on search content.  The government filtering, censoring and blocking is very quick to adapt to methods of getting around whatever it is they're intending to accomplish.
<br>
<br>
I submitted the original story to inform rather than question the PRC governments right or ability to implement censorship.  This is not a political matter for me, but rather an annoyance.  I realized rather quickly just how much I depend on google (and how much I might need to change that).  Google is the default search engine within my browser, my main email address of 7 years is handled through gmail, and I've become accustom to asking google to settle any fact based arguments that come up throughout my day.  Whether or not I search for objectionable content via google is besides the point (I can get all of the same content out of China's dominant search engine, baidu.com), it was simply a shock not to be able to get to ANY google property.
<br>
<br>
On another note, this comes just days after the PRC government demanded that google give them more control over what is displayed on google.cn and/or remove all 'pornographic' content which appears within search results.  If this was a move to point out how quickly the government can eliminate google's estimated 48M users within the PRC, it certainly worked on me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese governments approach to internet censorship is hardly random , but a heavy handed approach meant to blind just those citizens who are n't savvy enough to get around " The Great Firewall .
" Many of the other foreigners and even Chinese I know do not bother to employ VPN or proxy setups unless the government is currently blocking certain content or specific domains they are interested in ( ie .
youtube since March ) .
Keyword based filtering , blocking entire netblocks , domain names , and messing with DNS are all within the usual bag of tricks the government employs .
While I was able to get to the google.com main page via an IP address , most google owned sites outside of google.cn were blocked , unable to locate the domain via Chinese based DNS servers or incurring TCP resets at random .
Forcing my DNS to my VPN provider 's servers did solve the problem , but again , most people within the PRC do n't bother to keep a list of proxies or have a paid VPN account , let alone know how to implement these solutions .
Even forcing your DNS outside of the mainland , you 're still at the mercy of the governments packet snooping , resets , and IP blocking .
So while you 're now able to connect to google.com via an IP address , you 're still hoping the government has n't begun blocking those IP addresses or started implementing random resets based on search content .
The government filtering , censoring and blocking is very quick to adapt to methods of getting around whatever it is they 're intending to accomplish .
I submitted the original story to inform rather than question the PRC governments right or ability to implement censorship .
This is not a political matter for me , but rather an annoyance .
I realized rather quickly just how much I depend on google ( and how much I might need to change that ) .
Google is the default search engine within my browser , my main email address of 7 years is handled through gmail , and I 've become accustom to asking google to settle any fact based arguments that come up throughout my day .
Whether or not I search for objectionable content via google is besides the point ( I can get all of the same content out of China 's dominant search engine , baidu.com ) , it was simply a shock not to be able to get to ANY google property .
On another note , this comes just days after the PRC government demanded that google give them more control over what is displayed on google.cn and/or remove all 'pornographic ' content which appears within search results .
If this was a move to point out how quickly the government can eliminate google 's estimated 48M users within the PRC , it certainly worked on me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chinese governments approach to internet censorship is hardly random, but a heavy handed approach meant to blind just those citizens who aren't savvy enough to get around "The Great Firewall.
"  Many of the other foreigners and even Chinese I know do not bother to employ VPN or proxy setups unless the government is currently blocking certain content or specific domains they are interested in (ie.
youtube since March).
Keyword based filtering, blocking entire netblocks, domain names, and messing with DNS are all within the usual bag of tricks the government employs.
While I was able to get to the google.com main page via an IP address, most google owned sites outside of google.cn were blocked, unable to locate the domain via Chinese based DNS servers or incurring TCP resets at random.
Forcing my DNS to my VPN provider's servers did solve the problem, but again, most people within the PRC don't bother to keep a list of proxies or have a paid VPN account, let alone know how to implement these solutions.
Even forcing your DNS outside of the mainland, you're still at the mercy of the governments packet snooping, resets, and IP blocking.
So while you're now able to connect to google.com via an IP address, you're still hoping the government hasn't begun blocking those IP addresses or started implementing random resets based on search content.
The government filtering, censoring and blocking is very quick to adapt to methods of getting around whatever it is they're intending to accomplish.
I submitted the original story to inform rather than question the PRC governments right or ability to implement censorship.
This is not a political matter for me, but rather an annoyance.
I realized rather quickly just how much I depend on google (and how much I might need to change that).
Google is the default search engine within my browser, my main email address of 7 years is handled through gmail, and I've become accustom to asking google to settle any fact based arguments that come up throughout my day.
Whether or not I search for objectionable content via google is besides the point (I can get all of the same content out of China's dominant search engine, baidu.com), it was simply a shock not to be able to get to ANY google property.
On another note, this comes just days after the PRC government demanded that google give them more control over what is displayed on google.cn and/or remove all 'pornographic' content which appears within search results.
If this was a move to point out how quickly the government can eliminate google's estimated 48M users within the PRC, it certainly worked on me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465137</id>
	<title>What do you expect?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245937680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you elect a bunch of dictators to run your country, of course there will be some restrictions like this.  In the US, we learned that lesson under George W. Bush.  Just elect the Chinese version of Barack Obama, and your problems will be solved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you elect a bunch of dictators to run your country , of course there will be some restrictions like this .
In the US , we learned that lesson under George W. Bush. Just elect the Chinese version of Barack Obama , and your problems will be solved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you elect a bunch of dictators to run your country, of course there will be some restrictions like this.
In the US, we learned that lesson under George W. Bush.  Just elect the Chinese version of Barack Obama, and your problems will be solved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28467217</id>
	<title>Re:What do you expect?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245948960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>in communist china leaders choose you?</htmltext>
<tokenext>in communist china leaders choose you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in communist china leaders choose you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465313</id>
	<title>It's like a glitch in the Matrix</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245939000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They just changed something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They just changed something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They just changed something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465737</id>
	<title>Wake up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245941460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People, please wake up. Stop doing business with China. Stop outsourcing, stop buying clothes from China.<br>Cut them off from any business, tell anybody about it, tell the store you're shopping at, tell and vote with money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People , please wake up .
Stop doing business with China .
Stop outsourcing , stop buying clothes from China.Cut them off from any business , tell anybody about it , tell the store you 're shopping at , tell and vote with money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People, please wake up.
Stop doing business with China.
Stop outsourcing, stop buying clothes from China.Cut them off from any business, tell anybody about it, tell the store you're shopping at, tell and vote with money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28467545</id>
	<title>Local DNS problem?</title>
	<author>jaclu</author>
	<datestamp>1245950220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why doesn't anybody suggest the obvious first guess, the reporting guy had a local dns problem, either his office or his provider accidentally misconfigured something.</p><p>Doesnt have to be this of course but I usually assume that the risk for human errors are larger the lower in the food chain you go, and the redundancies also are fewer, so instead of assuming all of China lost google, why not start by digging and looking around how spread the issue is first?</p><p>In 90\% of all cases you find the problem in the first or second step if you search bottom up for net issues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does n't anybody suggest the obvious first guess , the reporting guy had a local dns problem , either his office or his provider accidentally misconfigured something.Doesnt have to be this of course but I usually assume that the risk for human errors are larger the lower in the food chain you go , and the redundancies also are fewer , so instead of assuming all of China lost google , why not start by digging and looking around how spread the issue is first ? In 90 \ % of all cases you find the problem in the first or second step if you search bottom up for net issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why doesn't anybody suggest the obvious first guess, the reporting guy had a local dns problem, either his office or his provider accidentally misconfigured something.Doesnt have to be this of course but I usually assume that the risk for human errors are larger the lower in the food chain you go, and the redundancies also are fewer, so instead of assuming all of China lost google, why not start by digging and looking around how spread the issue is first?In 90\% of all cases you find the problem in the first or second step if you search bottom up for net issues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465285</id>
	<title>DNS problem maybe?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245938760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Based on the short story summary, this could be as simple as the DNS server you use having an issue, not some grand blocking scheme.<br>We all know blocking in CN happens, do we need the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. front page to provide OMG weekly/daily updates on what is currently blocked and not blocked in CN?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Based on the short story summary , this could be as simple as the DNS server you use having an issue , not some grand blocking scheme.We all know blocking in CN happens , do we need the / .
front page to provide OMG weekly/daily updates on what is currently blocked and not blocked in CN ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Based on the short story summary, this could be as simple as the DNS server you use having an issue, not some grand blocking scheme.We all know blocking in CN happens, do we need the /.
front page to provide OMG weekly/daily updates on what is currently blocked and not blocked in CN?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28479173</id>
	<title>Maybe not a government plot</title>
	<author>krungthepsurfer</author>
	<datestamp>1246009740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This may not have been limited to China. I had the same problem in Melbourne, Australia for a while today. Attempts to reach Google sites returned a URL not found error. Perhaps the problem was a Google server malfunction rather than a censorship attempt jointly conducted by the Chinese and Australian governments.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This may not have been limited to China .
I had the same problem in Melbourne , Australia for a while today .
Attempts to reach Google sites returned a URL not found error .
Perhaps the problem was a Google server malfunction rather than a censorship attempt jointly conducted by the Chinese and Australian governments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This may not have been limited to China.
I had the same problem in Melbourne, Australia for a while today.
Attempts to reach Google sites returned a URL not found error.
Perhaps the problem was a Google server malfunction rather than a censorship attempt jointly conducted by the Chinese and Australian governments.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465051</id>
	<title>Please come to the local station</title>
	<author>ls671</author>
	<datestamp>1245937200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dear Sir,</p><p>We know who you are, we were just conducting tests and installing tools to enhance your dedicated internet connection.</p><p>Now that you have made this public, could you come to the local authorities station right away so we can settle things up ?</p><p>If you do not come, we will have to go get you at your work place and we would like to avoid this embarrassment for yourself. We also have enabled airport and border checks for yourself so you won't be allowed to leave the country before we meet.</p><p>Regards,<br>Liu Cheng<br>Security officer,<br>Republic of China</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear Sir,We know who you are , we were just conducting tests and installing tools to enhance your dedicated internet connection.Now that you have made this public , could you come to the local authorities station right away so we can settle things up ? If you do not come , we will have to go get you at your work place and we would like to avoid this embarrassment for yourself .
We also have enabled airport and border checks for yourself so you wo n't be allowed to leave the country before we meet.Regards,Liu ChengSecurity officer,Republic of China</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear Sir,We know who you are, we were just conducting tests and installing tools to enhance your dedicated internet connection.Now that you have made this public, could you come to the local authorities station right away so we can settle things up ?If you do not come, we will have to go get you at your work place and we would like to avoid this embarrassment for yourself.
We also have enabled airport and border checks for yourself so you won't be allowed to leave the country before we meet.Regards,Liu ChengSecurity officer,Republic of China</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28472695</id>
	<title>By Neruos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245925560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China is going to do whatever they want and there is not a damn thing the rest of the world can do about it. Stop reporting every time google goes down, srsly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China is going to do whatever they want and there is not a damn thing the rest of the world can do about it .
Stop reporting every time google goes down , srsly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China is going to do whatever they want and there is not a damn thing the rest of the world can do about it.
Stop reporting every time google goes down, srsly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466943</id>
	<title>ZH connections</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245947760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm posting this from China.</p><p>Google was off and on all today. Youtube is still blocked, 1 or 2 months since the last<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. article about it, thought one proxy easily deals with the issue.</p><p>Other random factoids of note from a Chinese computer (not from a hotel; they use different censorship deals for Hotels than private residences).</p><p>The New York Times site is fully functional<br>Wikipedia works on everything except articles specifically talking about Chinese badstuff (IE you can visit the Chinese page, the PRC page, not the page of a certain Square).<br>Bittorrent will rarely use non-Chinese peers<br>The Sinfest webcomic is blocked.<br>4chan is not.</p><p>About 3/4 of the porn sites I know off the top of my head are blocked.</p><p>The french and japanese wikipedia articles for the Square incident aren't blocked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm posting this from China.Google was off and on all today .
Youtube is still blocked , 1 or 2 months since the last / .
article about it , thought one proxy easily deals with the issue.Other random factoids of note from a Chinese computer ( not from a hotel ; they use different censorship deals for Hotels than private residences ) .The New York Times site is fully functionalWikipedia works on everything except articles specifically talking about Chinese badstuff ( IE you can visit the Chinese page , the PRC page , not the page of a certain Square ) .Bittorrent will rarely use non-Chinese peersThe Sinfest webcomic is blocked.4chan is not.About 3/4 of the porn sites I know off the top of my head are blocked.The french and japanese wikipedia articles for the Square incident are n't blocked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm posting this from China.Google was off and on all today.
Youtube is still blocked, 1 or 2 months since the last /.
article about it, thought one proxy easily deals with the issue.Other random factoids of note from a Chinese computer (not from a hotel; they use different censorship deals for Hotels than private residences).The New York Times site is fully functionalWikipedia works on everything except articles specifically talking about Chinese badstuff (IE you can visit the Chinese page, the PRC page, not the page of a certain Square).Bittorrent will rarely use non-Chinese peersThe Sinfest webcomic is blocked.4chan is not.About 3/4 of the porn sites I know off the top of my head are blocked.The french and japanese wikipedia articles for the Square incident aren't blocked.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28468661</id>
	<title>Re:Google should block China</title>
	<author>cyfer2000</author>
	<datestamp>1245954300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Chinese don't care. Google is only a small player in China.  Baidu, QQ are the real thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese do n't care .
Google is only a small player in China .
Baidu , QQ are the real thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese don't care.
Google is only a small player in China.
Baidu, QQ are the real thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465191</id>
	<title>Gauging response?</title>
	<author>ComputerDruid</author>
	<datestamp>1245938040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems to me that google is one of the sites on the internet that make china's censorship work much more difficult. It's not hard to imagine that they'd like google gone for good. Unfortunately, google is a very real part of a lot of people's lives.</p><p>Is it possible that this (and other similar actions) are attempts to see if they would be able to get away with blocking google for a longer period of time, and not cause a mass uproar?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to me that google is one of the sites on the internet that make china 's censorship work much more difficult .
It 's not hard to imagine that they 'd like google gone for good .
Unfortunately , google is a very real part of a lot of people 's lives.Is it possible that this ( and other similar actions ) are attempts to see if they would be able to get away with blocking google for a longer period of time , and not cause a mass uproar ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to me that google is one of the sites on the internet that make china's censorship work much more difficult.
It's not hard to imagine that they'd like google gone for good.
Unfortunately, google is a very real part of a lot of people's lives.Is it possible that this (and other similar actions) are attempts to see if they would be able to get away with blocking google for a longer period of time, and not cause a mass uproar?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466831
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465181
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28468661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28467217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28469055
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466169
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28523961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465241
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465253
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465991
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465577
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28479219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465051
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28475991
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465241
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466251
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28471657
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465241
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28468381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465181
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28477333
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465051
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_1220232_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465189
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465927
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465193
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465297
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465901
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465889
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465253
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466371
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466111
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466709
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465683
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28467217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465577
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465047
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28467545
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465347
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465877
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466251
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465845
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28468661
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465875
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466939
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466169
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28469055
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465231
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465241
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28471657
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28523961
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28475991
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465313
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465181
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28468381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28466831
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465135
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_1220232.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28465051
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28479219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_1220232.28477333
</commentlist>
</conversation>
