<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_29_164210</id>
	<title>First Electronic Quantum Processor Created</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1246294680000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>ScienceDaily is reporting that the first <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090628171949.htm">rudimentary solid-state quantum processor</a> has been created by a team led by Yale University researchers.  <i>"Working with a group of theoretical physicists led by Steven Girvin, the Eugene Higgins Professor of Physics &amp; Applied Physics, the team manufactured two artificial atoms, or qubits ('quantum bits'). While each qubit is actually made up of a billion aluminum atoms, it acts like a single atom that can occupy two different energy states. These states are akin to the '1' and '0' or 'on' and 'off' states of regular bits employed by conventional computers. Because of the counterintuitive laws of quantum mechanics, however, scientists can effectively place qubits in a 'superposition' of multiple states at the same time, allowing for greater information storage and processing power."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>ScienceDaily is reporting that the first rudimentary solid-state quantum processor has been created by a team led by Yale University researchers .
" Working with a group of theoretical physicists led by Steven Girvin , the Eugene Higgins Professor of Physics &amp; Applied Physics , the team manufactured two artificial atoms , or qubits ( 'quantum bits ' ) .
While each qubit is actually made up of a billion aluminum atoms , it acts like a single atom that can occupy two different energy states .
These states are akin to the '1 ' and '0 ' or 'on ' and 'off ' states of regular bits employed by conventional computers .
Because of the counterintuitive laws of quantum mechanics , however , scientists can effectively place qubits in a 'superposition ' of multiple states at the same time , allowing for greater information storage and processing power .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ScienceDaily is reporting that the first rudimentary solid-state quantum processor has been created by a team led by Yale University researchers.
"Working with a group of theoretical physicists led by Steven Girvin, the Eugene Higgins Professor of Physics &amp; Applied Physics, the team manufactured two artificial atoms, or qubits ('quantum bits').
While each qubit is actually made up of a billion aluminum atoms, it acts like a single atom that can occupy two different energy states.
These states are akin to the '1' and '0' or 'on' and 'off' states of regular bits employed by conventional computers.
Because of the counterintuitive laws of quantum mechanics, however, scientists can effectively place qubits in a 'superposition' of multiple states at the same time, allowing for greater information storage and processing power.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516443</id>
	<title>Quick!</title>
	<author>alexborges</author>
	<datestamp>1246300560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Feed 42 to it and let us know how it goes!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Feed 42 to it and let us know how it goes !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Feed 42 to it and let us know how it goes!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28524817</id>
	<title>Re:Direct PDF Link to Original Paper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246302780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And for those without access, here is the free preprint of the same paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2030</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And for those without access , here is the free preprint of the same paper : http : //arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2030</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And for those without access, here is the free preprint of the same paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2030</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517389</id>
	<title>Re:Yay!</title>
	<author>mhall119</author>
	<datestamp>1246304100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And running Windows 9<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></div><p>...slowly.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And running Windows 9 : ( ...slowly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And running Windows 9 :(...slowly.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517009</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516737</id>
	<title>Real test</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1246301640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't yet know what kind of porn this enables.  I just know that I want it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't yet know what kind of porn this enables .
I just know that I want it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't yet know what kind of porn this enables.
I just know that I want it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516085</id>
	<title>Direct PDF Link to Original Paper</title>
	<author>GameGod0</author>
	<datestamp>1246299060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/nature08121.pdf" title="nature.com">http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/nature08121.pdf</a> [nature.com] <br> <br>

(For those with access to Nature through school or work...)</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/nature08121.pdf [ nature.com ] ( For those with access to Nature through school or work... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/nature08121.pdf [nature.com]  

(For those with access to Nature through school or work...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519239</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246268040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's why these were called "<b>artifical</b> atoms" (emphasis added). I think that it is a sufficiently accurate description for an article targeted at non-professional audience.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why these were called " artifical atoms " ( emphasis added ) .
I think that it is a sufficiently accurate description for an article targeted at non-professional audience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why these were called "artifical atoms" (emphasis added).
I think that it is a sufficiently accurate description for an article targeted at non-professional audience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516513</id>
	<title>Wasn't there a quantum computer a while back?</title>
	<author>louiswins</author>
	<datestamp>1246300800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought I remembered reading about a multi-qubit quantum computer that implemented Shor's algorithm for a small input?</p><p>It appears that Wikipedia says it was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shor's\_algorithm" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">15 = 3&#215;5</a> [wikipedia.org]. That page says they used photonic qubits - as opposed to the aluminum qubits here, I guess. Can anyone enlighten me as to why these are better, or why this is a big deal? It seems that these decay just as quickly as the photonic ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought I remembered reading about a multi-qubit quantum computer that implemented Shor 's algorithm for a small input ? It appears that Wikipedia says it was 15 = 3   5 [ wikipedia.org ] .
That page says they used photonic qubits - as opposed to the aluminum qubits here , I guess .
Can anyone enlighten me as to why these are better , or why this is a big deal ?
It seems that these decay just as quickly as the photonic ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought I remembered reading about a multi-qubit quantum computer that implemented Shor's algorithm for a small input?It appears that Wikipedia says it was 15 = 3×5 [wikipedia.org].
That page says they used photonic qubits - as opposed to the aluminum qubits here, I guess.
Can anyone enlighten me as to why these are better, or why this is a big deal?
It seems that these decay just as quickly as the photonic ones.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516713</id>
	<title>Re:Simulating?</title>
	<author>immakiku</author>
	<datestamp>1246301580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well that's my question. Does it scale linearly with the number of qubits? The article is not very clear about that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well that 's my question .
Does it scale linearly with the number of qubits ?
The article is not very clear about that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well that's my question.
Does it scale linearly with the number of qubits?
The article is not very clear about that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516593</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517355</id>
	<title>Re:Does it run Linux?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246303920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quantum Processors are only good for certain algorithms; more likely, in the medium-to-long term as quantum architecture becomes possible, either (1) specialized coprocessors will be built for quantum operations, (2) eventually perhaps a quantum ALU will be added on-chip on some systems, or (3) Quantum computing will be tightly regulated by the government.  (Because it invalidates most encryption schemes other than one-time-pads.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quantum Processors are only good for certain algorithms ; more likely , in the medium-to-long term as quantum architecture becomes possible , either ( 1 ) specialized coprocessors will be built for quantum operations , ( 2 ) eventually perhaps a quantum ALU will be added on-chip on some systems , or ( 3 ) Quantum computing will be tightly regulated by the government .
( Because it invalidates most encryption schemes other than one-time-pads .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quantum Processors are only good for certain algorithms; more likely, in the medium-to-long term as quantum architecture becomes possible, either (1) specialized coprocessors will be built for quantum operations, (2) eventually perhaps a quantum ALU will be added on-chip on some systems, or (3) Quantum computing will be tightly regulated by the government.
(Because it invalidates most encryption schemes other than one-time-pads.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28528215</id>
	<title>Quantum computing ...not in my lifetime</title>
	<author>nickrao</author>
	<datestamp>1246376400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This has been the holy grail of computing for a while now.  Sorry, I would not put the champagne on ice.  There will be more challenges in engineering this into a workable solution.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This has been the holy grail of computing for a while now .
Sorry , I would not put the champagne on ice .
There will be more challenges in engineering this into a workable solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has been the holy grail of computing for a while now.
Sorry, I would not put the champagne on ice.
There will be more challenges in engineering this into a workable solution.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075</id>
	<title>Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1246299000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am not trying to split hairs. This is actually a rather important point: they did <b>not</b> manufacture "two artificial atoms, or qubits". They manufactured two clusters of atoms that <b>acted</b> as qubits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not trying to split hairs .
This is actually a rather important point : they did not manufacture " two artificial atoms , or qubits " .
They manufactured two clusters of atoms that acted as qubits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not trying to split hairs.
This is actually a rather important point: they did not manufacture "two artificial atoms, or qubits".
They manufactured two clusters of atoms that acted as qubits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516339</id>
	<title>Re:Problem Solved</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246300200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>Which came first? The chicken or the egg.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>

It's obvious the egg came first. Dinosaurs laid eggs. Dinosaurs lived before birds, including chickens, evolved. So eggs existed before chickens did.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which came first ?
The chicken or the egg .
It 's obvious the egg came first .
Dinosaurs laid eggs .
Dinosaurs lived before birds , including chickens , evolved .
So eggs existed before chickens did .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Which came first?
The chicken or the egg.
It's obvious the egg came first.
Dinosaurs laid eggs.
Dinosaurs lived before birds, including chickens, evolved.
So eggs existed before chickens did.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519341</id>
	<title>Re:Does it run Linux?</title>
	<author>RWerp</author>
	<datestamp>1246268400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I read that algorithms based on elliptic functions are immune to quantum algorithms, but this may have changed now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I read that algorithms based on elliptic functions are immune to quantum algorithms , but this may have changed now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read that algorithms based on elliptic functions are immune to quantum algorithms, but this may have changed now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517355</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28522017</id>
	<title>Two qubits?</title>
	<author>emandres</author>
	<datestamp>1246280280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Two qubits?  As far as I'm concerned that's not a quantum processor, it's a quantum transistor.  Wake me up when they have a few of these things slung together to make a logic gate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Two qubits ?
As far as I 'm concerned that 's not a quantum processor , it 's a quantum transistor .
Wake me up when they have a few of these things slung together to make a logic gate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two qubits?
As far as I'm concerned that's not a quantum processor, it's a quantum transistor.
Wake me up when they have a few of these things slung together to make a logic gate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516019</id>
	<title>Yay!</title>
	<author>S810</author>
	<datestamp>1246298820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Soon a PC with a Quantum Processor, Holographic Memory and optical storage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Soon a PC with a Quantum Processor , Holographic Memory and optical storage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soon a PC with a Quantum Processor, Holographic Memory and optical storage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28521087</id>
	<title>Re:Simulating?</title>
	<author>Starlon</author>
	<datestamp>1246275600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You must be related to Bill Gates.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You must be related to Bill Gates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must be related to Bill Gates.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517181</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516293</id>
	<title>Sooo Excited...</title>
	<author>Steegest</author>
	<datestamp>1246299960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow. I'm very excited for the future of computing right now. I hope when I'm 65 and this technology is finally implemented I'll still know how to use computers. If my parents are any indication...unlikely...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
I 'm very excited for the future of computing right now .
I hope when I 'm 65 and this technology is finally implemented I 'll still know how to use computers .
If my parents are any indication...unlikely.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
I'm very excited for the future of computing right now.
I hope when I'm 65 and this technology is finally implemented I'll still know how to use computers.
If my parents are any indication...unlikely...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517581</id>
	<title>Re:Stallman says</title>
	<author>Loko Draucarn</author>
	<datestamp>1246304760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In fact, due to the state superposition, any set of qubits longer then the number of bits in the GPL will necessarily contain the GPL.</p><p>Ditto for the Windows EULA. (what's worse, you can get the Windows EULA superposed over the GPL, and wind up with a completely undistributable state.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In fact , due to the state superposition , any set of qubits longer then the number of bits in the GPL will necessarily contain the GPL.Ditto for the Windows EULA .
( what 's worse , you can get the Windows EULA superposed over the GPL , and wind up with a completely undistributable state .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In fact, due to the state superposition, any set of qubits longer then the number of bits in the GPL will necessarily contain the GPL.Ditto for the Windows EULA.
(what's worse, you can get the Windows EULA superposed over the GPL, and wind up with a completely undistributable state.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516277</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517003</id>
	<title>Re:Simulating?</title>
	<author>dlenmn</author>
	<datestamp>1246302660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's no simulation -- the large group of atoms forms one qubit. That's why this is interesting.

Normally, only very small things (like one atom) exhibit quantum behavior. This system is large for something able to exhibit quantum behavior. All the parts effectively join together to act like one quantum system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no simulation -- the large group of atoms forms one qubit .
That 's why this is interesting .
Normally , only very small things ( like one atom ) exhibit quantum behavior .
This system is large for something able to exhibit quantum behavior .
All the parts effectively join together to act like one quantum system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no simulation -- the large group of atoms forms one qubit.
That's why this is interesting.
Normally, only very small things (like one atom) exhibit quantum behavior.
This system is large for something able to exhibit quantum behavior.
All the parts effectively join together to act like one quantum system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516593</id>
	<title>Re:Simulating?</title>
	<author>Freetardo Jones</author>
	<datestamp>1246301100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would it take an exponential amount of resources?  One of these qubits only amounts to around 1.66 &#195;-- 10e-14 percent of a mole of aluminum. For every mole of aluminum they can create 6 quadrillion qubits. I'm not sure how many qubits would be needed for a quantum computer but I'm doubting it's much more than that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would it take an exponential amount of resources ?
One of these qubits only amounts to around 1.66   -- 10e-14 percent of a mole of aluminum .
For every mole of aluminum they can create 6 quadrillion qubits .
I 'm not sure how many qubits would be needed for a quantum computer but I 'm doubting it 's much more than that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would it take an exponential amount of resources?
One of these qubits only amounts to around 1.66 Ã-- 10e-14 percent of a mole of aluminum.
For every mole of aluminum they can create 6 quadrillion qubits.
I'm not sure how many qubits would be needed for a quantum computer but I'm doubting it's much more than that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516525</id>
	<title>Beowulf Cluster</title>
	<author>Pepebuho</author>
	<datestamp>1246300800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How far till we have a Beowulf Cluster of Quantum Processors?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How far till we have a Beowulf Cluster of Quantum Processors ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How far till we have a Beowulf Cluster of Quantum Processors?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516397</id>
	<title>Re:What's up with pseudonyms?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246300380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why can't people use a real name in Slashdot or Reddit?</p></div><p>My name is Mr.Coward you insensitive clod!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ca n't people use a real name in Slashdot or Reddit ? My name is Mr.Coward you insensitive clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why can't people use a real name in Slashdot or Reddit?My name is Mr.Coward you insensitive clod!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516107</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28523379</id>
	<title>Artifical Atoms!</title>
	<author>paulkoan</author>
	<datestamp>1246288680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, what do you make an artificial atom out of?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what do you make an artificial atom out of ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what do you make an artificial atom out of?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516837</id>
	<title>Bose-einstein condensate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246302000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While each qubit is actually made up of a billion aluminum atoms, it acts like a single atom that can occupy two different energy states.</p></div><p>This sounds a like a bose-einstein condensate, where many atoms will act is if though they are all part of a larger, single atom. Also, it gains some pretty interesting properties, neither of which can be described exactly as solid, liquid or gas.
<br> <br> The article didn't mention anything about near absolute zero temps, though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While each qubit is actually made up of a billion aluminum atoms , it acts like a single atom that can occupy two different energy states.This sounds a like a bose-einstein condensate , where many atoms will act is if though they are all part of a larger , single atom .
Also , it gains some pretty interesting properties , neither of which can be described exactly as solid , liquid or gas .
The article did n't mention anything about near absolute zero temps , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While each qubit is actually made up of a billion aluminum atoms, it acts like a single atom that can occupy two different energy states.This sounds a like a bose-einstein condensate, where many atoms will act is if though they are all part of a larger, single atom.
Also, it gains some pretty interesting properties, neither of which can be described exactly as solid, liquid or gas.
The article didn't mention anything about near absolute zero temps, though.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28523741</id>
	<title>Re:Direct PDF Link to Original Paper</title>
	<author>collinstocks</author>
	<datestamp>1246292040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Link to PDF version for those without access to Nature. <a href="http://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2030" title="arxiv.org">http://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2030</a> [arxiv.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Link to PDF version for those without access to Nature .
http : //arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2030 [ arxiv.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Link to PDF version for those without access to Nature.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2030 [arxiv.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517221</id>
	<title>Re:What's up with pseudonyms?</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1246303440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why can't people use a real name in Slashdot or Reddit?</p></div><p>I don't know Sybert42, why can't they?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ca n't people use a real name in Slashdot or Reddit ? I do n't know Sybert42 , why ca n't they ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why can't people use a real name in Slashdot or Reddit?I don't know Sybert42, why can't they?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516107</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516001</id>
	<title>Simulating?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246298760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While each qubit is actually made up of a billion aluminum atoms, it acts like a single atom that can occupy two different energy states.</p></div><p>Does this sound like they're using real atoms to simulate qubits? Perhaps I'm misinterpretting, but it looks like it's still going to take an exponential amount of resources to "make" each additional qubit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While each qubit is actually made up of a billion aluminum atoms , it acts like a single atom that can occupy two different energy states.Does this sound like they 're using real atoms to simulate qubits ?
Perhaps I 'm misinterpretting , but it looks like it 's still going to take an exponential amount of resources to " make " each additional qubit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While each qubit is actually made up of a billion aluminum atoms, it acts like a single atom that can occupy two different energy states.Does this sound like they're using real atoms to simulate qubits?
Perhaps I'm misinterpretting, but it looks like it's still going to take an exponential amount of resources to "make" each additional qubit.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520965</id>
	<title>Re:Most Excellent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246274880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, all the phone booths could time travel back to when people actually used them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , all the phone booths could time travel back to when people actually used them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, all the phone booths could time travel back to when people actually used them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519069</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>Kheric</author>
	<datestamp>1246267500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Holy crap that's an obscure reference.  Score one for Bill Cosby (and this guy who like quoting him)!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Holy crap that 's an obscure reference .
Score one for Bill Cosby ( and this guy who like quoting him ) !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Holy crap that's an obscure reference.
Score one for Bill Cosby (and this guy who like quoting him)!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28523895</id>
	<title>Is it scalable?</title>
	<author>kementari7</author>
	<datestamp>1246293600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's nice, but if they can't scale it, or create entanglement between the qubits, it isn't going to be of any immediate use. Some guys at IBM built a quantum circuit to factor the number 15, which took seven qubits, and that was not a general algorithm. The general algorithm would take 3-10 times (you'd want error correction for larger numbers) the number of bits needed to represent the number.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's nice , but if they ca n't scale it , or create entanglement between the qubits , it is n't going to be of any immediate use .
Some guys at IBM built a quantum circuit to factor the number 15 , which took seven qubits , and that was not a general algorithm .
The general algorithm would take 3-10 times ( you 'd want error correction for larger numbers ) the number of bits needed to represent the number .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's nice, but if they can't scale it, or create entanglement between the qubits, it isn't going to be of any immediate use.
Some guys at IBM built a quantum circuit to factor the number 15, which took seven qubits, and that was not a general algorithm.
The general algorithm would take 3-10 times (you'd want error correction for larger numbers) the number of bits needed to represent the number.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28525279</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1246394520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's the sound you get when you perform Schr&#195;dinger's cat experiment with a frog instead of a cat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the sound you get when you perform Schr   dinger 's cat experiment with a frog instead of a cat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the sound you get when you perform SchrÃdinger's cat experiment with a frog instead of a cat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516391</id>
	<title>In UR Multiverse ...</title>
	<author>lysdexia</author>
	<datestamp>1246300380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>... cracken' UR codez.<br>
In one of those universes, this meme is still funny, and I'm not a dipshit.<br>
Probably not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... cracken ' UR codez .
In one of those universes , this meme is still funny , and I 'm not a dipshit .
Probably not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... cracken' UR codez.
In one of those universes, this meme is still funny, and I'm not a dipshit.
Probably not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517731</id>
	<title>Re:Problem Solved</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1246305420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What produced it just happened not to be a chicken. Something close, but not quite.</i></p><p>Except when posed in evolutionary terms, the whole question comes down to a problem of the human desire for classification versus nature's complete lack of giving a shit about that desire.</p><p>What precisely makes a chicken a chicken versus a chicken-minus-one-generation proto-chicken?  Given that any population naturally has a degree of genetic variation, there's no "gold standard" for a chicken genome, and it is entirely possible that every gene we see in chickens was already present in the population of proto-chickens.  It could be that the only thing differentiating the chicken from its proto-chicken parent is that the chicken was born into an environment where its only potential mates were other proto-chickens with the same subset of genes from the larger proto-chicken population.  Then proto-chicken becomes chicken not by a mutation that completes the chicken genome, but by a quirk of fate that isolated a certain set of genes, and what was once a sub-species of proto-chicken is now its own species, the chicken.</p><p>Or it could be that in the list of traits we recognize as chicken-like, a hen laid an egg with the mutation that completed the last of these traits and thus was the chicken born to dominate the proto-chicken.  Or a hundred thousand other possibilities I can't think of.  I guess I'm just trying to add back in some mystery to an old philosophical question that science <i>seems</i> to give an answer too.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Oh and this is unrelated, but proto-chicken seriously needs to be a boss monster in some rpg.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What produced it just happened not to be a chicken .
Something close , but not quite.Except when posed in evolutionary terms , the whole question comes down to a problem of the human desire for classification versus nature 's complete lack of giving a shit about that desire.What precisely makes a chicken a chicken versus a chicken-minus-one-generation proto-chicken ?
Given that any population naturally has a degree of genetic variation , there 's no " gold standard " for a chicken genome , and it is entirely possible that every gene we see in chickens was already present in the population of proto-chickens .
It could be that the only thing differentiating the chicken from its proto-chicken parent is that the chicken was born into an environment where its only potential mates were other proto-chickens with the same subset of genes from the larger proto-chicken population .
Then proto-chicken becomes chicken not by a mutation that completes the chicken genome , but by a quirk of fate that isolated a certain set of genes , and what was once a sub-species of proto-chicken is now its own species , the chicken.Or it could be that in the list of traits we recognize as chicken-like , a hen laid an egg with the mutation that completed the last of these traits and thus was the chicken born to dominate the proto-chicken .
Or a hundred thousand other possibilities I ca n't think of .
I guess I 'm just trying to add back in some mystery to an old philosophical question that science seems to give an answer too .
: ) Oh and this is unrelated , but proto-chicken seriously needs to be a boss monster in some rpg .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What produced it just happened not to be a chicken.
Something close, but not quite.Except when posed in evolutionary terms, the whole question comes down to a problem of the human desire for classification versus nature's complete lack of giving a shit about that desire.What precisely makes a chicken a chicken versus a chicken-minus-one-generation proto-chicken?
Given that any population naturally has a degree of genetic variation, there's no "gold standard" for a chicken genome, and it is entirely possible that every gene we see in chickens was already present in the population of proto-chickens.
It could be that the only thing differentiating the chicken from its proto-chicken parent is that the chicken was born into an environment where its only potential mates were other proto-chickens with the same subset of genes from the larger proto-chicken population.
Then proto-chicken becomes chicken not by a mutation that completes the chicken genome, but by a quirk of fate that isolated a certain set of genes, and what was once a sub-species of proto-chicken is now its own species, the chicken.Or it could be that in the list of traits we recognize as chicken-like, a hen laid an egg with the mutation that completed the last of these traits and thus was the chicken born to dominate the proto-chicken.
Or a hundred thousand other possibilities I can't think of.
I guess I'm just trying to add back in some mystery to an old philosophical question that science seems to give an answer too.
:)Oh and this is unrelated, but proto-chicken seriously needs to be a boss monster in some rpg.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516449</id>
	<title>Re:Does it run Linux?</title>
	<author>cyphercell</author>
	<datestamp>1246300620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course. Windows hasn't been ported yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course .
Windows has n't been ported yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course.
Windows hasn't been ported yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520419</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>kestasjk</author>
	<datestamp>1246272180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the ark was measured in qubits. Frankly I'm not sure what the fuss is about, don't we have the metric system now?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the ark was measured in qubits .
Frankly I 'm not sure what the fuss is about , do n't we have the metric system now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the ark was measured in qubits.
Frankly I'm not sure what the fuss is about, don't we have the metric system now?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520775</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246273980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Riiiiight.  What's a qubit?</p></div><p>Qubit is "an arcade video game developed and published by Gottlieb in 1982. It is a platform game that features two-dimensional (2D) graphics. The object is to change the color of every cube in a pyramid by having the on-screen character jump on top them while avoiding obstacles and enemies."  Oh, wait, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qbert" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">my bad.</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Sorry.....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Riiiiight .
What 's a qubit ? Qubit is " an arcade video game developed and published by Gottlieb in 1982 .
It is a platform game that features two-dimensional ( 2D ) graphics .
The object is to change the color of every cube in a pyramid by having the on-screen character jump on top them while avoiding obstacles and enemies .
" Oh , wait , my bad .
[ wikipedia.org ] Sorry.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Riiiiight.
What's a qubit?Qubit is "an arcade video game developed and published by Gottlieb in 1982.
It is a platform game that features two-dimensional (2D) graphics.
The object is to change the color of every cube in a pyramid by having the on-screen character jump on top them while avoiding obstacles and enemies.
"  Oh, wait, my bad.
[wikipedia.org]Sorry.....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516015</id>
	<title>This is the day we've been waiting for people!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246298820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We all knew this day would come. We're now officially living in the future. We can expect even greater leaps and bounds in scientific progress now. Like electric cars and drawing energy from the very air we breathe. Our ancestors in the 1950's would be proud.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We all knew this day would come .
We 're now officially living in the future .
We can expect even greater leaps and bounds in scientific progress now .
Like electric cars and drawing energy from the very air we breathe .
Our ancestors in the 1950 's would be proud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We all knew this day would come.
We're now officially living in the future.
We can expect even greater leaps and bounds in scientific progress now.
Like electric cars and drawing energy from the very air we breathe.
Our ancestors in the 1950's would be proud.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515895</id>
	<title>Love</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246298400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do something small and thoughtful that really surprises and delights someone you care about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do something small and thoughtful that really surprises and delights someone you care about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do something small and thoughtful that really surprises and delights someone you care about.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246302120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Riiiiight.  What's a qubit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Riiiiight .
What 's a qubit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Riiiiight.
What's a qubit?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516811</id>
	<title>Re:Problem Solved</title>
	<author>d474</author>
	<datestamp>1246301940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Which came first? The chicken or the egg.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Neither: It was the Rooster who came first (it happens to every guy once in a while).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which came first ?
The chicken or the egg .
Neither : It was the Rooster who came first ( it happens to every guy once in a while ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which came first?
The chicken or the egg.
Neither: It was the Rooster who came first (it happens to every guy once in a while).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515943</id>
	<title>Most Excellent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246298580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The possible applications for this technology are an exciting prospect.  Handheld supercomputers, true real-time physics simulations for research and gaming, maybe even time travelling phone booths...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The possible applications for this technology are an exciting prospect .
Handheld supercomputers , true real-time physics simulations for research and gaming , maybe even time travelling phone booths.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The possible applications for this technology are an exciting prospect.
Handheld supercomputers, true real-time physics simulations for research and gaming, maybe even time travelling phone booths...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517181</id>
	<title>Re:Simulating?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246303320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>640K qubits ought to be enough for anybody</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>640K qubits ought to be enough for anybody</tokentext>
<sentencetext>640K qubits ought to be enough for anybody</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516593</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28522097</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246280880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>little critter, he hops on a bunch of blocks, avoiding certain obstac<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>little critter , he hops on a bunch of blocks , avoiding certain obstac ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>little critter, he hops on a bunch of blocks, avoiding certain obstac ....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516107</id>
	<title>What's up with pseudonyms?</title>
	<author>Sybert42</author>
	<datestamp>1246299120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why can't people use a real name in Slashdot or Reddit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ca n't people use a real name in Slashdot or Reddit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why can't people use a real name in Slashdot or Reddit?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515895</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519443</id>
	<title>Crackpottery</title>
	<author>Louis Savain</author>
	<datestamp>1246268700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quantum computing is one of biggest hoaxes/crackpotteries in the history of science, on a par with the flat earth hypothesis.</p><p><a href="http://rebelscience.blogspot.com/2008/04/d-waves-quantum-computing-crackpottery.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">Quantum Computing Crackpottery</a> [blogspot.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quantum computing is one of biggest hoaxes/crackpotteries in the history of science , on a par with the flat earth hypothesis.Quantum Computing Crackpottery [ blogspot.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quantum computing is one of biggest hoaxes/crackpotteries in the history of science, on a par with the flat earth hypothesis.Quantum Computing Crackpottery [blogspot.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28525207</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>fractoid</author>
	<datestamp>1246393860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It depends on exactly what definition you use but a qubit is roughly 45 sentymeaters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It depends on exactly what definition you use but a qubit is roughly 45 sentymeaters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It depends on exactly what definition you use but a qubit is roughly 45 sentymeaters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517335</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>causality</author>
	<datestamp>1246303860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I am not trying to split hairs. This is actually a rather important point: they did <b>not</b> manufacture "two artificial atoms, or qubits". They manufactured two clusters of atoms that <b>acted</b> as qubits.</p></div><p>If the quality of journalism we see for politics or for useless celebrity trivia became just like the quality of journalism we see for technical matters, there would be significant backlashes against it.  Joe Sixpack might not care about the distinction between abstract qubits and their physical implementation, but by God they better not misreport how many times $POP\_SINGER has been divorced!
<br> <br>
Though I'm not so sure that blatantly inaccurate (or misleading) statements are worse than the way more mainstream news items are handled.  For the mainstream items, they are very careful about which stories become "big news that everyone knows" and which don't, or they selectively omit facts which don't suit their agenda or that they otherwise find to be inconvenient.  They do that while being careful that any positive statements that they do choose to make are impeccable.
<br> <br>
There's nothing absurd or magical about this.  It's not unlike the way Microsoft doesn't make all of their file formats free open standards because they, in a similar fashion, find the idea to be inconvenient and incompatible with their intentions.  That doesn't become impossible and unthinkable merely because accurate news is important to you.  It just means that it's unwise to be the naive person who takes everything at face value and doesn't question like this:
<br> <br>
 "Of all the events that happen in the world every day, why promote this thing?"<br>
"If you look carefully at what becomes big news and what doesn't, do you see independent people who stand up for themselves, or do you see victims who need to be rescued from something?  Why?"<br>
"Do you see that the news corporations value freedom above all else, or do they call for its removal in the name of safety?  Can you pick up any newspaper or turn to any news channel and easily find good representatives of both views?  Why or why not?"<br>
"Is the nature of presented debate concerning whether or not it is the role of government to get involved, or does the debate consist merely of two competing proposals for what government should do after it gets involved?  Is this a careful consideration of available options before solutions are proposed?"<br>
"Do people like Ron Paul (whether you hate him or love him) get coverage because their ideas are radically different, and so they stand out more?  Or do such folks become marginalized because their views are not mainstream?  Does this help people to make up their own minds?  Does this mean that we have real debate, including dissent, or some mockery of real debate?"<br>
"Do these things, when taken together as an abstract, reflect an agenda?  Is that agenda statist in nature?  Did it get there by accident?"
<br> <br>
The way tech stories are handled can be described as "merely low-quality" or "someone didn't do their homework"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the way the mainstream items are dealt with is really much worse because it takes far more discernment to see what is (deeply) wrong with it.  I remember once hearing this on radio news a few years ago (I believe it was Fox):  "This new proposal authorizes warrentless wiretapping, which officials state is necessary in order to protect us from the threat of terrorism and will help us to prosecute the War on Terror.  However, some civil liberties groups cite privacy concerns *end of show*."  Nice how they didn't bother to explain what those concerns are or what the reasoning behind them might be.  To quote Bill Hicks, "you'd think that'd be newsworthy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not trying to split hairs .
This is actually a rather important point : they did not manufacture " two artificial atoms , or qubits " .
They manufactured two clusters of atoms that acted as qubits.If the quality of journalism we see for politics or for useless celebrity trivia became just like the quality of journalism we see for technical matters , there would be significant backlashes against it .
Joe Sixpack might not care about the distinction between abstract qubits and their physical implementation , but by God they better not misreport how many times $ POP \ _SINGER has been divorced !
Though I 'm not so sure that blatantly inaccurate ( or misleading ) statements are worse than the way more mainstream news items are handled .
For the mainstream items , they are very careful about which stories become " big news that everyone knows " and which do n't , or they selectively omit facts which do n't suit their agenda or that they otherwise find to be inconvenient .
They do that while being careful that any positive statements that they do choose to make are impeccable .
There 's nothing absurd or magical about this .
It 's not unlike the way Microsoft does n't make all of their file formats free open standards because they , in a similar fashion , find the idea to be inconvenient and incompatible with their intentions .
That does n't become impossible and unthinkable merely because accurate news is important to you .
It just means that it 's unwise to be the naive person who takes everything at face value and does n't question like this : " Of all the events that happen in the world every day , why promote this thing ?
" " If you look carefully at what becomes big news and what does n't , do you see independent people who stand up for themselves , or do you see victims who need to be rescued from something ?
Why ? " " Do you see that the news corporations value freedom above all else , or do they call for its removal in the name of safety ?
Can you pick up any newspaper or turn to any news channel and easily find good representatives of both views ?
Why or why not ?
" " Is the nature of presented debate concerning whether or not it is the role of government to get involved , or does the debate consist merely of two competing proposals for what government should do after it gets involved ?
Is this a careful consideration of available options before solutions are proposed ?
" " Do people like Ron Paul ( whether you hate him or love him ) get coverage because their ideas are radically different , and so they stand out more ?
Or do such folks become marginalized because their views are not mainstream ?
Does this help people to make up their own minds ?
Does this mean that we have real debate , including dissent , or some mockery of real debate ?
" " Do these things , when taken together as an abstract , reflect an agenda ?
Is that agenda statist in nature ?
Did it get there by accident ?
" The way tech stories are handled can be described as " merely low-quality " or " someone did n't do their homework " ... the way the mainstream items are dealt with is really much worse because it takes far more discernment to see what is ( deeply ) wrong with it .
I remember once hearing this on radio news a few years ago ( I believe it was Fox ) : " This new proposal authorizes warrentless wiretapping , which officials state is necessary in order to protect us from the threat of terrorism and will help us to prosecute the War on Terror .
However , some civil liberties groups cite privacy concerns * end of show * .
" Nice how they did n't bother to explain what those concerns are or what the reasoning behind them might be .
To quote Bill Hicks , " you 'd think that 'd be newsworthy ... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not trying to split hairs.
This is actually a rather important point: they did not manufacture "two artificial atoms, or qubits".
They manufactured two clusters of atoms that acted as qubits.If the quality of journalism we see for politics or for useless celebrity trivia became just like the quality of journalism we see for technical matters, there would be significant backlashes against it.
Joe Sixpack might not care about the distinction between abstract qubits and their physical implementation, but by God they better not misreport how many times $POP\_SINGER has been divorced!
Though I'm not so sure that blatantly inaccurate (or misleading) statements are worse than the way more mainstream news items are handled.
For the mainstream items, they are very careful about which stories become "big news that everyone knows" and which don't, or they selectively omit facts which don't suit their agenda or that they otherwise find to be inconvenient.
They do that while being careful that any positive statements that they do choose to make are impeccable.
There's nothing absurd or magical about this.
It's not unlike the way Microsoft doesn't make all of their file formats free open standards because they, in a similar fashion, find the idea to be inconvenient and incompatible with their intentions.
That doesn't become impossible and unthinkable merely because accurate news is important to you.
It just means that it's unwise to be the naive person who takes everything at face value and doesn't question like this:
 
 "Of all the events that happen in the world every day, why promote this thing?
"
"If you look carefully at what becomes big news and what doesn't, do you see independent people who stand up for themselves, or do you see victims who need to be rescued from something?
Why?"
"Do you see that the news corporations value freedom above all else, or do they call for its removal in the name of safety?
Can you pick up any newspaper or turn to any news channel and easily find good representatives of both views?
Why or why not?
"
"Is the nature of presented debate concerning whether or not it is the role of government to get involved, or does the debate consist merely of two competing proposals for what government should do after it gets involved?
Is this a careful consideration of available options before solutions are proposed?
"
"Do people like Ron Paul (whether you hate him or love him) get coverage because their ideas are radically different, and so they stand out more?
Or do such folks become marginalized because their views are not mainstream?
Does this help people to make up their own minds?
Does this mean that we have real debate, including dissent, or some mockery of real debate?
"
"Do these things, when taken together as an abstract, reflect an agenda?
Is that agenda statist in nature?
Did it get there by accident?
"
 
The way tech stories are handled can be described as "merely low-quality" or "someone didn't do their homework" ... the way the mainstream items are dealt with is really much worse because it takes far more discernment to see what is (deeply) wrong with it.
I remember once hearing this on radio news a few years ago (I believe it was Fox):  "This new proposal authorizes warrentless wiretapping, which officials state is necessary in order to protect us from the threat of terrorism and will help us to prosecute the War on Terror.
However, some civil liberties groups cite privacy concerns *end of show*.
"  Nice how they didn't bother to explain what those concerns are or what the reasoning behind them might be.
To quote Bill Hicks, "you'd think that'd be newsworthy ..."
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516469</id>
	<title>Re:Does it run Linux?</title>
	<author>oodaloop</author>
	<datestamp>1246300680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Obligatory slashdot answer on any topic regarding quantum mechanics: Yes and No.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Obligatory slashdot answer on any topic regarding quantum mechanics : Yes and No .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obligatory slashdot answer on any topic regarding quantum mechanics: Yes and No.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516347</id>
	<title>I know what this means....</title>
	<author>htwf\_and\_ip</author>
	<datestamp>1246300200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My iPhone is obsolete again.... sigh</htmltext>
<tokenext>My iPhone is obsolete again.... sigh</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My iPhone is obsolete again.... sigh</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28523425</id>
	<title>Re:Yay!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246289040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And running Windows 9<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></div><p>No way. This thing will be released in the Year of Linux.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And running Windows 9 : ( No way .
This thing will be released in the Year of Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And running Windows 9 :(No way.
This thing will be released in the Year of Linux.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517009</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515989</id>
	<title>Lab Site &amp; Papers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246298760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can find the lab site <a href="http://www.eng.yale.edu/rslab/" title="yale.edu" rel="nofollow">here</a> [yale.edu] with <a href="http://www.eng.yale.edu/rslab/publications.html#transmon" title="yale.edu" rel="nofollow">several papers freely available in pre-publication form on arxiv</a> [yale.edu] from the researchers.  I'm trying to find the "basic algorithms" the article alludes to that these rudimentary processors can perform.  I thought only a handful were applicable (Shor's algorithm) to quantum computing.  Anyone know?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can find the lab site here [ yale.edu ] with several papers freely available in pre-publication form on arxiv [ yale.edu ] from the researchers .
I 'm trying to find the " basic algorithms " the article alludes to that these rudimentary processors can perform .
I thought only a handful were applicable ( Shor 's algorithm ) to quantum computing .
Anyone know ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can find the lab site here [yale.edu] with several papers freely available in pre-publication form on arxiv [yale.edu] from the researchers.
I'm trying to find the "basic algorithms" the article alludes to that these rudimentary processors can perform.
I thought only a handful were applicable (Shor's algorithm) to quantum computing.
Anyone know?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517009</id>
	<title>Re:Yay!</title>
	<author>cyber-vandal</author>
	<datestamp>1246302660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And running Windows 9<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And running Windows 9 : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And running Windows 9 :(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516019</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28524155</id>
	<title>Need more cats!</title>
	<author>aqk</author>
	<datestamp>1246296060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately the supply of cats is running out.<br>
The live ones we can re-use; the dead ones are problematic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately the supply of cats is running out .
The live ones we can re-use ; the dead ones are problematic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately the supply of cats is running out.
The live ones we can re-use; the dead ones are problematic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28524457</id>
	<title>Re:Problem Solved</title>
	<author>adavies42</author>
	<datestamp>1246298700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the chicken had to get laid before the egg could</htmltext>
<tokenext>the chicken had to get laid before the egg could</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the chicken had to get laid before the egg could</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516811</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520841</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246274340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To see this wonderful comment tagged "Offtopic" instead of "Insightful"; a little piece of me died today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To see this wonderful comment tagged " Offtopic " instead of " Insightful " ; a little piece of me died today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To see this wonderful comment tagged "Offtopic" instead of "Insightful"; a little piece of me died today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517335</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517455</id>
	<title>It's like cutting off Sampson's hair...</title>
	<author>Qubit</author>
	<datestamp>1246304280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Riiiiight. What's a qubit?</p></div><p>If I tell you, I'll lose my superposition high and collapse.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Riiiiight .
What 's a qubit ? If I tell you , I 'll lose my superposition high and collapse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Riiiiight.
What's a qubit?If I tell you, I'll lose my superposition high and collapse.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517333</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246303860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cosby returns!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cosby returns !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cosby returns!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516331</id>
	<title>Re:Problem Solved</title>
	<author>ByOhTek</author>
	<datestamp>1246300140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That has been long since solved with evolutionary genetics.</p><p>The egg.</p><p>What produced it just happened not to be a chicken. Something close, but not quite.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That has been long since solved with evolutionary genetics.The egg.What produced it just happened not to be a chicken .
Something close , but not quite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That has been long since solved with evolutionary genetics.The egg.What produced it just happened not to be a chicken.
Something close, but not quite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516087</id>
	<title>Problem Solved</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246299060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So in theory, one of the greatest scientific inquiries can now be solved by a quantum computer.</p><p>Which came first? The chicken or the egg.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So in theory , one of the greatest scientific inquiries can now be solved by a quantum computer.Which came first ?
The chicken or the egg .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So in theory, one of the greatest scientific inquiries can now be solved by a quantum computer.Which came first?
The chicken or the egg.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517517</id>
	<title>I want..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246304520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google Maps - Traveling Salesmen.</p><p>Imagine how much fuel could be saved by UPS or FedEx in a given year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google Maps - Traveling Salesmen.Imagine how much fuel could be saved by UPS or FedEx in a given year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google Maps - Traveling Salesmen.Imagine how much fuel could be saved by UPS or FedEx in a given year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519027</id>
	<title>Re:Simulating?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246267320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why would it take an exponential amount of resources?</p></div><p>Ahem. Why has nobody built a working simulation of a 32- or 64-qbit quantum computer?</p><p>Oh yeah: because they need 2^32 or 2^64 units of REAL work to build and/or operate the things. It's hard to promote vaporware to the get-rich-quick crowd when you show them that your product will never be practical. EVER.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would it take an exponential amount of resources ? Ahem .
Why has nobody built a working simulation of a 32- or 64-qbit quantum computer ? Oh yeah : because they need 2 ^ 32 or 2 ^ 64 units of REAL work to build and/or operate the things .
It 's hard to promote vaporware to the get-rich-quick crowd when you show them that your product will never be practical .
EVER .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would it take an exponential amount of resources?Ahem.
Why has nobody built a working simulation of a 32- or 64-qbit quantum computer?Oh yeah: because they need 2^32 or 2^64 units of REAL work to build and/or operate the things.
It's hard to promote vaporware to the get-rich-quick crowd when you show them that your product will never be practical.
EVER.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516593</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516137</id>
	<title>Does it run Linux?</title>
	<author>filesiteguy</author>
	<datestamp>1246299300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry, couldn't resist.<br><br>Seriously, I wonder if this comes to pass and we continue on the binary process forever. (IIRC, some mainframes back in the '40s and '50s used decimal processing, which was too slow then, so all switched eventually to binary.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , could n't resist.Seriously , I wonder if this comes to pass and we continue on the binary process forever .
( IIRC , some mainframes back in the '40s and '50s used decimal processing , which was too slow then , so all switched eventually to binary .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, couldn't resist.Seriously, I wonder if this comes to pass and we continue on the binary process forever.
(IIRC, some mainframes back in the '40s and '50s used decimal processing, which was too slow then, so all switched eventually to binary.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516277</id>
	<title>Stallman says</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246299900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Qubit states should be copyrightable but not patentable.</p><p>That way I can make a qubit state that copies all the innovations within commercially produced Qubit states, slap a viral copyright notice on it, give it away for nothing and then babble incoherantly about my personal definition of the word "freedom".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Qubit states should be copyrightable but not patentable.That way I can make a qubit state that copies all the innovations within commercially produced Qubit states , slap a viral copyright notice on it , give it away for nothing and then babble incoherantly about my personal definition of the word " freedom " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Qubit states should be copyrightable but not patentable.That way I can make a qubit state that copies all the innovations within commercially produced Qubit states, slap a viral copyright notice on it, give it away for nothing and then babble incoherantly about my personal definition of the word "freedom".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516829</id>
	<title>Re:Stallman says</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246301940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More evidence of the MS shill campaign going on at slashdot...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More evidence of the MS shill campaign going on at slashdot.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More evidence of the MS shill campaign going on at slashdot...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516277</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28525263</id>
	<title>Re:Most Excellent</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1246394400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>time travelling phone booths</p></div><p>That would be awesome! We could call them Telephone And Restrooms Designed for Intelligent Species!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>time travelling phone boothsThat would be awesome !
We could call them Telephone And Restrooms Designed for Intelligent Species !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>time travelling phone boothsThat would be awesome!
We could call them Telephone And Restrooms Designed for Intelligent Species!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516057</id>
	<title>excellent news!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246298940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will the production model allow us to upload our consciousness to the Universal Computer?<br>In that case, I might actually queue up for it (and let others queue for the iPhone).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will the production model allow us to upload our consciousness to the Universal Computer ? In that case , I might actually queue up for it ( and let others queue for the iPhone ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will the production model allow us to upload our consciousness to the Universal Computer?In that case, I might actually queue up for it (and let others queue for the iPhone).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28518457</id>
	<title>Re:Article is incorrect.</title>
	<author>Artuir</author>
	<datestamp>1246308480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q*bert" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Q*Bert</a> [wikipedia.org] is related somehow, but I haven't figured it all out yet. Maybe this will help explain it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Q * Bert [ wikipedia.org ] is related somehow , but I have n't figured it all out yet .
Maybe this will help explain it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Q*Bert [wikipedia.org] is related somehow, but I haven't figured it all out yet.
Maybe this will help explain it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517003
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28525207
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28525263
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28523741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516085
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516107
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516277
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516339
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28522097
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28518457
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28524457
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516019
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28524817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516085
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28521087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517181
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516713
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516107
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28523425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516019
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517333
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28525279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516829
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516277
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_164210_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515895
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516107
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516397
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517221
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516837
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516015
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515989
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28515943
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519443
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517517
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28525263
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520965
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517581
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516829
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516057
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517355
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519341
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516449
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519239
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516871
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28522097
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517455
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28525207
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520419
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28518457
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519069
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520775
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517333
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28525279
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517335
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28520841
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28523741
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28524817
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516513
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516593
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28519027
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517181
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28521087
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517003
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516019
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517009
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28523425
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517389
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516443
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_164210.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516087
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516811
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28524457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516331
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28517731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_164210.28516339
</commentlist>
</conversation>
