<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_29_1647200</id>
	<title>Graphene Could Make Magnetic Memory 1000x Denser</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1246267260000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://arxivblog.technologyreview.com/" rel="nofollow">KentuckyFC</a> writes <i>"The density of magnetic memory depends on the size of the magnetic domains used to store bits. The current state-of-the-art uses cobalt-based grains some 8nm across, each containing about 50,000 atoms. Materials scientists think they can shrink the grains to 15,000 atoms but any smaller than that and the crystal structure of the grains is lost. That's a problem because the cobalt has to be arranged in a hexagonal close packing structure to ensure the stability of its magnetic field. Otherwise the field can spontaneously reverse and the data is lost. Now a group of German physicists say they can <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/23773/">trick a pair of cobalt atoms</a> into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene  or benzene. That's handy because the magnetic field associated with cobalt dimers is calculated to be far more stable than the field in a cobalt grain. And graphene and benzene rings are only 0.5 nm across, a size that could allow an increase in memory density of three orders of magnitude."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>KentuckyFC writes " The density of magnetic memory depends on the size of the magnetic domains used to store bits .
The current state-of-the-art uses cobalt-based grains some 8nm across , each containing about 50,000 atoms .
Materials scientists think they can shrink the grains to 15,000 atoms but any smaller than that and the crystal structure of the grains is lost .
That 's a problem because the cobalt has to be arranged in a hexagonal close packing structure to ensure the stability of its magnetic field .
Otherwise the field can spontaneously reverse and the data is lost .
Now a group of German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene or benzene .
That 's handy because the magnetic field associated with cobalt dimers is calculated to be far more stable than the field in a cobalt grain .
And graphene and benzene rings are only 0.5 nm across , a size that could allow an increase in memory density of three orders of magnitude .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>KentuckyFC writes "The density of magnetic memory depends on the size of the magnetic domains used to store bits.
The current state-of-the-art uses cobalt-based grains some 8nm across, each containing about 50,000 atoms.
Materials scientists think they can shrink the grains to 15,000 atoms but any smaller than that and the crystal structure of the grains is lost.
That's a problem because the cobalt has to be arranged in a hexagonal close packing structure to ensure the stability of its magnetic field.
Otherwise the field can spontaneously reverse and the data is lost.
Now a group of German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene  or benzene.
That's handy because the magnetic field associated with cobalt dimers is calculated to be far more stable than the field in a cobalt grain.
And graphene and benzene rings are only 0.5 nm across, a size that could allow an increase in memory density of three orders of magnitude.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525901</id>
	<title>Re:Math?</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1246359840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>256 is 1000 in hard-disk marketing speak.</htmltext>
<tokenext>256 is 1000 in hard-disk marketing speak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>256 is 1000 in hard-disk marketing speak.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520151</id>
	<title>More room, yay!</title>
	<author>Knave75</author>
	<datestamp>1246271100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sweet, more room for p0rn.

I mean, more room to store my philosophical musings about the world we live in...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sweet , more room for p0rn .
I mean , more room to store my philosophical musings about the world we live in.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sweet, more room for p0rn.
I mean, more room to store my philosophical musings about the world we live in...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521115</id>
	<title>Re:Math?</title>
	<author>Anti\_Climax</author>
	<datestamp>1246275720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not that it's necessarily the case, but I'd imagine there is some minimal spacing dictated by the strength of the magnetic fields in use. The smaller structures could allow for smaller spacing than would be allowable for their contemporaries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not that it 's necessarily the case , but I 'd imagine there is some minimal spacing dictated by the strength of the magnetic fields in use .
The smaller structures could allow for smaller spacing than would be allowable for their contemporaries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not that it's necessarily the case, but I'd imagine there is some minimal spacing dictated by the strength of the magnetic fields in use.
The smaller structures could allow for smaller spacing than would be allowable for their contemporaries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522189</id>
	<title>call me stupid</title>
	<author>layer3switch</author>
	<datestamp>1246281240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1000x Denser ???<br><b><nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>... 50,000 atoms<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... to 15,000 atoms... 8nm across<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... only 0.5nm across... could allow an increase in memory density of three orders of magnitude</i> </b><br>three orders of magnitude?  what kind of math is this???<br><b> <i>The only question now is whether this team's calculations hold true in the real world.</i> </b><br>I would like to see that calculation!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1000x Denser ? ? ?
... 50,000 atoms ... to 15,000 atoms... 8nm across ... only 0.5nm across... could allow an increase in memory density of three orders of magnitude three orders of magnitude ?
what kind of math is this ? ? ?
The only question now is whether this team 's calculations hold true in the real world .
I would like to see that calculation !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1000x Denser ???
... 50,000 atoms ... to 15,000 atoms... 8nm across ... only 0.5nm across... could allow an increase in memory density of three orders of magnitude three orders of magnitude?
what kind of math is this???
The only question now is whether this team's calculations hold true in the real world.
I would like to see that calculation!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28529465</id>
	<title>Yeah but..</title>
	<author>Ezekiel68</author>
	<datestamp>1246381020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...boy are those cobalt atoms gonna be pissed off once they realize they've been tricked.  I wouldn't want to be someone's data around them when <i>that</i> happens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...boy are those cobalt atoms gon na be pissed off once they realize they 've been tricked .
I would n't want to be someone 's data around them when that happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...boy are those cobalt atoms gonna be pissed off once they realize they've been tricked.
I wouldn't want to be someone's data around them when that happens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522435</id>
	<title>AI?</title>
	<author>Plekto</author>
	<datestamp>1246282560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This may be the breakthrough, though, that allows for the type of density that would be required for a human-analog type AI to be a reality.(currently it would take a small building to approximate a typical human brain)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This may be the breakthrough , though , that allows for the type of density that would be required for a human-analog type AI to be a reality .
( currently it would take a small building to approximate a typical human brain )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This may be the breakthrough, though, that allows for the type of density that would be required for a human-analog type AI to be a reality.
(currently it would take a small building to approximate a typical human brain)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28534911</id>
	<title>Re:call me stupid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246356960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, stupid.</p><p>I have no clue where you think they were headed with the 15000 atoms bit, but that's showing a limit of potential refinement of current structure (roughly log(50/15)*2/3 = 0.35; ~2x density), nothing to do with the new development.</p><p>log(8nm/0.5nm)*2 = 2.4; ~250x density</p><p>Not quite 3, but that's only considering the increased domain density; they also mentioned enhanced stability, which probably means you could have a physical bit contain less domains for the same performance; without Ring TFA, it seems perfectly reasonable that this could account for the remaining factor of 4.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , stupid.I have no clue where you think they were headed with the 15000 atoms bit , but that 's showing a limit of potential refinement of current structure ( roughly log ( 50/15 ) * 2/3 = 0.35 ; ~ 2x density ) , nothing to do with the new development.log ( 8nm/0.5nm ) * 2 = 2.4 ; ~ 250x densityNot quite 3 , but that 's only considering the increased domain density ; they also mentioned enhanced stability , which probably means you could have a physical bit contain less domains for the same performance ; without Ring TFA , it seems perfectly reasonable that this could account for the remaining factor of 4 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, stupid.I have no clue where you think they were headed with the 15000 atoms bit, but that's showing a limit of potential refinement of current structure (roughly log(50/15)*2/3 = 0.35; ~2x density), nothing to do with the new development.log(8nm/0.5nm)*2 = 2.4; ~250x densityNot quite 3, but that's only considering the increased domain density; they also mentioned enhanced stability, which probably means you could have a physical bit contain less domains for the same performance; without Ring TFA, it seems perfectly reasonable that this could account for the remaining factor of 4.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525645</id>
	<title>Re:call me stupid</title>
	<author>abies</author>
	<datestamp>1246356060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As you wish. "You are stupid".</p><p>Now when we got it done, let's read the article.</p><p>1) current state-of-the-art [...] 50,000 atoms[...]scientists think they can shrink [..] to 15,000 atoms<br>2) group of German physicists [...] pair of cobalt atoms [...] hexagonal carbon ring</p><p>I don't know how many atoms are in second case, but with estimate of 10-50, you will get 3 orders of magnitude from point 1.</p><p>Now, the sizes. 8nm versus 0.5nm (diameter, so I cut in in half)<br>4*4*pi is around 50.<br>0.25*0.25*pi is around 0.2<br>Difference is 250 times. I think that we can count it as 3 orders of magnitude with a bit of good will.</p><p>What was your question ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As you wish .
" You are stupid " .Now when we got it done , let 's read the article.1 ) current state-of-the-art [ ... ] 50,000 atoms [ ... ] scientists think they can shrink [ .. ] to 15,000 atoms2 ) group of German physicists [ ... ] pair of cobalt atoms [ ... ] hexagonal carbon ringI do n't know how many atoms are in second case , but with estimate of 10-50 , you will get 3 orders of magnitude from point 1.Now , the sizes .
8nm versus 0.5nm ( diameter , so I cut in in half ) 4 * 4 * pi is around 50.0.25 * 0.25 * pi is around 0.2Difference is 250 times .
I think that we can count it as 3 orders of magnitude with a bit of good will.What was your question ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As you wish.
"You are stupid".Now when we got it done, let's read the article.1) current state-of-the-art [...] 50,000 atoms[...]scientists think they can shrink [..] to 15,000 atoms2) group of German physicists [...] pair of cobalt atoms [...] hexagonal carbon ringI don't know how many atoms are in second case, but with estimate of 10-50, you will get 3 orders of magnitude from point 1.Now, the sizes.
8nm versus 0.5nm (diameter, so I cut in in half)4*4*pi is around 50.0.25*0.25*pi is around 0.2Difference is 250 times.
I think that we can count it as 3 orders of magnitude with a bit of good will.What was your question ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28528371</id>
	<title>Re:Who controls magnetism...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246376940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...a group of German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms [CC] [MD] [GC] into thinking"</p><p>We also read<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., so the trick is off now that we know.</p><p>The Cobalts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...a group of German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms [ CC ] [ MD ] [ GC ] into thinking " We also read /. , so the trick is off now that we know.The Cobalts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...a group of German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms [CC] [MD] [GC] into thinking"We also read /., so the trick is off now that we know.The Cobalts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520125</id>
	<title>FIRST POST</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246271040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Chemistry is Bullshit!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Chemistry is Bullshit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chemistry is Bullshit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523709</id>
	<title>Graphene or benzene?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246291740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Graphene is extremely expensive and benzene is very cheap.<br>It sounds as if they argue whether to use diamonds or wood for their project.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Graphene is extremely expensive and benzene is very cheap.It sounds as if they argue whether to use diamonds or wood for their project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Graphene is extremely expensive and benzene is very cheap.It sounds as if they argue whether to use diamonds or wood for their project.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28529781</id>
	<title>RoHS</title>
	<author>motherpusbucket</author>
	<datestamp>1246381980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey, isn't Benzene on the RoHS 'nasty stuff' list?<br>
If so, I'm surprised it's being looked at as a component of a potentially mass-marketed technology.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , is n't Benzene on the RoHS 'nasty stuff ' list ?
If so , I 'm surprised it 's being looked at as a component of a potentially mass-marketed technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, isn't Benzene on the RoHS 'nasty stuff' list?
If so, I'm surprised it's being looked at as a component of a potentially mass-marketed technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521663</id>
	<title>Re:Not again!</title>
	<author>turing\_m</author>
	<datestamp>1246278600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I want terabyte USB thumb drives, not yet another mechanical storage device.</p></div></blockquote><p>
That day may come sooner than I'd thought. It looks like they even have 256Gb thumb drives now, last time I checked the largest was only 32Gb (which is now the sweet spot in $/GB). I'd still like to have all the data I own on 1 disk with another disk or two as backup. If mechanical gets me there sooner so be it. Currently mechanical is 1/20 of the cost of USB flash, comparing lowest $/GB media. 10Tb HDDs should be here in 2013, according to Hitachi.
<br> <br>
But I can certainly understand the cool factor in terabyte thumb drives, especially with USB3 making an appearance. To be honest, my mind boggles at how far computing has come since the days of the C64 era. And there still will be a need for different storage media out to at least 5 years - USB flash for transporting data quickly on your person, SSD for anything requiring quick seeks, HDD for storing all your data at home. Hopefully there will also be something flash based to supersede tapes for archival purposes too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want terabyte USB thumb drives , not yet another mechanical storage device .
That day may come sooner than I 'd thought .
It looks like they even have 256Gb thumb drives now , last time I checked the largest was only 32Gb ( which is now the sweet spot in $ /GB ) .
I 'd still like to have all the data I own on 1 disk with another disk or two as backup .
If mechanical gets me there sooner so be it .
Currently mechanical is 1/20 of the cost of USB flash , comparing lowest $ /GB media .
10Tb HDDs should be here in 2013 , according to Hitachi .
But I can certainly understand the cool factor in terabyte thumb drives , especially with USB3 making an appearance .
To be honest , my mind boggles at how far computing has come since the days of the C64 era .
And there still will be a need for different storage media out to at least 5 years - USB flash for transporting data quickly on your person , SSD for anything requiring quick seeks , HDD for storing all your data at home .
Hopefully there will also be something flash based to supersede tapes for archival purposes too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want terabyte USB thumb drives, not yet another mechanical storage device.
That day may come sooner than I'd thought.
It looks like they even have 256Gb thumb drives now, last time I checked the largest was only 32Gb (which is now the sweet spot in $/GB).
I'd still like to have all the data I own on 1 disk with another disk or two as backup.
If mechanical gets me there sooner so be it.
Currently mechanical is 1/20 of the cost of USB flash, comparing lowest $/GB media.
10Tb HDDs should be here in 2013, according to Hitachi.
But I can certainly understand the cool factor in terabyte thumb drives, especially with USB3 making an appearance.
To be honest, my mind boggles at how far computing has come since the days of the C64 era.
And there still will be a need for different storage media out to at least 5 years - USB flash for transporting data quickly on your person, SSD for anything requiring quick seeks, HDD for storing all your data at home.
Hopefully there will also be something flash based to supersede tapes for archival purposes too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520585</id>
	<title>Useless if the speed is the same</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246272900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well this is all fine and dandy for storage space, but what about performance?    Drives are getting bigger all the time, but you're still stuck with spindles that rotate at the same speeds as the ones from last year, or the year before.  I can't see anyone wanting to replace their speedy many-spindle database disk farm with a single 320TB disk that still spins at 10Krpm and only delivers ~125 IOPS.  Performance is going to suck big time.  All the top TPS benchmark results for example are achieved using 1000's of disks to max out the IO speed and make the database fly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well this is all fine and dandy for storage space , but what about performance ?
Drives are getting bigger all the time , but you 're still stuck with spindles that rotate at the same speeds as the ones from last year , or the year before .
I ca n't see anyone wanting to replace their speedy many-spindle database disk farm with a single 320TB disk that still spins at 10Krpm and only delivers ~ 125 IOPS .
Performance is going to suck big time .
All the top TPS benchmark results for example are achieved using 1000 's of disks to max out the IO speed and make the database fly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well this is all fine and dandy for storage space, but what about performance?
Drives are getting bigger all the time, but you're still stuck with spindles that rotate at the same speeds as the ones from last year, or the year before.
I can't see anyone wanting to replace their speedy many-spindle database disk farm with a single 320TB disk that still spins at 10Krpm and only delivers ~125 IOPS.
Performance is going to suck big time.
All the top TPS benchmark results for example are achieved using 1000's of disks to max out the IO speed and make the database fly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520507</id>
	<title>Re:Who controls magnetism...</title>
	<author>kestasjk</author>
	<datestamp>1246272540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hope he's right..<br> <br>

-- Magneto</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope he 's right. . -- Magneto</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope he's right.. 

-- Magneto</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520853</id>
	<title>Re:Useless if the speed is the same</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246274340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who would do that?</p><p>You run a database off of a decent RAID if you're worried about performance or data security. You wouldn't replace it all with one drive for the same reason that we haven't replaced our social security numbers with our initials.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who would do that ? You run a database off of a decent RAID if you 're worried about performance or data security .
You would n't replace it all with one drive for the same reason that we have n't replaced our social security numbers with our initials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who would do that?You run a database off of a decent RAID if you're worried about performance or data security.
You wouldn't replace it all with one drive for the same reason that we haven't replaced our social security numbers with our initials.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520633</id>
	<title>Re:Who controls magnetism...</title>
	<author>oodaloop</author>
	<datestamp>1246273200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Must have been talking about Magneto.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Must have been talking about Magneto .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Must have been talking about Magneto.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520947</id>
	<title>Experiment?</title>
	<author>feranick</author>
	<datestamp>1246274820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Before I can get excited, I need to know when this is proven experimentally. The FTA refers to a calculation. There are lots of possible things that are achieved with a calculation, but translating it in practice is a totally different matter. BTW, I am an experimentalist nanoscientist (working on graphene, actually), part of my daily job is to prove that computational results can be achieved in reality.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Before I can get excited , I need to know when this is proven experimentally .
The FTA refers to a calculation .
There are lots of possible things that are achieved with a calculation , but translating it in practice is a totally different matter .
BTW , I am an experimentalist nanoscientist ( working on graphene , actually ) , part of my daily job is to prove that computational results can be achieved in reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before I can get excited, I need to know when this is proven experimentally.
The FTA refers to a calculation.
There are lots of possible things that are achieved with a calculation, but translating it in practice is a totally different matter.
BTW, I am an experimentalist nanoscientist (working on graphene, actually), part of my daily job is to prove that computational results can be achieved in reality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201</id>
	<title>How to fill up the storage?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246271280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's already a challenge to fill a 60GB MP3 player with MP3s. I have 9TB of disks on the network at home, and it's less than half full, even with all of our CDs and DVDs ripped onto the server - and of the 9TB, we use 6TB as double backup of the 3TB primary storage.<br>
What's a person to do when disk capacities increase by another 3 orders of magnitude?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's already a challenge to fill a 60GB MP3 player with MP3s .
I have 9TB of disks on the network at home , and it 's less than half full , even with all of our CDs and DVDs ripped onto the server - and of the 9TB , we use 6TB as double backup of the 3TB primary storage .
What 's a person to do when disk capacities increase by another 3 orders of magnitude ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's already a challenge to fill a 60GB MP3 player with MP3s.
I have 9TB of disks on the network at home, and it's less than half full, even with all of our CDs and DVDs ripped onto the server - and of the 9TB, we use 6TB as double backup of the 3TB primary storage.
What's a person to do when disk capacities increase by another 3 orders of magnitude?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525575</id>
	<title>More Linux!</title>
	<author>pinkushun</author>
	<datestamp>1246355160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In a smaller space! Hooray!</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a smaller space !
Hooray !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a smaller space!
Hooray!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523427</id>
	<title>Re:Not again!</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1246289040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want petabyte hard drives to store and backup all the stuff that's too big to fit on my terabyte USB drives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want petabyte hard drives to store and backup all the stuff that 's too big to fit on my terabyte USB drives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want petabyte hard drives to store and backup all the stuff that's too big to fit on my terabyte USB drives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520219</id>
	<title>Lets show 'em what a walkman can do!</title>
	<author>gooseupfront</author>
	<datestamp>1246271340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does this mean my walkman will hold 45,000 minutes of music?  take that iPod!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean my walkman will hold 45,000 minutes of music ?
take that iPod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean my walkman will hold 45,000 minutes of music?
take that iPod!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520187</id>
	<title>1000x denser</title>
	<author>Finallyjoined!!!</author>
	<datestamp>1246271220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Now a group of German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene or benzene.</p></div></blockquote><p>
If only I could trick my pr0n collection into thinking (there's so much of it it's become self-aware) it's in a hexagonal close packing structure, I could archive onto 3&#189;" floppies<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now a group of German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene or benzene .
If only I could trick my pr0n collection into thinking ( there 's so much of it it 's become self-aware ) it 's in a hexagonal close packing structure , I could archive onto 3   " floppies : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now a group of German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene or benzene.
If only I could trick my pr0n collection into thinking (there's so much of it it's become self-aware) it's in a hexagonal close packing structure, I could archive onto 3½" floppies :-)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520525</id>
	<title>Early beta tst</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1246272600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I trhed an e"rlx be|a tast.( Uhe res7ltw w\%ren/t so pretpyn</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I trhed an e " rlx be | a tast .
( Uhe res7ltw w \ % ren/t so pretpyn</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I trhed an e"rlx be|a tast.
( Uhe res7ltw w\%ren/t so pretpyn</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520881</id>
	<title>Re:More room but----</title>
	<author>dimeglio</author>
	<datestamp>1246274520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the cobalt has to be arranged in a hexagonal close packing structure to ensure the stability of its magnetic field. Otherwise the field can spontaneously reverse and the data is lost.</p><p>So one day the atoms might just realize that they've been tricked and you'll end up with your computer on fire because your benzene chains have all broken and you end up with<br>2-methyl-1,3,5-trinitrobenzene</p></div><p>Yeah, and not to mention that cobalt atoms can be very <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt\_bomb" title="wikipedia.org">nasty</a> [wikipedia.org] if they decide to isotope themselves. Will the EPA to allow them in PCs?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the cobalt has to be arranged in a hexagonal close packing structure to ensure the stability of its magnetic field .
Otherwise the field can spontaneously reverse and the data is lost.So one day the atoms might just realize that they 've been tricked and you 'll end up with your computer on fire because your benzene chains have all broken and you end up with2-methyl-1,3,5-trinitrobenzeneYeah , and not to mention that cobalt atoms can be very nasty [ wikipedia.org ] if they decide to isotope themselves .
Will the EPA to allow them in PCs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the cobalt has to be arranged in a hexagonal close packing structure to ensure the stability of its magnetic field.
Otherwise the field can spontaneously reverse and the data is lost.So one day the atoms might just realize that they've been tricked and you'll end up with your computer on fire because your benzene chains have all broken and you end up with2-methyl-1,3,5-trinitrobenzeneYeah, and not to mention that cobalt atoms can be very nasty [wikipedia.org] if they decide to isotope themselves.
Will the EPA to allow them in PCs?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525205</id>
	<title>Re:Useless if the speed is the same</title>
	<author>rdebath</author>
	<datestamp>1246393860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
You're pretty close, except it isn't the magnetic coating that gets flung off nowadays. It's the glass or metal disks themselves that start to ooze toward the edge of the drive.
</p><p>
Then there's the momentum, if you're holding a running 15k drive and it's bearing seizes it has a very good chance of jumping out of your hand. (I've had that happen with a 7k2 drive, it didn't have much chance of escaping but it was very noticeable) Much more and it'll start damaging equipment around it.
</p><p>
Both of these are good reasons for there not being any 5.25" hard drives anymore.
</p><p>
Anyway huge storage isn't useless with slow access, it's just that it's "nearline" storage rather than "online" storage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're pretty close , except it is n't the magnetic coating that gets flung off nowadays .
It 's the glass or metal disks themselves that start to ooze toward the edge of the drive .
Then there 's the momentum , if you 're holding a running 15k drive and it 's bearing seizes it has a very good chance of jumping out of your hand .
( I 've had that happen with a 7k2 drive , it did n't have much chance of escaping but it was very noticeable ) Much more and it 'll start damaging equipment around it .
Both of these are good reasons for there not being any 5.25 " hard drives anymore .
Anyway huge storage is n't useless with slow access , it 's just that it 's " nearline " storage rather than " online " storage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
You're pretty close, except it isn't the magnetic coating that gets flung off nowadays.
It's the glass or metal disks themselves that start to ooze toward the edge of the drive.
Then there's the momentum, if you're holding a running 15k drive and it's bearing seizes it has a very good chance of jumping out of your hand.
(I've had that happen with a 7k2 drive, it didn't have much chance of escaping but it was very noticeable) Much more and it'll start damaging equipment around it.
Both of these are good reasons for there not being any 5.25" hard drives anymore.
Anyway huge storage isn't useless with slow access, it's just that it's "nearline" storage rather than "online" storage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520749</id>
	<title>Great for semicondcutors too</title>
	<author>anexanhume</author>
	<datestamp>1246273800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Graphene also has great potential for transistors. Graphene has insanely high electron and hole mobility characteristics, making it ideal for these devices. Devices of both types (n and p) have been fabricated in the lab:

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphene#Integrated\_circuits" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphene#Integrated\_circuits</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Graphene also has great potential for transistors .
Graphene has insanely high electron and hole mobility characteristics , making it ideal for these devices .
Devices of both types ( n and p ) have been fabricated in the lab : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphene # Integrated \ _circuits [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Graphene also has great potential for transistors.
Graphene has insanely high electron and hole mobility characteristics, making it ideal for these devices.
Devices of both types (n and p) have been fabricated in the lab:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphene#Integrated\_circuits [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520443</id>
	<title>Re:More room but----</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246272300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So one day the atoms might just realize that they've been tricked and you'll end up with your computer on fire because your benzene chains have all broken and you end up with 2-methyl-1,3,5-trinitrobenzene</p></div><p>Actually, the explosive yield is greater if you omit the methyl group. Trinitrobenzene out-booms trinitrotoluene, but is harder to handle due to its lower stability.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So one day the atoms might just realize that they 've been tricked and you 'll end up with your computer on fire because your benzene chains have all broken and you end up with 2-methyl-1,3,5-trinitrobenzeneActually , the explosive yield is greater if you omit the methyl group .
Trinitrobenzene out-booms trinitrotoluene , but is harder to handle due to its lower stability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So one day the atoms might just realize that they've been tricked and you'll end up with your computer on fire because your benzene chains have all broken and you end up with 2-methyl-1,3,5-trinitrobenzeneActually, the explosive yield is greater if you omit the methyl group.
Trinitrobenzene out-booms trinitrotoluene, but is harder to handle due to its lower stability.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28532865</id>
	<title>Re:call me stupid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246391460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, you're stupid and didn't even read the summary you're quoting. They're going from 50,000 atoms to two cobalt atoms attached to a hexagon of six carbon atoms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , you 're stupid and did n't even read the summary you 're quoting .
They 're going from 50,000 atoms to two cobalt atoms attached to a hexagon of six carbon atoms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, you're stupid and didn't even read the summary you're quoting.
They're going from 50,000 atoms to two cobalt atoms attached to a hexagon of six carbon atoms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521375</id>
	<title>Re:Useless if the speed is the same</title>
	<author>Chyeld</author>
	<datestamp>1246277160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back when I was in college one of the 'cool' old Comp Sci professors had a tale he liked to share with his classes on the first day. I had him in a couple of classes, so I heard it over and over again. His presentation made it an amusing story if you could get over the fact that he smelt as if he lived in an ashtray.</p><p>It seems that back in the mainframe days, the standard way of increasing storage size on your hard drives was to make a bigger platter. Seems rather simple, right? The storage size grows exponentially with its radius. So adding an inch each time can lead to some fairly nice results, and with some platters topping out at 24 inches, that's some space.</p><p>Except....</p><p>One day, the university ordered the 'latest' hard drive for one of their mainframes. I'm sure it was a behemoth, it probably held around 50 meg. The vendor came by and installed it, and everything seemed fine till a few months later when the drive seemed to start failing, at about 30\% capacity, writes stopped working and anything written to seemed to have been corrupted. They were puzzled, but this is why such things service contracts. The vendor came out, replaced the drive, and everyone went on with life.</p><p>Till it happened again, at about the same capacity. Another replacement was made and vendor was quite red-faced and explained that they seemed to have run into a batch of dud drives. All was forgiven and life went on.</p><p>Till, it happened the third time. At this point, it was starting to embarrass everyone: The vendor, the people who ordered the hard drive in the first place, etc. So this time, instead of just allowing the vendor to take the drive back, the dean of the department demanded they diagnose the issue there on the spot.</p><p>Now, this wasn't the age of the sealed drive cases, certainly drives were still kept 'clean' but we weren't to the point yet where a single grain of dust could wipe out megabytes of info (heck, even the 24 inch platters needed to be in arrays of 50+ just dream of hitting 100 meg) so cracking open the drive wasn't that big of a deal.</p><p>So the vendor's tech, hoping to appease a clearly angry customer in the day and age when parts cost tens of thousands of dollars, popped open the drive.</p><p>Want to guess what they found?</p><p>Larger disks do indeed result in more surface area, but they also result in a higher centrifugal force on the edges. An increased force which the vendor apparently hadn't accounted for. Once the disks began to spin up, the glue holding the magnetic dust to the platter gave way, resulting in the platters being stripped clean after a certain radial length from the center. The disks themselves were fine up to that point, the dust was plastered to the case itself and when the platters came up to speed any dust that had fallen back onto them was once again flung up against the case.</p><p>The reason why the disks didn't seem to fail till they reached a certain capacity was simply because they weren't being used in a RAM fashion but were being written to in a sequential manner. The outer portions of the platters were only being hit once the inner portions were written to.</p><p>Perhaps the reason spindle speeds haven't gone up lately could be part of the same issue. Or perhaps I'm simply indulging in a bit of pointless nostalgia as I wait for this report I'm running to finish. Who knows...?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back when I was in college one of the 'cool ' old Comp Sci professors had a tale he liked to share with his classes on the first day .
I had him in a couple of classes , so I heard it over and over again .
His presentation made it an amusing story if you could get over the fact that he smelt as if he lived in an ashtray.It seems that back in the mainframe days , the standard way of increasing storage size on your hard drives was to make a bigger platter .
Seems rather simple , right ?
The storage size grows exponentially with its radius .
So adding an inch each time can lead to some fairly nice results , and with some platters topping out at 24 inches , that 's some space.Except....One day , the university ordered the 'latest ' hard drive for one of their mainframes .
I 'm sure it was a behemoth , it probably held around 50 meg .
The vendor came by and installed it , and everything seemed fine till a few months later when the drive seemed to start failing , at about 30 \ % capacity , writes stopped working and anything written to seemed to have been corrupted .
They were puzzled , but this is why such things service contracts .
The vendor came out , replaced the drive , and everyone went on with life.Till it happened again , at about the same capacity .
Another replacement was made and vendor was quite red-faced and explained that they seemed to have run into a batch of dud drives .
All was forgiven and life went on.Till , it happened the third time .
At this point , it was starting to embarrass everyone : The vendor , the people who ordered the hard drive in the first place , etc .
So this time , instead of just allowing the vendor to take the drive back , the dean of the department demanded they diagnose the issue there on the spot.Now , this was n't the age of the sealed drive cases , certainly drives were still kept 'clean ' but we were n't to the point yet where a single grain of dust could wipe out megabytes of info ( heck , even the 24 inch platters needed to be in arrays of 50 + just dream of hitting 100 meg ) so cracking open the drive was n't that big of a deal.So the vendor 's tech , hoping to appease a clearly angry customer in the day and age when parts cost tens of thousands of dollars , popped open the drive.Want to guess what they found ? Larger disks do indeed result in more surface area , but they also result in a higher centrifugal force on the edges .
An increased force which the vendor apparently had n't accounted for .
Once the disks began to spin up , the glue holding the magnetic dust to the platter gave way , resulting in the platters being stripped clean after a certain radial length from the center .
The disks themselves were fine up to that point , the dust was plastered to the case itself and when the platters came up to speed any dust that had fallen back onto them was once again flung up against the case.The reason why the disks did n't seem to fail till they reached a certain capacity was simply because they were n't being used in a RAM fashion but were being written to in a sequential manner .
The outer portions of the platters were only being hit once the inner portions were written to.Perhaps the reason spindle speeds have n't gone up lately could be part of the same issue .
Or perhaps I 'm simply indulging in a bit of pointless nostalgia as I wait for this report I 'm running to finish .
Who knows... ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back when I was in college one of the 'cool' old Comp Sci professors had a tale he liked to share with his classes on the first day.
I had him in a couple of classes, so I heard it over and over again.
His presentation made it an amusing story if you could get over the fact that he smelt as if he lived in an ashtray.It seems that back in the mainframe days, the standard way of increasing storage size on your hard drives was to make a bigger platter.
Seems rather simple, right?
The storage size grows exponentially with its radius.
So adding an inch each time can lead to some fairly nice results, and with some platters topping out at 24 inches, that's some space.Except....One day, the university ordered the 'latest' hard drive for one of their mainframes.
I'm sure it was a behemoth, it probably held around 50 meg.
The vendor came by and installed it, and everything seemed fine till a few months later when the drive seemed to start failing, at about 30\% capacity, writes stopped working and anything written to seemed to have been corrupted.
They were puzzled, but this is why such things service contracts.
The vendor came out, replaced the drive, and everyone went on with life.Till it happened again, at about the same capacity.
Another replacement was made and vendor was quite red-faced and explained that they seemed to have run into a batch of dud drives.
All was forgiven and life went on.Till, it happened the third time.
At this point, it was starting to embarrass everyone: The vendor, the people who ordered the hard drive in the first place, etc.
So this time, instead of just allowing the vendor to take the drive back, the dean of the department demanded they diagnose the issue there on the spot.Now, this wasn't the age of the sealed drive cases, certainly drives were still kept 'clean' but we weren't to the point yet where a single grain of dust could wipe out megabytes of info (heck, even the 24 inch platters needed to be in arrays of 50+ just dream of hitting 100 meg) so cracking open the drive wasn't that big of a deal.So the vendor's tech, hoping to appease a clearly angry customer in the day and age when parts cost tens of thousands of dollars, popped open the drive.Want to guess what they found?Larger disks do indeed result in more surface area, but they also result in a higher centrifugal force on the edges.
An increased force which the vendor apparently hadn't accounted for.
Once the disks began to spin up, the glue holding the magnetic dust to the platter gave way, resulting in the platters being stripped clean after a certain radial length from the center.
The disks themselves were fine up to that point, the dust was plastered to the case itself and when the platters came up to speed any dust that had fallen back onto them was once again flung up against the case.The reason why the disks didn't seem to fail till they reached a certain capacity was simply because they weren't being used in a RAM fashion but were being written to in a sequential manner.
The outer portions of the platters were only being hit once the inner portions were written to.Perhaps the reason spindle speeds haven't gone up lately could be part of the same issue.
Or perhaps I'm simply indulging in a bit of pointless nostalgia as I wait for this report I'm running to finish.
Who knows...?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520585</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28526995</id>
	<title>Re:How to fill up the storage?</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1246370820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But your eyes and ears aren't growing exponentially more sensitive. Nothing with more bandwidth than the CD has really caught on, in fact 128kbps MP3S seem to be ok for many and 256kbps AAC enough for almost everyone. Pictures seem to have stabilized in the 5-10MP range for the consumer market - we'd rather have a practical size than huge dSLRs. The only thing really pushing the envelope is HD video, and that too is debatable. Compare a DVD upscale to a well made DVD-size h264 rip from BluRay source - it's incredibly much better without exceeding the size from 15 years ago. BluRay might be to movies what the CD is to audio, but the bluray rips are equal to mp3s.</p><p>That, and there's bandwidth. If you have a 10Mbit+ line and can max it, why bother storing it unless you're a pack rat? You're already downloading at faster-than-real time, if only the torrent client had a little sense you could start near-instant play. Just yesterday I was looking at a new fiber provider that was offering up to 250/50 Mbit/s for residential customers. If you know you can get it again, why even bother saving it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But your eyes and ears are n't growing exponentially more sensitive .
Nothing with more bandwidth than the CD has really caught on , in fact 128kbps MP3S seem to be ok for many and 256kbps AAC enough for almost everyone .
Pictures seem to have stabilized in the 5-10MP range for the consumer market - we 'd rather have a practical size than huge dSLRs .
The only thing really pushing the envelope is HD video , and that too is debatable .
Compare a DVD upscale to a well made DVD-size h264 rip from BluRay source - it 's incredibly much better without exceeding the size from 15 years ago .
BluRay might be to movies what the CD is to audio , but the bluray rips are equal to mp3s.That , and there 's bandwidth .
If you have a 10Mbit + line and can max it , why bother storing it unless you 're a pack rat ?
You 're already downloading at faster-than-real time , if only the torrent client had a little sense you could start near-instant play .
Just yesterday I was looking at a new fiber provider that was offering up to 250/50 Mbit/s for residential customers .
If you know you can get it again , why even bother saving it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But your eyes and ears aren't growing exponentially more sensitive.
Nothing with more bandwidth than the CD has really caught on, in fact 128kbps MP3S seem to be ok for many and 256kbps AAC enough for almost everyone.
Pictures seem to have stabilized in the 5-10MP range for the consumer market - we'd rather have a practical size than huge dSLRs.
The only thing really pushing the envelope is HD video, and that too is debatable.
Compare a DVD upscale to a well made DVD-size h264 rip from BluRay source - it's incredibly much better without exceeding the size from 15 years ago.
BluRay might be to movies what the CD is to audio, but the bluray rips are equal to mp3s.That, and there's bandwidth.
If you have a 10Mbit+ line and can max it, why bother storing it unless you're a pack rat?
You're already downloading at faster-than-real time, if only the torrent client had a little sense you could start near-instant play.
Just yesterday I was looking at a new fiber provider that was offering up to 250/50 Mbit/s for residential customers.
If you know you can get it again, why even bother saving it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525563</id>
	<title>Re:Not again!</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1246355040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I want terabyte USB thumb drives, not yet another mechanical storage device."</p><p>Phase Change Memory to the rescue! the same glass substrate used in rewritable optical discs turned into a solid-state solution, with a couple of orders of magnitude more read/write cycles than current flash today.</p><p>2.5" laptop drive holding about 5TB of data and being able to access any of it at above SATA-II speeds isn't even the start of this technology, FYI.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I want terabyte USB thumb drives , not yet another mechanical storage device .
" Phase Change Memory to the rescue !
the same glass substrate used in rewritable optical discs turned into a solid-state solution , with a couple of orders of magnitude more read/write cycles than current flash today.2.5 " laptop drive holding about 5TB of data and being able to access any of it at above SATA-II speeds is n't even the start of this technology , FYI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I want terabyte USB thumb drives, not yet another mechanical storage device.
"Phase Change Memory to the rescue!
the same glass substrate used in rewritable optical discs turned into a solid-state solution, with a couple of orders of magnitude more read/write cycles than current flash today.2.5" laptop drive holding about 5TB of data and being able to access any of it at above SATA-II speeds isn't even the start of this technology, FYI.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523455</id>
	<title>Re:sounds dangerous</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1246289400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chlorine is pretty toxic too.  Better throw away that salt in your cupboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chlorine is pretty toxic too .
Better throw away that salt in your cupboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chlorine is pretty toxic too.
Better throw away that salt in your cupboard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520385</id>
	<title>Re:Not again!</title>
	<author>basementman</author>
	<datestamp>1246272000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Screw that, I want my humans thumbs to be made out of this stuff. Think about the gaming possibilities!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Screw that , I want my humans thumbs to be made out of this stuff .
Think about the gaming possibilities !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Screw that, I want my humans thumbs to be made out of this stuff.
Think about the gaming possibilities!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520159</id>
	<title>Who controls magnetism...</title>
	<author>Geoffrey.landis</author>
	<datestamp>1246271100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Diet Smith said, "He who controls magnetism, controls the world!"
<p>-- I'm just not sure he knew exactly <i>how</i> that would come out to be true!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Diet Smith said , " He who controls magnetism , controls the world !
" -- I 'm just not sure he knew exactly how that would come out to be true !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Diet Smith said, "He who controls magnetism, controls the world!
"
-- I'm just not sure he knew exactly how that would come out to be true!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520845</id>
	<title>Math?</title>
	<author>sdo1</author>
	<datestamp>1246274340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, what am I missing here?  0.5nm is 16 times smaller than 8nm.  On a 2D platter, that's 256 times more dense, not 1000 times more dense.</p><p>-S</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , what am I missing here ?
0.5nm is 16 times smaller than 8nm .
On a 2D platter , that 's 256 times more dense , not 1000 times more dense.-S</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, what am I missing here?
0.5nm is 16 times smaller than 8nm.
On a 2D platter, that's 256 times more dense, not 1000 times more dense.-S</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521453</id>
	<title>Re:sounds dangerous</title>
	<author>Jeremi</author>
	<datestamp>1246277580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>isnt benzene a carcinogen?</i></p><p>Not to worry -- we will put a big red sticker on the side of the drive that says "DO NOT EAT".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>isnt benzene a carcinogen ? Not to worry -- we will put a big red sticker on the side of the drive that says " DO NOT EAT " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>isnt benzene a carcinogen?Not to worry -- we will put a big red sticker on the side of the drive that says "DO NOT EAT".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520757</id>
	<title>Re:How to fill up the storage?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246273920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You obviously don't have nearly enough pr0n.<br>
<br>
Seriously though: a smallish (300-bed) hospital in my area maintains a 48TB SAN for patient data until it's moved to permanent archival.  The data stored there is typically never more than two months old - of course it's used for everything from daily patient notes to complete sets of CT-scans.<br>
<br>
I don't have any idea how much storage is in their archive - but I was told it's "a lot".<br>
<br>
I want to see a 1TB iPod Touch by 2011!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You obviously do n't have nearly enough pr0n .
Seriously though : a smallish ( 300-bed ) hospital in my area maintains a 48TB SAN for patient data until it 's moved to permanent archival .
The data stored there is typically never more than two months old - of course it 's used for everything from daily patient notes to complete sets of CT-scans .
I do n't have any idea how much storage is in their archive - but I was told it 's " a lot " .
I want to see a 1TB iPod Touch by 2011 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You obviously don't have nearly enough pr0n.
Seriously though: a smallish (300-bed) hospital in my area maintains a 48TB SAN for patient data until it's moved to permanent archival.
The data stored there is typically never more than two months old - of course it's used for everything from daily patient notes to complete sets of CT-scans.
I don't have any idea how much storage is in their archive - but I was told it's "a lot".
I want to see a 1TB iPod Touch by 2011!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520207</id>
	<title>What a coincidence!</title>
	<author>somersault</author>
	<datestamp>1246271280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene or benzene</p></div><p>I have a friend who was tricked into thinking he was a hexagonal close packing structure after spending a bit too much time around benzene.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene or benzeneI have a friend who was tricked into thinking he was a hexagonal close packing structure after spending a bit too much time around benzene .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>German physicists say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene or benzeneI have a friend who was tricked into thinking he was a hexagonal close packing structure after spending a bit too much time around benzene.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521583</id>
	<title>Re:sounds dangerous</title>
	<author>Wingman 5</author>
	<datestamp>1246278120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Sodium</a> [wikipedia.org] is dangerous...<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clorine" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Clorine</a> [wikipedia.org] is dangerous...<br>Holy crap! I am shocked millions are not <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">dead</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sodium [ wikipedia.org ] is dangerous...Clorine [ wikipedia.org ] is dangerous...Holy crap !
I am shocked millions are not dead [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sodium [wikipedia.org] is dangerous...Clorine [wikipedia.org] is dangerous...Holy crap!
I am shocked millions are not dead [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523463</id>
	<title>Re:Useless if the speed is the same</title>
	<author>wagnerrp</author>
	<datestamp>1246289460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Perhaps the reason spindle speeds haven't gone up lately could be part of the same issue. Or perhaps I'm simply indulging in a bit of pointless nostalgia as I wait for this report I'm running to finish. Who knows...?</p></div><p>Close, but not quite.  The 'dust' isn't going to fly off, but the disks will expand, throw off track alignment, and risk rubbing against other parts.  The platters on a 7200RPM drive use almost the full 3.5", however the platters on a 10K or 15K drive are typically much smaller diameter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps the reason spindle speeds have n't gone up lately could be part of the same issue .
Or perhaps I 'm simply indulging in a bit of pointless nostalgia as I wait for this report I 'm running to finish .
Who knows... ? Close , but not quite .
The 'dust ' is n't going to fly off , but the disks will expand , throw off track alignment , and risk rubbing against other parts .
The platters on a 7200RPM drive use almost the full 3.5 " , however the platters on a 10K or 15K drive are typically much smaller diameter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps the reason spindle speeds haven't gone up lately could be part of the same issue.
Or perhaps I'm simply indulging in a bit of pointless nostalgia as I wait for this report I'm running to finish.
Who knows...?Close, but not quite.
The 'dust' isn't going to fly off, but the disks will expand, throw off track alignment, and risk rubbing against other parts.
The platters on a 7200RPM drive use almost the full 3.5", however the platters on a 10K or 15K drive are typically much smaller diameter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525851</id>
	<title>Re:Not again!</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1246359240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first computer I owned which used solid state storage was a Psion Series 3.  It was released in '93, and I think I got mine in '94.  To give you some idea of how far things have come in 15 years:</p><p>
This machine had 256<b>K</b>B of RAM.  The default storage was a RAM drive, so that 256KB was split between being used as main memory and for long-term storage.  Under the keyboard was space for two SSDs, about the same size as Compact Flash (different shape though).  I had one filled with a ROM containing a spreadsheet and one containing a 128KB flash disk.  </p><p>
The flash disk cost me &#194;&pound;30.  It was a single cell, so every write increased the amount of space used.  To reclaim space, you needed to format the disk, deleting everything at once.  It was rated for something like 1,000 formats I think, possibly fewer.  Read and write speeds were... slow.  I'd guess around 1KB/s, but possibly even less than that.</p><p>
Today, for the same price (factoring in inflation), I can buy a 16GB SDHD card (CF seems to be about the same price).  This is 2^17 times bigger or, to put it another way, the capacity for the same price has doubled 17 times in 15 years.  The physical form factor is much smaller.  It's now about as small as I'd want it to get; MicroSD is already small enough that it's very easy to lose.  Transfer rates have kept up, and rewrite cycles are now closer to 1,000,000 for SLC, or a bit less for MLC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first computer I owned which used solid state storage was a Psion Series 3 .
It was released in '93 , and I think I got mine in '94 .
To give you some idea of how far things have come in 15 years : This machine had 256KB of RAM .
The default storage was a RAM drive , so that 256KB was split between being used as main memory and for long-term storage .
Under the keyboard was space for two SSDs , about the same size as Compact Flash ( different shape though ) .
I had one filled with a ROM containing a spreadsheet and one containing a 128KB flash disk .
The flash disk cost me     30 .
It was a single cell , so every write increased the amount of space used .
To reclaim space , you needed to format the disk , deleting everything at once .
It was rated for something like 1,000 formats I think , possibly fewer .
Read and write speeds were... slow. I 'd guess around 1KB/s , but possibly even less than that .
Today , for the same price ( factoring in inflation ) , I can buy a 16GB SDHD card ( CF seems to be about the same price ) .
This is 2 ^ 17 times bigger or , to put it another way , the capacity for the same price has doubled 17 times in 15 years .
The physical form factor is much smaller .
It 's now about as small as I 'd want it to get ; MicroSD is already small enough that it 's very easy to lose .
Transfer rates have kept up , and rewrite cycles are now closer to 1,000,000 for SLC , or a bit less for MLC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first computer I owned which used solid state storage was a Psion Series 3.
It was released in '93, and I think I got mine in '94.
To give you some idea of how far things have come in 15 years:
This machine had 256KB of RAM.
The default storage was a RAM drive, so that 256KB was split between being used as main memory and for long-term storage.
Under the keyboard was space for two SSDs, about the same size as Compact Flash (different shape though).
I had one filled with a ROM containing a spreadsheet and one containing a 128KB flash disk.
The flash disk cost me Â£30.
It was a single cell, so every write increased the amount of space used.
To reclaim space, you needed to format the disk, deleting everything at once.
It was rated for something like 1,000 formats I think, possibly fewer.
Read and write speeds were... slow.  I'd guess around 1KB/s, but possibly even less than that.
Today, for the same price (factoring in inflation), I can buy a 16GB SDHD card (CF seems to be about the same price).
This is 2^17 times bigger or, to put it another way, the capacity for the same price has doubled 17 times in 15 years.
The physical form factor is much smaller.
It's now about as small as I'd want it to get; MicroSD is already small enough that it's very easy to lose.
Transfer rates have kept up, and rewrite cycles are now closer to 1,000,000 for SLC, or a bit less for MLC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520581</id>
	<title>Re:How to fill up the storage?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246272900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What's a person to do when disk capacities increase by another 3 orders of magnitude?</p></div></blockquote><p>
Storage requirement is going up, relentlessly:<br>
VCD = 700Mb<br>
DVD = 4.7Gb<br>
Dual-layer Blu-ray = 50Gb (potentially 100Gb; 4 layer @ 25Gb per layer.<br> <br>
And don't forget that Ch-erman scientists never sleep:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's a person to do when disk capacities increase by another 3 orders of magnitude ?
Storage requirement is going up , relentlessly : VCD = 700Mb DVD = 4.7Gb Dual-layer Blu-ray = 50Gb ( potentially 100Gb ; 4 layer @ 25Gb per layer .
And do n't forget that Ch-erman scientists never sleep : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's a person to do when disk capacities increase by another 3 orders of magnitude?
Storage requirement is going up, relentlessly:
VCD = 700Mb
DVD = 4.7Gb
Dual-layer Blu-ray = 50Gb (potentially 100Gb; 4 layer @ 25Gb per layer.
And don't forget that Ch-erman scientists never sleep:-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525705</id>
	<title>Re:How to fill up the storage?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246356780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about datacenters that needs to make and store backups of thousands of servers? That would certainly fill up the storage (since all servers all full of pr0n)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about datacenters that needs to make and store backups of thousands of servers ?
That would certainly fill up the storage ( since all servers all full of pr0n )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about datacenters that needs to make and store backups of thousands of servers?
That would certainly fill up the storage (since all servers all full of pr0n)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520221</id>
	<title>AH!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246271340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>....a size that could allow an increase in memory density of three orders of magnitude."</p><p>So that is good, yes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>....a size that could allow an increase in memory density of three orders of magnitude .
" So that is good , yes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....a size that could allow an increase in memory density of three orders of magnitude.
"So that is good, yes?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520267</id>
	<title>More room but----</title>
	<author>KingPin27</author>
	<datestamp>1246271580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTA: <p><div class="quote"><p>say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene or benzene.</p></div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the cobalt has to be arranged in a hexagonal close packing structure to ensure the stability of its magnetic field. Otherwise the field can spontaneously reverse and the data is lost.</p> </div><p>
So one day the atoms might just realize that they've been tricked and you'll end up with your computer on fire because your benzene chains have all broken and you end up with
2-methyl-1,3,5-trinitrobenzene</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTA : say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene or benzene .
...the cobalt has to be arranged in a hexagonal close packing structure to ensure the stability of its magnetic field .
Otherwise the field can spontaneously reverse and the data is lost .
So one day the atoms might just realize that they 've been tricked and you 'll end up with your computer on fire because your benzene chains have all broken and you end up with 2-methyl-1,3,5-trinitrobenzene</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTA: say they can trick a pair of cobalt atoms into thinking they are in a hexagonal close packing structure by bonding them to a hexagonal carbon ring such as graphene or benzene.
...the cobalt has to be arranged in a hexagonal close packing structure to ensure the stability of its magnetic field.
Otherwise the field can spontaneously reverse and the data is lost.
So one day the atoms might just realize that they've been tricked and you'll end up with your computer on fire because your benzene chains have all broken and you end up with
2-methyl-1,3,5-trinitrobenzene
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523173</id>
	<title>Re:How to fill up the storage?</title>
	<author>mattack2</author>
	<datestamp>1246287480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Tivo upgrades their software (and/or the Tivo tools developers figure out some upgrades), the storage will be useful to be able to record everything in HD and not fill up your drive darn quickly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Tivo upgrades their software ( and/or the Tivo tools developers figure out some upgrades ) , the storage will be useful to be able to record everything in HD and not fill up your drive darn quickly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Tivo upgrades their software (and/or the Tivo tools developers figure out some upgrades), the storage will be useful to be able to record everything in HD and not fill up your drive darn quickly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520957</id>
	<title>sounds dangerous</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1246274880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>isnt benzene a carcinogen? <br> <br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene" title="wikipedia.org">Benzene</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>isnt benzene a carcinogen ?
Benzene [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>isnt benzene a carcinogen?
Benzene [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521633</id>
	<title>Tricking cobalt atoms!?</title>
	<author>mugurel</author>
	<datestamp>1246278420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No thank you, that hard disk is morally defect!</htmltext>
<tokenext>No thank you , that hard disk is morally defect !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No thank you, that hard disk is morally defect!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521329</id>
	<title>Re: what are you missing?</title>
	<author>neonsignal</author>
	<datestamp>1246276860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>- specmanship</htmltext>
<tokenext>- specmanship</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- specmanship</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522969</id>
	<title>Re:How to fill up the storage?</title>
	<author>walt-sjc</author>
	<datestamp>1246286040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are thinking wrong. Instead of thinking of disk capacities increasing by 3 orders of magnitude, think of disks as shrinking nice and small (1 1/2"), using a lot less power and generating less heat yet being faster and storing twice the data of today's drives. Netbooks with the storage capacity of a large desktop of today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are thinking wrong .
Instead of thinking of disk capacities increasing by 3 orders of magnitude , think of disks as shrinking nice and small ( 1 1/2 " ) , using a lot less power and generating less heat yet being faster and storing twice the data of today 's drives .
Netbooks with the storage capacity of a large desktop of today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are thinking wrong.
Instead of thinking of disk capacities increasing by 3 orders of magnitude, think of disks as shrinking nice and small (1 1/2"), using a lot less power and generating less heat yet being faster and storing twice the data of today's drives.
Netbooks with the storage capacity of a large desktop of today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525235</id>
	<title>Cobalt AI</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246394160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The news should read "Thinking cobalt detected for the first time in history".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The news should read " Thinking cobalt detected for the first time in history " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The news should read "Thinking cobalt detected for the first time in history".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520779</id>
	<title>Re:How to fill up the storage?</title>
	<author>PoliticalGamer</author>
	<datestamp>1246273980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think this would mostly be used for archiving purposes (magnetic tape tends to last longer than most other storage mediums), in which case it would be fairly easy to fill up such space.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this would mostly be used for archiving purposes ( magnetic tape tends to last longer than most other storage mediums ) , in which case it would be fairly easy to fill up such space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this would mostly be used for archiving purposes (magnetic tape tends to last longer than most other storage mediums), in which case it would be fairly easy to fill up such space.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520495</id>
	<title>Re:Not again!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246272540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry dude, spinning magnetic media is just too cheap to lose at this point. Maybe when solid state solution are as reliable and cheap you will have your perfect world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry dude , spinning magnetic media is just too cheap to lose at this point .
Maybe when solid state solution are as reliable and cheap you will have your perfect world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry dude, spinning magnetic media is just too cheap to lose at this point.
Maybe when solid state solution are as reliable and cheap you will have your perfect world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28526967</id>
	<title>Re:How to fill up the storage?</title>
	<author>CopaceticOpus</author>
	<datestamp>1246370700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Netflix has over 100,000 discs. That's a nice round number for having a home library which has nearly everything you might want to watch, including movies, TV shows, documentaries, etc.</p><p>Assuming everything is available on Blu-Ray and no compression is added, this will require 5,000 TB, or 5 PB. Three orders of magnitude is just right.</p><p>If a disc has 3 hours of material, this would give you enough material to play non-stop for 35 years. However, the point is not to watch it all. The point is to have whatever you feel like seeing available immediately at very high quality and without dependence on a network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Netflix has over 100,000 discs .
That 's a nice round number for having a home library which has nearly everything you might want to watch , including movies , TV shows , documentaries , etc.Assuming everything is available on Blu-Ray and no compression is added , this will require 5,000 TB , or 5 PB .
Three orders of magnitude is just right.If a disc has 3 hours of material , this would give you enough material to play non-stop for 35 years .
However , the point is not to watch it all .
The point is to have whatever you feel like seeing available immediately at very high quality and without dependence on a network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Netflix has over 100,000 discs.
That's a nice round number for having a home library which has nearly everything you might want to watch, including movies, TV shows, documentaries, etc.Assuming everything is available on Blu-Ray and no compression is added, this will require 5,000 TB, or 5 PB.
Three orders of magnitude is just right.If a disc has 3 hours of material, this would give you enough material to play non-stop for 35 years.
However, the point is not to watch it all.
The point is to have whatever you feel like seeing available immediately at very high quality and without dependence on a network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521501</id>
	<title>Re:1000x denser</title>
	<author>crispin\_bollocks</author>
	<datestamp>1246277700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought I'd seen everything, but I must have missed hexagonal close-packed pr0n - damn!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought I 'd seen everything , but I must have missed hexagonal close-packed pr0n - damn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought I'd seen everything, but I must have missed hexagonal close-packed pr0n - damn!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520187</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28526791</id>
	<title>Re:How to fill up the storage?</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1246369560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well you would use 1/3 less space, you could make the money back on those external drives you been hogging</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well you would use 1/3 less space , you could make the money back on those external drives you been hogging</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well you would use 1/3 less space, you could make the money back on those external drives you been hogging</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203</id>
	<title>Not again!</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1246271280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let me guess.  They're going to stick this stuff to a platter and spin it past some sort of electromagnet.  I want terabyte USB thumb drives, not yet another mechanical storage device.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me guess .
They 're going to stick this stuff to a platter and spin it past some sort of electromagnet .
I want terabyte USB thumb drives , not yet another mechanical storage device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me guess.
They're going to stick this stuff to a platter and spin it past some sort of electromagnet.
I want terabyte USB thumb drives, not yet another mechanical storage device.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28534911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521329
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520957
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520853
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28532865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520507
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522969
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28528371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28526791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520757
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520779
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520957
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28526995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28526967
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520385
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520633
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520957
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523427
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_29_1647200_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28528371
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520507
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520633
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525645
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28534911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28532865
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520151
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520203
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520385
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521663
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525851
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525563
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520125
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520853
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521375
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525205
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523463
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28529781
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520221
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28526791
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28522969
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525705
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520581
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28526967
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28526995
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523173
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520845
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521115
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521329
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28525901
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521453
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28523455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521583
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520881
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520443
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_29_1647200.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28520187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_29_1647200.28521501
</commentlist>
</conversation>
