<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_26_234247</id>
	<title>Netflix Prize May Have Been Achieved</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1246018200000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>MadAnalyst writes <i>"The long-running $1,000,000 competition to improve on the Netflix Cinematch recommendation system by 10\% (in terms of the RMSE) may have finally been won. <a href="http://www.netflixprize.com//leaderboard">Recent results show a 10.05\%</a> improvement from the team called <a href="http://www.research.att.com/~volinsky/netflix/bpc.html">BellKor's Pragmatic Chaos</a>, a <a href="http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/06/winning-teams-join-to-qualify-for-1-million-netflix-prize/">merger between some of the teams</a> who were <a href="http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/06/1-million-netflix-prize-so-close-they-can-taste-it/">getting close to the contest's goal</a>. We've <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/story/08/11/22/0526216/Interest-Still-High-In-the-Netflix-Algorithm-Competition">discussed this competition</a> in the past."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>MadAnalyst writes " The long-running $ 1,000,000 competition to improve on the Netflix Cinematch recommendation system by 10 \ % ( in terms of the RMSE ) may have finally been won .
Recent results show a 10.05 \ % improvement from the team called BellKor 's Pragmatic Chaos , a merger between some of the teams who were getting close to the contest 's goal .
We 've discussed this competition in the past .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MadAnalyst writes "The long-running $1,000,000 competition to improve on the Netflix Cinematch recommendation system by 10\% (in terms of the RMSE) may have finally been won.
Recent results show a 10.05\% improvement from the team called BellKor's Pragmatic Chaos, a merger between some of the teams who were getting close to the contest's goal.
We've discussed this competition in the past.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490239</id>
	<title>Re:No info about the Netflix prize</title>
	<author>bogjobber</author>
	<datestamp>1246024380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the first sentence didn't explain it enough, perhaps you could RTFA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the first sentence did n't explain it enough , perhaps you could RTFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the first sentence didn't explain it enough, perhaps you could RTFA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491059</id>
	<title>Re:No info about the Netflix prize</title>
	<author>Korin43</author>
	<datestamp>1246033440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except it doesn't mention what an improvement of 10\% means (unless you know what RMSE means, which I don't).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except it does n't mention what an improvement of 10 \ % means ( unless you know what RMSE means , which I do n't ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except it doesn't mention what an improvement of 10\% means (unless you know what RMSE means, which I don't).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490173</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045</id>
	<title>No info about the Netflix prize</title>
	<author>Daimanta</author>
	<datestamp>1246022220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>C'mon, the Netflix prize isn't THAT well known. At least you could have given some basic info about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>C'mon , the Netflix prize is n't THAT well known .
At least you could have given some basic info about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C'mon, the Netflix prize isn't THAT well known.
At least you could have given some basic info about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28514459</id>
	<title>Re:Film recommendations</title>
	<author>coaxial</author>
	<datestamp>1246292520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe that Netflix is still using Cinematch.  You could look into <a href="http://www.movielens.org/" title="movielens.org" rel="nofollow">movielens</a> [movielens.org].  It's from the GroupLens group at U Minn.</p><blockquote><div><p>[E]ven though both probably use a pretty simple algorithm compared to Nextflix.</p></div></blockquote><p>You do know that Netflix said on the outset "You're competing with 15 years of really smart people banging away at the problem." and it was beat in <a href="http://slashdot.org/story/06/10/09/1344235/Netflix-Prize-Competitor-Already-Beats-Netflix" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">less than week</a> [slashdot.org].</p><p>That's not to meant as a knock against Netflix's engineers, but more about that they didn't really build a state of the art recommender system.  <a href="http://sifter.org/~simon/journal/20061211.html" title="sifter.org" rel="nofollow">Simple SVD</a> [sifter.org] (aka <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latent\_semantic\_indexing" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">latent semantic indexing</a> [wikipedia.org] outperfomed them as well.)  They did something a bit more than straight up kNN clustering, but that was pretty much it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe that Netflix is still using Cinematch .
You could look into movielens [ movielens.org ] .
It 's from the GroupLens group at U Minn. [ E ] ven though both probably use a pretty simple algorithm compared to Nextflix.You do know that Netflix said on the outset " You 're competing with 15 years of really smart people banging away at the problem .
" and it was beat in less than week [ slashdot.org ] .That 's not to meant as a knock against Netflix 's engineers , but more about that they did n't really build a state of the art recommender system .
Simple SVD [ sifter.org ] ( aka latent semantic indexing [ wikipedia.org ] outperfomed them as well .
) They did something a bit more than straight up kNN clustering , but that was pretty much it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe that Netflix is still using Cinematch.
You could look into movielens [movielens.org].
It's from the GroupLens group at U Minn.[E]ven though both probably use a pretty simple algorithm compared to Nextflix.You do know that Netflix said on the outset "You're competing with 15 years of really smart people banging away at the problem.
" and it was beat in less than week [slashdot.org].That's not to meant as a knock against Netflix's engineers, but more about that they didn't really build a state of the art recommender system.
Simple SVD [sifter.org] (aka latent semantic indexing [wikipedia.org] outperfomed them as well.
)  They did something a bit more than straight up kNN clustering, but that was pretty much it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28492529</id>
	<title>Re:1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>GuruBuckaroo</author>
	<datestamp>1246133940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>only $71,428.57 each<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... that ain't much of a prize.</p></div><p>That'd pay off my house, with a little to spare for new windows. I call that much of a prize.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>only $ 71,428.57 each ... that ai n't much of a prize.That 'd pay off my house , with a little to spare for new windows .
I call that much of a prize .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>only $71,428.57 each ... that ain't much of a prize.That'd pay off my house, with a little to spare for new windows.
I call that much of a prize.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490479</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246026540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cost? Try a genetic algorithm, a decent machine, and some free time. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a genetic algorithm that combined the other teams' findings into a fitter solution.<br>
The 'cost' of that would be literally time. Can't get much better than that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cost ?
Try a genetic algorithm , a decent machine , and some free time .
Hell , I would n't be surprised if it was a genetic algorithm that combined the other teams ' findings into a fitter solution .
The 'cost ' of that would be literally time .
Ca n't get much better than that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cost?
Try a genetic algorithm, a decent machine, and some free time.
Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a genetic algorithm that combined the other teams' findings into a fitter solution.
The 'cost' of that would be literally time.
Can't get much better than that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490207</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28492261</id>
	<title>FaiTlz0rs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246044600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>tto, can 3e a of a solid dose Sanctions, and</htmltext>
<tokenext>tto , can 3e a of a solid dose Sanctions , and</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tto, can 3e a of a solid dose Sanctions, and</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493637</id>
	<title>Film recommendations</title>
	<author>michuk</author>
	<datestamp>1246105020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does anyone find Netflix recommendations any good anyway? I used <a href="http://criticker.com/" title="criticker.com" rel="nofollow">http://criticker.com/</a> [criticker.com] for quite a while and was very happy about the recommended stuff. Recently switched to <a href="http://filmaster.com/" title="filmaster.com" rel="nofollow">http://filmaster.com/</a> [filmaster.com] (which is a free service) and it's equally good, even though both probably use a pretty simple algorithm compared to Nextflix.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone find Netflix recommendations any good anyway ?
I used http : //criticker.com/ [ criticker.com ] for quite a while and was very happy about the recommended stuff .
Recently switched to http : //filmaster.com/ [ filmaster.com ] ( which is a free service ) and it 's equally good , even though both probably use a pretty simple algorithm compared to Nextflix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone find Netflix recommendations any good anyway?
I used http://criticker.com/ [criticker.com] for quite a while and was very happy about the recommended stuff.
Recently switched to http://filmaster.com/ [filmaster.com] (which is a free service) and it's equally good, even though both probably use a pretty simple algorithm compared to Nextflix.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490059</id>
	<title>Well done!</title>
	<author>Slurpee</author>
	<datestamp>1246022340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well done Bellkor.</p><p>But now the real race begins.</p><p>Now that the 10\% barrier has been reached, people have 30 days to submit their final results.  At the end of the 30 days, whoever has the best result wins.</p><p>This is going to be a great month!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well done Bellkor.But now the real race begins.Now that the 10 \ % barrier has been reached , people have 30 days to submit their final results .
At the end of the 30 days , whoever has the best result wins.This is going to be a great month !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well done Bellkor.But now the real race begins.Now that the 10\% barrier has been reached, people have 30 days to submit their final results.
At the end of the 30 days, whoever has the best result wins.This is going to be a great month!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491165</id>
	<title>Re:1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>denzacar</author>
	<datestamp>1246035120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unless one of them kills all of their partners like in The Dark Knight that ain't much of a prize.</p></div><p>Yeah, but if they deliver him to the competition in a body bag they get another 500 hundred grand.<br>A million if alive, so they can teach him some manners first.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless one of them kills all of their partners like in The Dark Knight that ai n't much of a prize.Yeah , but if they deliver him to the competition in a body bag they get another 500 hundred grand.A million if alive , so they can teach him some manners first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless one of them kills all of their partners like in The Dark Knight that ain't much of a prize.Yeah, but if they deliver him to the competition in a body bag they get another 500 hundred grand.A million if alive, so they can teach him some manners first.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490321</id>
	<title>"recommendations"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246025100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who listens to these sort of things anyway?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who listens to these sort of things anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who listens to these sort of things anyway?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491547</id>
	<title>Re:1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246038060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, I have already killed two of the other guys.  Hope fully this doesn't tip off the others.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I have already killed two of the other guys .
Hope fully this does n't tip off the others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I have already killed two of the other guys.
Hope fully this doesn't tip off the others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490541</id>
	<title>real world</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246027080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So...  What does this mean in real-world analysis?  What does the score represent?  Since the score shown seems to be smaller-is-better, does this mean that 85+\% of the movies recommended won't be attractive to the target, and less than 15\% would be found interesting?</p><p>That doesn't seem very accurate...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So... What does this mean in real-world analysis ?
What does the score represent ?
Since the score shown seems to be smaller-is-better , does this mean that 85 + \ % of the movies recommended wo n't be attractive to the target , and less than 15 \ % would be found interesting ? That does n't seem very accurate.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So...  What does this mean in real-world analysis?
What does the score represent?
Since the score shown seems to be smaller-is-better, does this mean that 85+\% of the movies recommended won't be attractive to the target, and less than 15\% would be found interesting?That doesn't seem very accurate...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490101</id>
	<title>Wonderful.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246022820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now will somebody please fix that goddamned Silverlight player?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now will somebody please fix that goddamned Silverlight player ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now will somebody please fix that goddamned Silverlight player?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493147</id>
	<title>Re:they were able to get the extra 0.5\% over the t</title>
	<author>thunderclap</author>
	<datestamp>1246098060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>by simply ignoring data from anyone who ever rented SuperBabies: Baby Geniuses 2, Gigli, From Justin to Kelly, Disaster Movie, any movie by Uwe Boll and any movie starring Paris Hilton</p><p>suddenly, everything made sense</p></div><p>Ok, From Justin to Kelly wasn't really that bad. Now, Ishtar...and Battlefield Earth; those were baaaad.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>by simply ignoring data from anyone who ever rented SuperBabies : Baby Geniuses 2 , Gigli , From Justin to Kelly , Disaster Movie , any movie by Uwe Boll and any movie starring Paris Hiltonsuddenly , everything made senseOk , From Justin to Kelly was n't really that bad .
Now , Ishtar...and Battlefield Earth ; those were baaaad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>by simply ignoring data from anyone who ever rented SuperBabies: Baby Geniuses 2, Gigli, From Justin to Kelly, Disaster Movie, any movie by Uwe Boll and any movie starring Paris Hiltonsuddenly, everything made senseOk, From Justin to Kelly wasn't really that bad.
Now, Ishtar...and Battlefield Earth; those were baaaad.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490071</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490177</id>
	<title>Re:1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>neokushan</author>
	<datestamp>1246023660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pretty sure having it on their CV means they can effectively write their own pay cheque in terms of job opportunities.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty sure having it on their CV means they can effectively write their own pay cheque in terms of job opportunities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty sure having it on their CV means they can effectively write their own pay cheque in terms of job opportunities.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490055</id>
	<title>Bah, too complex; here's my analysis</title>
	<author>Smidge207</author>
	<datestamp>1246022340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just think there cannot be such 5 grades for movies. Since a 3-star or 4-star rating is differently given by people on a more or less random basis depending on the understanding that the user has about the difference that there should be between 3 and 4.</p><p>Are you sure that the contest rules don't allow to change stuff like that?</p><p>Are there some studies pointing to having 5 grades for evaluating movies being better than just having 2 as in Good and Bad?</p><p>I just think it can be split up like this:</p><p>Bad - Good<br>Waste of time - Interesting<br>Hate - Love<br>Forget - Remember<br>Ban - Bookmark<br>Discard - Add to Favorites<br>Ignore - Enjoy<br>Avoid - Recommend<br>Advise against - Support</p><p>Etc.. I think that maybe the algorithm can be more effective once ratings are just given in this way. Having only Love and Hate ratings might be a bit extreme, but all the ratings in between are for the bulletin boards, and not for a perfect recommendations system in my opinion. Maybe there should be a popup that lets the user choose which kind of definition suits best for their positive or negative rating. For example some movie might better fit "Interesting" than it would fit "Love", and some other movie might fit "Ignore" better than it would fit the description of "Hate"..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just think there can not be such 5 grades for movies .
Since a 3-star or 4-star rating is differently given by people on a more or less random basis depending on the understanding that the user has about the difference that there should be between 3 and 4.Are you sure that the contest rules do n't allow to change stuff like that ? Are there some studies pointing to having 5 grades for evaluating movies being better than just having 2 as in Good and Bad ? I just think it can be split up like this : Bad - GoodWaste of time - InterestingHate - LoveForget - RememberBan - BookmarkDiscard - Add to FavoritesIgnore - EnjoyAvoid - RecommendAdvise against - SupportEtc.. I think that maybe the algorithm can be more effective once ratings are just given in this way .
Having only Love and Hate ratings might be a bit extreme , but all the ratings in between are for the bulletin boards , and not for a perfect recommendations system in my opinion .
Maybe there should be a popup that lets the user choose which kind of definition suits best for their positive or negative rating .
For example some movie might better fit " Interesting " than it would fit " Love " , and some other movie might fit " Ignore " better than it would fit the description of " Hate " . .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just think there cannot be such 5 grades for movies.
Since a 3-star or 4-star rating is differently given by people on a more or less random basis depending on the understanding that the user has about the difference that there should be between 3 and 4.Are you sure that the contest rules don't allow to change stuff like that?Are there some studies pointing to having 5 grades for evaluating movies being better than just having 2 as in Good and Bad?I just think it can be split up like this:Bad - GoodWaste of time - InterestingHate - LoveForget - RememberBan - BookmarkDiscard - Add to FavoritesIgnore - EnjoyAvoid - RecommendAdvise against - SupportEtc.. I think that maybe the algorithm can be more effective once ratings are just given in this way.
Having only Love and Hate ratings might be a bit extreme, but all the ratings in between are for the bulletin boards, and not for a perfect recommendations system in my opinion.
Maybe there should be a popup that lets the user choose which kind of definition suits best for their positive or negative rating.
For example some movie might better fit "Interesting" than it would fit "Love", and some other movie might fit "Ignore" better than it would fit the description of "Hate"..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491603</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246038420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The initial work definitely did, but I wonder how much of the quest for the 10\% threshold moved the science, as opposed to just tweaking an application.</p></div><p>Exactly.  The first big "ah-ha" moment was that matrix factorization is the way to go for datasets like this.  The second big "ah-ha" moment was that, hey, we need to be using temporal data, too!  It's been my opinion that pretty much everything else has been the operators manually training their programs and blends against the quiz set ("tweaking," to put it gently).  Put another way, I seriously doubt Netflix could take all the same code, run it over their up-to-date database, and still see a 10\% improvement; I don't know if they'd even see a 9\% improvement.  Personally, I don't think there's even "10\%" more signal there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The initial work definitely did , but I wonder how much of the quest for the 10 \ % threshold moved the science , as opposed to just tweaking an application.Exactly .
The first big " ah-ha " moment was that matrix factorization is the way to go for datasets like this .
The second big " ah-ha " moment was that , hey , we need to be using temporal data , too !
It 's been my opinion that pretty much everything else has been the operators manually training their programs and blends against the quiz set ( " tweaking , " to put it gently ) .
Put another way , I seriously doubt Netflix could take all the same code , run it over their up-to-date database , and still see a 10 \ % improvement ; I do n't know if they 'd even see a 9 \ % improvement .
Personally , I do n't think there 's even " 10 \ % " more signal there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The initial work definitely did, but I wonder how much of the quest for the 10\% threshold moved the science, as opposed to just tweaking an application.Exactly.
The first big "ah-ha" moment was that matrix factorization is the way to go for datasets like this.
The second big "ah-ha" moment was that, hey, we need to be using temporal data, too!
It's been my opinion that pretty much everything else has been the operators manually training their programs and blends against the quiz set ("tweaking," to put it gently).
Put another way, I seriously doubt Netflix could take all the same code, run it over their up-to-date database, and still see a 10\% improvement; I don't know if they'd even see a 9\% improvement.
Personally, I don't think there's even "10\%" more signal there.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490207</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490671</id>
	<title>Re:1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246028760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man, I don't know about you (obviously), but $71k would go a pretty long way towards making my life a lot better.</p><p>And yes, I know money doesn't buy happiness, but I would be content with rent being paid and food on the table without worry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man , I do n't know about you ( obviously ) , but $ 71k would go a pretty long way towards making my life a lot better.And yes , I know money does n't buy happiness , but I would be content with rent being paid and food on the table without worry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man, I don't know about you (obviously), but $71k would go a pretty long way towards making my life a lot better.And yes, I know money doesn't buy happiness, but I would be content with rent being paid and food on the table without worry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490207</id>
	<title>Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246024020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I published a paper using Netflix data.  (Yeah, <a href="http://slashdot.org/story/06/10/09/1344235/Netflix-Prize-Competitor-Already-Beats-Netflix" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">that group</a> [slashdot.org].)</p><p>It's certainly cool that they beat the 10\% improvement, and it's a hell of a deal for Netflix, since it would have cost them more than a prize money paid out to hire the researchers, the interesting thing is whether or not this really advances the the field of recommendation systems.</p><p>The initial work definitely did, but I wonder how much of the quest for the 10\% threshold moved the science, as opposed to just tweaking an application.  Recommender systems still don't bring up rare items, and they still have problems with diversity.  None of the Netflix Prize work address any of these problems.</p><p>Still, I look forward to their paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I published a paper using Netflix data .
( Yeah , that group [ slashdot.org ] .
) It 's certainly cool that they beat the 10 \ % improvement , and it 's a hell of a deal for Netflix , since it would have cost them more than a prize money paid out to hire the researchers , the interesting thing is whether or not this really advances the the field of recommendation systems.The initial work definitely did , but I wonder how much of the quest for the 10 \ % threshold moved the science , as opposed to just tweaking an application .
Recommender systems still do n't bring up rare items , and they still have problems with diversity .
None of the Netflix Prize work address any of these problems.Still , I look forward to their paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I published a paper using Netflix data.
(Yeah, that group [slashdot.org].
)It's certainly cool that they beat the 10\% improvement, and it's a hell of a deal for Netflix, since it would have cost them more than a prize money paid out to hire the researchers, the interesting thing is whether or not this really advances the the field of recommendation systems.The initial work definitely did, but I wonder how much of the quest for the 10\% threshold moved the science, as opposed to just tweaking an application.
Recommender systems still don't bring up rare items, and they still have problems with diversity.
None of the Netflix Prize work address any of these problems.Still, I look forward to their paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28492321</id>
	<title>I'm confused...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246045200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Recent results show a 10.05\% improvement</p> </div><p>How many library of congresses is that?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Recent results show a 10.05 \ % improvement How many library of congresses is that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Recent results show a 10.05\% improvement How many library of congresses is that?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490473</id>
	<title>I've been doing behavioral data analysis...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246026540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this is my career, doing behavioral data analysis.</p><p>I was really excited when they announced the project, and began tinkering with it.  Unfortunately, they stripped so much data out of the exercise that it became an academic statistical exercise, rather than an insightful behavioral modeling exercise.  It rewarded an approach where the training population was continually wildly segmented, with different model parameters on each segment.</p><p>I wish they had opened up more data, there could have been lots of cool stuff in there.  I'm not saying it was bad or against it, just not *my* cup of tea.  I rather prefer statistically simple models driven off unique customer segments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this is my career , doing behavioral data analysis.I was really excited when they announced the project , and began tinkering with it .
Unfortunately , they stripped so much data out of the exercise that it became an academic statistical exercise , rather than an insightful behavioral modeling exercise .
It rewarded an approach where the training population was continually wildly segmented , with different model parameters on each segment.I wish they had opened up more data , there could have been lots of cool stuff in there .
I 'm not saying it was bad or against it , just not * my * cup of tea .
I rather prefer statistically simple models driven off unique customer segments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this is my career, doing behavioral data analysis.I was really excited when they announced the project, and began tinkering with it.
Unfortunately, they stripped so much data out of the exercise that it became an academic statistical exercise, rather than an insightful behavioral modeling exercise.
It rewarded an approach where the training population was continually wildly segmented, with different model parameters on each segment.I wish they had opened up more data, there could have been lots of cool stuff in there.
I'm not saying it was bad or against it, just not *my* cup of tea.
I rather prefer statistically simple models driven off unique customer segments.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28492427</id>
	<title>Re:1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246046280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Let's say" that taxes don't take half.  There's pretty much nowhere in the country where someone earning 143k would be in the 50\% tax bracket.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Let 's say " that taxes do n't take half .
There 's pretty much nowhere in the country where someone earning 143k would be in the 50 \ % tax bracket .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Let's say" that taxes don't take half.
There's pretty much nowhere in the country where someone earning 143k would be in the 50\% tax bracket.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490053</id>
	<title>Do they keep the prize money?</title>
	<author>whoever57</author>
	<datestamp>1246022340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Assuming no-one turns up a better score in the next 30 days, do the team members who work for Yahoo and AT&amp;T get to keep their share of the prize money?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Assuming no-one turns up a better score in the next 30 days , do the team members who work for Yahoo and AT&amp;T get to keep their share of the prize money ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Assuming no-one turns up a better score in the next 30 days, do the team members who work for Yahoo and AT&amp;T get to keep their share of the prize money?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490151</id>
	<title>Re:1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246023360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, just like the Ansari X Prize didn't cover the costs of developing and launching a suborbital rocket, the Netflix Prize isn't really meant to be a large enough prize to fully fund the development of a new recommendation algorithm.  The purpose of the prize is to stimulate interest and get people started.  The real reward will come when they turn their algorithm into commercialized software - the rewards from making such a thing applicable outside of Netflix could be large indeed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , just like the Ansari X Prize did n't cover the costs of developing and launching a suborbital rocket , the Netflix Prize is n't really meant to be a large enough prize to fully fund the development of a new recommendation algorithm .
The purpose of the prize is to stimulate interest and get people started .
The real reward will come when they turn their algorithm into commercialized software - the rewards from making such a thing applicable outside of Netflix could be large indeed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, just like the Ansari X Prize didn't cover the costs of developing and launching a suborbital rocket, the Netflix Prize isn't really meant to be a large enough prize to fully fund the development of a new recommendation algorithm.
The purpose of the prize is to stimulate interest and get people started.
The real reward will come when they turn their algorithm into commercialized software - the rewards from making such a thing applicable outside of Netflix could be large indeed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490341</id>
	<title>Re:they were able to get the extra 0.5\% over the t</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1246025340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>by simply ignoring data from anyone who ever rented SuperBabies: Baby Geniuses 2, Gigli, From Justin to Kelly, Disaster Movie, any movie by Uwe Boll and any movie starring Paris Hilton</p></div><p>Hey, I (along with the rest of my frat, our school hockey team, and most of the town) was in a movie starring Paris Hilton, you insensitive clod!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>by simply ignoring data from anyone who ever rented SuperBabies : Baby Geniuses 2 , Gigli , From Justin to Kelly , Disaster Movie , any movie by Uwe Boll and any movie starring Paris HiltonHey , I ( along with the rest of my frat , our school hockey team , and most of the town ) was in a movie starring Paris Hilton , you insensitive clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>by simply ignoring data from anyone who ever rented SuperBabies: Baby Geniuses 2, Gigli, From Justin to Kelly, Disaster Movie, any movie by Uwe Boll and any movie starring Paris HiltonHey, I (along with the rest of my frat, our school hockey team, and most of the town) was in a movie starring Paris Hilton, you insensitive clod!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490071</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490135</id>
	<title>Re:No info about the Netflix prize</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1246023120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the new york times had a great story about it in november</p><p>slashdot story below includes links to that nyt article, and other slashdot stories about the netflix prize:</p><p><a href="http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/22/0526216" title="slashdot.org">http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/22/0526216</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the new york times had a great story about it in novemberslashdot story below includes links to that nyt article , and other slashdot stories about the netflix prize : http : //science.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 08/11/22/0526216 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the new york times had a great story about it in novemberslashdot story below includes links to that nyt article, and other slashdot stories about the netflix prize:http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/22/0526216 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491233</id>
	<title>Re:No info about the Netflix prize</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246035900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The long-running $1,000,000 competition to improve on the Netflix Cinematch recommendation system by 10\%..."</p><p>It's right there in the opening sentence. Easy to miss.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The long-running $ 1,000,000 competition to improve on the Netflix Cinematch recommendation system by 10 \ % ... " It 's right there in the opening sentence .
Easy to miss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The long-running $1,000,000 competition to improve on the Netflix Cinematch recommendation system by 10\%..."It's right there in the opening sentence.
Easy to miss.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28494603</id>
	<title>Re:No info about the Netflix prize</title>
	<author>romcabrera</author>
	<datestamp>1246116420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=netflix+prize" title="lmgtfy.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=netflix+prize</a> [lmgtfy.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.lmgtfy.com/ ? q = netflix + prize [ lmgtfy.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=netflix+prize [lmgtfy.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490071</id>
	<title>they were able to get the extra 0.5\% over the top</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1246022460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>by simply ignoring data from anyone who ever rented SuperBabies: Baby Geniuses 2, Gigli, From Justin to Kelly, Disaster Movie, any movie by Uwe Boll and any movie starring Paris Hilton</p><p>suddenly, everything made sense</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>by simply ignoring data from anyone who ever rented SuperBabies : Baby Geniuses 2 , Gigli , From Justin to Kelly , Disaster Movie , any movie by Uwe Boll and any movie starring Paris Hiltonsuddenly , everything made sense</tokentext>
<sentencetext>by simply ignoring data from anyone who ever rented SuperBabies: Baby Geniuses 2, Gigli, From Justin to Kelly, Disaster Movie, any movie by Uwe Boll and any movie starring Paris Hiltonsuddenly, everything made sense</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490173</id>
	<title>Re:No info about the Netflix prize</title>
	<author>MrMista\_B</author>
	<datestamp>1246023600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What, you didn't even read the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/summary/?</p><p>I know, this is Slashdot, but 'some basic info about it' is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/right there/.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What , you did n't even read the /summary/ ? I know , this is Slashdot , but 'some basic info about it ' is /right there/ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, you didn't even read the /summary/?I know, this is Slashdot, but 'some basic info about it' is /right there/.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490373</id>
	<title>Re:they were able to get the extra 0.5\% over the t</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246025640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can generalize that to any movie with an action hero, and a baby. Any movie with a pseudo-star (Hilton, Spears, Madonna, etc.). And any movie with Uwe Boll or similar people.</p><p>On a more serious note: I think the best way to improve recommendations, is to first relate the IMDB rating to the IQ of the rater. I found that more intelligent people do not like movies with a simple plot, because it bores them, and less intelligent people do not like movies with a complex, subtle plot, because they don't get it. You can further separate this into the EQ and the IQ, which will considerably improve the experience for emotional people (like most women).<br>I found that the best way to quickly and realistically do that, is to check the length of the sentences and the percentage of the questions in the comments of that user.</p><p>This will give you a 3D space with a rating, a EQ and a IQ axis.<br>Now apply the values of the user that wants to get recommendations as coordinates, and order by the distance from that point.<br>Then apply the traditional recommendation system with a blending factor.</p><p>I bet I could code that in less than an hour in Haskell.</p><p>P.S.: If you want to patent this, mind you that I will seriously kick your ass for doing so. I do not know any laws when it comes to giving credit. You can probably sue me afterwards, but it won't fix what I did to you. ^^ (Be fair to me, and I will be the nicest man you ever met.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can generalize that to any movie with an action hero , and a baby .
Any movie with a pseudo-star ( Hilton , Spears , Madonna , etc. ) .
And any movie with Uwe Boll or similar people.On a more serious note : I think the best way to improve recommendations , is to first relate the IMDB rating to the IQ of the rater .
I found that more intelligent people do not like movies with a simple plot , because it bores them , and less intelligent people do not like movies with a complex , subtle plot , because they do n't get it .
You can further separate this into the EQ and the IQ , which will considerably improve the experience for emotional people ( like most women ) .I found that the best way to quickly and realistically do that , is to check the length of the sentences and the percentage of the questions in the comments of that user.This will give you a 3D space with a rating , a EQ and a IQ axis.Now apply the values of the user that wants to get recommendations as coordinates , and order by the distance from that point.Then apply the traditional recommendation system with a blending factor.I bet I could code that in less than an hour in Haskell.P.S .
: If you want to patent this , mind you that I will seriously kick your ass for doing so .
I do not know any laws when it comes to giving credit .
You can probably sue me afterwards , but it wo n't fix what I did to you .
^ ^ ( Be fair to me , and I will be the nicest man you ever met .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can generalize that to any movie with an action hero, and a baby.
Any movie with a pseudo-star (Hilton, Spears, Madonna, etc.).
And any movie with Uwe Boll or similar people.On a more serious note: I think the best way to improve recommendations, is to first relate the IMDB rating to the IQ of the rater.
I found that more intelligent people do not like movies with a simple plot, because it bores them, and less intelligent people do not like movies with a complex, subtle plot, because they don't get it.
You can further separate this into the EQ and the IQ, which will considerably improve the experience for emotional people (like most women).I found that the best way to quickly and realistically do that, is to check the length of the sentences and the percentage of the questions in the comments of that user.This will give you a 3D space with a rating, a EQ and a IQ axis.Now apply the values of the user that wants to get recommendations as coordinates, and order by the distance from that point.Then apply the traditional recommendation system with a blending factor.I bet I could code that in less than an hour in Haskell.P.S.
: If you want to patent this, mind you that I will seriously kick your ass for doing so.
I do not know any laws when it comes to giving credit.
You can probably sue me afterwards, but it won't fix what I did to you.
^^ (Be fair to me, and I will be the nicest man you ever met.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490071</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493085</id>
	<title>Re:1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>WinstonWolfIT</author>
	<datestamp>1246097220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>First burn 70 large for laffs.
Then say the prize isn't impressive.
In that order.</htmltext>
<tokenext>First burn 70 large for laffs .
Then say the prize is n't impressive .
In that order .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First burn 70 large for laffs.
Then say the prize isn't impressive.
In that order.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049</id>
	<title>1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246022280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's see, $1,000,000 split 7 ways gives us $142,857.14 each. Let's say taxes take half, now you are down to only $71,428.57 each. Unless one of them kills all of their partners like in The Dark Knight that ain't much of a prize.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's see , $ 1,000,000 split 7 ways gives us $ 142,857.14 each .
Let 's say taxes take half , now you are down to only $ 71,428.57 each .
Unless one of them kills all of their partners like in The Dark Knight that ai n't much of a prize .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's see, $1,000,000 split 7 ways gives us $142,857.14 each.
Let's say taxes take half, now you are down to only $71,428.57 each.
Unless one of them kills all of their partners like in The Dark Knight that ain't much of a prize.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493731</id>
	<title>Re:1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246106760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Resume item worth much more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Resume item worth much more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Resume item worth much more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490025</id>
	<title>Jews did it.</title>
	<author>Luke727</author>
	<datestamp>1246021920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also 9/11.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also 9/11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also 9/11.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490589</id>
	<title>Re:1 Million split 7 ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246027560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The X-Prize was designed to encourage the creation of a vehicle that would demonstrate the feasibility of a new market.  It was backed up with a whole lot of market research which showed that people would happily sign up for a flight on such a vehicle.  The anticipated business plan that it was trying to encourage was:</p><p>1. Build a vehicle that is very reusable and can put passengers into space.<br>2. Win the prize and get the PR.<br>3. Take bookings and reservation fees to fund the next flight.<br>4. Fly the first passengers in your winning vehicle.<br>5. Repeat 3, 4 until Profit!!</p><p>Unfortunately they didn't anticipate that some big personality like Burt Rutan would come along and do:</p><p>1. Convince an investor to invest *twice* the price to build a vehicle.<br>2. Win the prize and get the PR.<br>3. Use the PR to get more venture capital.<br>4. Took bookings and reservation fees for a new vehicle that hasn't even been built yet.<br>5. Never fly the winning vehicle again.. hang it in the Smithsonian like a freakin' monument or something.<br>6. Watch your schedule slip, try to catch up by cutting corners, have a fatal accident.<br>7. Announce that your vehicle will be delayed still more as you work on making it a "platform" for doing shit that wasn't in the original spec (can you say space shuttle?)<br>8. Demonstrate a fly over of your carrier aircraft, after having to delay the fly over due to malfunctions.<br>9. ??????  We're still waiting.<br>10. Profit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The X-Prize was designed to encourage the creation of a vehicle that would demonstrate the feasibility of a new market .
It was backed up with a whole lot of market research which showed that people would happily sign up for a flight on such a vehicle .
The anticipated business plan that it was trying to encourage was : 1 .
Build a vehicle that is very reusable and can put passengers into space.2 .
Win the prize and get the PR.3 .
Take bookings and reservation fees to fund the next flight.4 .
Fly the first passengers in your winning vehicle.5 .
Repeat 3 , 4 until Profit !
! Unfortunately they did n't anticipate that some big personality like Burt Rutan would come along and do : 1 .
Convince an investor to invest * twice * the price to build a vehicle.2 .
Win the prize and get the PR.3 .
Use the PR to get more venture capital.4 .
Took bookings and reservation fees for a new vehicle that has n't even been built yet.5 .
Never fly the winning vehicle again.. hang it in the Smithsonian like a freakin ' monument or something.6 .
Watch your schedule slip , try to catch up by cutting corners , have a fatal accident.7 .
Announce that your vehicle will be delayed still more as you work on making it a " platform " for doing shit that was n't in the original spec ( can you say space shuttle ? ) 8 .
Demonstrate a fly over of your carrier aircraft , after having to delay the fly over due to malfunctions.9 .
? ? ? ? ? ? We 're still waiting.10 .
Profit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The X-Prize was designed to encourage the creation of a vehicle that would demonstrate the feasibility of a new market.
It was backed up with a whole lot of market research which showed that people would happily sign up for a flight on such a vehicle.
The anticipated business plan that it was trying to encourage was:1.
Build a vehicle that is very reusable and can put passengers into space.2.
Win the prize and get the PR.3.
Take bookings and reservation fees to fund the next flight.4.
Fly the first passengers in your winning vehicle.5.
Repeat 3, 4 until Profit!
!Unfortunately they didn't anticipate that some big personality like Burt Rutan would come along and do:1.
Convince an investor to invest *twice* the price to build a vehicle.2.
Win the prize and get the PR.3.
Use the PR to get more venture capital.4.
Took bookings and reservation fees for a new vehicle that hasn't even been built yet.5.
Never fly the winning vehicle again.. hang it in the Smithsonian like a freakin' monument or something.6.
Watch your schedule slip, try to catch up by cutting corners, have a fatal accident.7.
Announce that your vehicle will be delayed still more as you work on making it a "platform" for doing shit that wasn't in the original spec (can you say space shuttle?)8.
Demonstrate a fly over of your carrier aircraft, after having to delay the fly over due to malfunctions.9.
??????  We're still waiting.10.
Profit?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490151</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28492529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490373
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490071
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28494603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490071
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28492427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490207
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490671
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490071
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28514459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_234247_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490207
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_234247.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490541
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_234247.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490207
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490479
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491603
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_234247.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490177
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491165
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28492529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28492427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490151
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490589
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490671
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_234247.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490321
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_234247.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490071
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493147
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490341
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_234247.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490045
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490135
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490173
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491059
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28494603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28491233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490239
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_234247.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490053
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_234247.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28490059
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_234247.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28493637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_234247.28514459
</commentlist>
</conversation>
