<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_01_1522210</id>
	<title>Dave Perry Shows Off Cloud Gaming Service "Gaikai"</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1246461780000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://jasoncartwright.com/" rel="nofollow">jasoncart</a> writes <i>"Veteran gaming man Dave Perry has <a href="http://play.tm/news/25439/dave-perry-shows-off-gaikai/">shown off his OnLive-rivalling, cloud gaming service called Gaikai</a> in a new video that is drawing a lot of attention. As you can see from the video, Perry plays <em>World of Warcraft</em>, <em>EVE Online</em>, <em>Mario Kart 64</em>, <em>Spore</em> and more &mdash; all running on a bog-standard computer through the Gaikai website, itself running in a normal version of Firefox."</i>
More <a href="http://www.dperry.com/archives/news/dp\_blog/gaikai\_-\_video/">details about the service</a> are available at Perry's website. He <a href="http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/head-in-the-cloud">spoke about Gaikai in an interview</a> a few months ago, and he seems confident that this will work better than OnLive (which <a href="//games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/24/135212&amp;tid=206">we've discussed</a> in the past).</htmltext>
<tokenext>jasoncart writes " Veteran gaming man Dave Perry has shown off his OnLive-rivalling , cloud gaming service called Gaikai in a new video that is drawing a lot of attention .
As you can see from the video , Perry plays World of Warcraft , EVE Online , Mario Kart 64 , Spore and more    all running on a bog-standard computer through the Gaikai website , itself running in a normal version of Firefox .
" More details about the service are available at Perry 's website .
He spoke about Gaikai in an interview a few months ago , and he seems confident that this will work better than OnLive ( which we 've discussed in the past ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jasoncart writes "Veteran gaming man Dave Perry has shown off his OnLive-rivalling, cloud gaming service called Gaikai in a new video that is drawing a lot of attention.
As you can see from the video, Perry plays World of Warcraft, EVE Online, Mario Kart 64, Spore and more — all running on a bog-standard computer through the Gaikai website, itself running in a normal version of Firefox.
"
More details about the service are available at Perry's website.
He spoke about Gaikai in an interview a few months ago, and he seems confident that this will work better than OnLive (which we've discussed in the past).</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28590379</id>
	<title>Re:Won't anyone think of the ISPs?</title>
	<author>42forty-two42</author>
	<datestamp>1246808760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This could be helped by making deals with the ISPs, where the gaming datacenter is peered directly with the ISP's core network, and in exchange the ISP doesn't meter (or gives a higher limit for) the data going across this peering.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This could be helped by making deals with the ISPs , where the gaming datacenter is peered directly with the ISP 's core network , and in exchange the ISP does n't meter ( or gives a higher limit for ) the data going across this peering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This could be helped by making deals with the ISPs, where the gaming datacenter is peered directly with the ISP's core network, and in exchange the ISP doesn't meter (or gives a higher limit for) the data going across this peering.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543397</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28546569</id>
	<title>Re:Backend machines</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246476360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This has greater implications. You really don't know what is happening at the "backend," they could implement a totally custom (and proprietary) solution to handle physics and other game details, rendering and encoding frames in parallel, ray-tracing, ai, etc. In other words, they could implement unconventional solutions that are not practical for the consumer market, plus it's attractive to certain company's who would enjoy tight exclusive control over these backend technologies and perhaps gain an even wider advantage over their smaller (less capable) competitors. I'm not saying dogmatically that this is it's destiny, but I see the potential. We could see a new rise in virtual Arcades (but this would probably be a monopoly). It could also shake-up the current lopsided coke/pepsi graphics card duopoly, and even give the internet a swift kick-in-the-ass. Lets hope!</p><p>BTW, This is not a new concept at all, I don't particularly like the "cloud" label, and I hope this guy gets shoved out of the way, but this is not important.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This has greater implications .
You really do n't know what is happening at the " backend , " they could implement a totally custom ( and proprietary ) solution to handle physics and other game details , rendering and encoding frames in parallel , ray-tracing , ai , etc .
In other words , they could implement unconventional solutions that are not practical for the consumer market , plus it 's attractive to certain company 's who would enjoy tight exclusive control over these backend technologies and perhaps gain an even wider advantage over their smaller ( less capable ) competitors .
I 'm not saying dogmatically that this is it 's destiny , but I see the potential .
We could see a new rise in virtual Arcades ( but this would probably be a monopoly ) .
It could also shake-up the current lopsided coke/pepsi graphics card duopoly , and even give the internet a swift kick-in-the-ass .
Lets hope ! BTW , This is not a new concept at all , I do n't particularly like the " cloud " label , and I hope this guy gets shoved out of the way , but this is not important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has greater implications.
You really don't know what is happening at the "backend," they could implement a totally custom (and proprietary) solution to handle physics and other game details, rendering and encoding frames in parallel, ray-tracing, ai, etc.
In other words, they could implement unconventional solutions that are not practical for the consumer market, plus it's attractive to certain company's who would enjoy tight exclusive control over these backend technologies and perhaps gain an even wider advantage over their smaller (less capable) competitors.
I'm not saying dogmatically that this is it's destiny, but I see the potential.
We could see a new rise in virtual Arcades (but this would probably be a monopoly).
It could also shake-up the current lopsided coke/pepsi graphics card duopoly, and even give the internet a swift kick-in-the-ass.
Lets hope!BTW, This is not a new concept at all, I don't particularly like the "cloud" label, and I hope this guy gets shoved out of the way, but this is not important.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543987</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542993</id>
	<title>bog-standard..</title>
	<author>3.5 stripes</author>
	<datestamp>1246465920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.bog-standard.org/" title="bog-standard.org">http://www.bog-standard.org/</a> [bog-standard.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.bog-standard.org/ [ bog-standard.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.bog-standard.org/ [bog-standard.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543397</id>
	<title>Won't anyone think of the ISPs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246467180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm certainly not signing up for anything that absolutely requires an active high bandwidth connection to play single player offline games until companies like Comcast have been brought to heel.<br> <br>They're already complaining about those pesky high-bandwidth users, they aren't upgrading their infrastructure, and they're charging fees for just about anything they can think of.  Now wait until their metered plan really takes off, and tell me about gaming in the cloud.  Any savings from hardware cost with this setup will be eaten by increasing ISP charges.<br> <br>Besides, really, aren't we reaching the point where mandatory PC upgrades for games are much farther apart, really mitigating that factor?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm certainly not signing up for anything that absolutely requires an active high bandwidth connection to play single player offline games until companies like Comcast have been brought to heel .
They 're already complaining about those pesky high-bandwidth users , they are n't upgrading their infrastructure , and they 're charging fees for just about anything they can think of .
Now wait until their metered plan really takes off , and tell me about gaming in the cloud .
Any savings from hardware cost with this setup will be eaten by increasing ISP charges .
Besides , really , are n't we reaching the point where mandatory PC upgrades for games are much farther apart , really mitigating that factor ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm certainly not signing up for anything that absolutely requires an active high bandwidth connection to play single player offline games until companies like Comcast have been brought to heel.
They're already complaining about those pesky high-bandwidth users, they aren't upgrading their infrastructure, and they're charging fees for just about anything they can think of.
Now wait until their metered plan really takes off, and tell me about gaming in the cloud.
Any savings from hardware cost with this setup will be eaten by increasing ISP charges.
Besides, really, aren't we reaching the point where mandatory PC upgrades for games are much farther apart, really mitigating that factor?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545973</id>
	<title>Why doesn't this work with VNC?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246474680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The same technology underlying remote desktop or similar systems is whats at work here - send a frame buffer - raw pixel rectangles - down the wire after some compression.
<br>
<br>
Most of the compression works on the idea that the delta doesn't change to much from frame to frame so they only send data about what did change. When that isn't true, say in the case of gaming, VNC clients stop working well. Certainly, they stop working well under a 1mbit connection.
<br>
<br>
Now there are a lot of VNC technologies out there - why haven't any of them gotten this right before? How come this guy can magically do what those vendors couldn't?
<br>
<br>
I'm sincerely asking. I would think it'd be damn hard to send high quality video streams of your desktop at some constraint network capacity.
<br>
<br>
Theres three explanations: this is snake oil, this company has developed a really awesome new compression scheme, or at least something was missing from that video.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The same technology underlying remote desktop or similar systems is whats at work here - send a frame buffer - raw pixel rectangles - down the wire after some compression .
Most of the compression works on the idea that the delta does n't change to much from frame to frame so they only send data about what did change .
When that is n't true , say in the case of gaming , VNC clients stop working well .
Certainly , they stop working well under a 1mbit connection .
Now there are a lot of VNC technologies out there - why have n't any of them gotten this right before ?
How come this guy can magically do what those vendors could n't ?
I 'm sincerely asking .
I would think it 'd be damn hard to send high quality video streams of your desktop at some constraint network capacity .
Theres three explanations : this is snake oil , this company has developed a really awesome new compression scheme , or at least something was missing from that video .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same technology underlying remote desktop or similar systems is whats at work here - send a frame buffer - raw pixel rectangles - down the wire after some compression.
Most of the compression works on the idea that the delta doesn't change to much from frame to frame so they only send data about what did change.
When that isn't true, say in the case of gaming, VNC clients stop working well.
Certainly, they stop working well under a 1mbit connection.
Now there are a lot of VNC technologies out there - why haven't any of them gotten this right before?
How come this guy can magically do what those vendors couldn't?
I'm sincerely asking.
I would think it'd be damn hard to send high quality video streams of your desktop at some constraint network capacity.
Theres three explanations: this is snake oil, this company has developed a really awesome new compression scheme, or at least something was missing from that video.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28547135</id>
	<title>It needs a lot more than better name</title>
	<author>Savior\_on\_a\_Stick</author>
	<datestamp>1246478280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It needs a better backer.</p><p>Seriously, David Perry is a shitheel in the gaming community.</p><p>Acclaim's 2moons is so bot and hack infested as to be nearly unplayable.</p><p>Likely because no one at Acclaim, and certainly not David Perry, has written a line of code in a decade.</p><p>Welcome to Outsourced Gaming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It needs a better backer.Seriously , David Perry is a shitheel in the gaming community.Acclaim 's 2moons is so bot and hack infested as to be nearly unplayable.Likely because no one at Acclaim , and certainly not David Perry , has written a line of code in a decade.Welcome to Outsourced Gaming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It needs a better backer.Seriously, David Perry is a shitheel in the gaming community.Acclaim's 2moons is so bot and hack infested as to be nearly unplayable.Likely because no one at Acclaim, and certainly not David Perry, has written a line of code in a decade.Welcome to Outsourced Gaming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543263</id>
	<title>Re:No plugins?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246466820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>He mentions elsewhere having the latest version of flash as well.  I think he meant no extensions/add-ons.  It does seem like it could be done with something like  as well, though.  It's just that Firefox 3.5 came out yesterday, and I don't think there was any support for it at all on non-development browsers so already having something like this working already seems less likely then using flash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He mentions elsewhere having the latest version of flash as well .
I think he meant no extensions/add-ons .
It does seem like it could be done with something like as well , though .
It 's just that Firefox 3.5 came out yesterday , and I do n't think there was any support for it at all on non-development browsers so already having something like this working already seems less likely then using flash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He mentions elsewhere having the latest version of flash as well.
I think he meant no extensions/add-ons.
It does seem like it could be done with something like  as well, though.
It's just that Firefox 3.5 came out yesterday, and I don't think there was any support for it at all on non-development browsers so already having something like this working already seems less likely then using flash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544509</id>
	<title>Re:Notably missing from the video:</title>
	<author>vnsnes</author>
	<datestamp>1246470300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA:</p><p><i>(3) Data travel distance is around 800 miles (round trip) on this demo as that's where the server is. I get a 21 millisecond ping on that route. My final delay will be 10 milliseconds as I just added a server in Irvine California yesterday, but it's not added to our grid yet. (So this demo is twice the delay I personally would get, the good news is I don't notice it anyway.)</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : ( 3 ) Data travel distance is around 800 miles ( round trip ) on this demo as that 's where the server is .
I get a 21 millisecond ping on that route .
My final delay will be 10 milliseconds as I just added a server in Irvine California yesterday , but it 's not added to our grid yet .
( So this demo is twice the delay I personally would get , the good news is I do n't notice it anyway .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:(3) Data travel distance is around 800 miles (round trip) on this demo as that's where the server is.
I get a 21 millisecond ping on that route.
My final delay will be 10 milliseconds as I just added a server in Irvine California yesterday, but it's not added to our grid yet.
(So this demo is twice the delay I personally would get, the good news is I don't notice it anyway.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543369</id>
	<title>Re:Head in the cloud(s)</title>
	<author>Vectronic</author>
	<datestamp>1246467120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot the "<i>get off my lawn</i>". I don't see "cloud" computing leaving anytime soon, or ever, because it makes the most sense from both a business and a consumer perspective.</p><p>1. Company X develops "product" Y which remains on their servers.<br>2. Charge people for an account to gain access.<br>3. ???<br>4.<i>Profit!</i></p><p>From the consumer perspective, cheaper PC's and what "appears" to be cheaper software (pay-as-you-go, "low monthly fee", etc), access to all your shit from anywhere (via some universal wireless not yet developed), even if it's not your PC/hand-held/toaster you are using, etc, etc.</p><p>Personally, I love the idea ideologically, in some sort of Over-Unity kind of way, but I see years of abuse by business' (and/=/or Government) before it's actually as free or ubiquitous as it could be. It's just a part of the natural evolution of the Internet, first it was just a few computers, then a few networks, then one big network. First it was a few computers, then a few super-computers, then one big computer and millions of monitors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot the " get off my lawn " .
I do n't see " cloud " computing leaving anytime soon , or ever , because it makes the most sense from both a business and a consumer perspective.1 .
Company X develops " product " Y which remains on their servers.2 .
Charge people for an account to gain access.3 .
? ? ? 4.Profit ! From the consumer perspective , cheaper PC 's and what " appears " to be cheaper software ( pay-as-you-go , " low monthly fee " , etc ) , access to all your shit from anywhere ( via some universal wireless not yet developed ) , even if it 's not your PC/hand-held/toaster you are using , etc , etc.Personally , I love the idea ideologically , in some sort of Over-Unity kind of way , but I see years of abuse by business ' ( and/ = /or Government ) before it 's actually as free or ubiquitous as it could be .
It 's just a part of the natural evolution of the Internet , first it was just a few computers , then a few networks , then one big network .
First it was a few computers , then a few super-computers , then one big computer and millions of monitors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot the "get off my lawn".
I don't see "cloud" computing leaving anytime soon, or ever, because it makes the most sense from both a business and a consumer perspective.1.
Company X develops "product" Y which remains on their servers.2.
Charge people for an account to gain access.3.
???4.Profit!From the consumer perspective, cheaper PC's and what "appears" to be cheaper software (pay-as-you-go, "low monthly fee", etc), access to all your shit from anywhere (via some universal wireless not yet developed), even if it's not your PC/hand-held/toaster you are using, etc, etc.Personally, I love the idea ideologically, in some sort of Over-Unity kind of way, but I see years of abuse by business' (and/=/or Government) before it's actually as free or ubiquitous as it could be.
It's just a part of the natural evolution of the Internet, first it was just a few computers, then a few networks, then one big network.
First it was a few computers, then a few super-computers, then one big computer and millions of monitors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542925</id>
	<title>perfect execution</title>
	<author>should\_be\_linear</author>
	<datestamp>1246465680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This thing installed on tier 1 internet server might bring large portion of MS Windows and nVidia value to zero. If it really works as advertised, sell shares of above companies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This thing installed on tier 1 internet server might bring large portion of MS Windows and nVidia value to zero .
If it really works as advertised , sell shares of above companies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This thing installed on tier 1 internet server might bring large portion of MS Windows and nVidia value to zero.
If it really works as advertised, sell shares of above companies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28549489</id>
	<title>Re:Just needs a better name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246442220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually it going to change in 3 month into PenNice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually it going to change in 3 month into PenNice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually it going to change in 3 month into PenNice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543413</id>
	<title>Re:Head in the cloud(s)</title>
	<author>\_bug\_</author>
	<datestamp>1246467240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The point is that you don't have to spend lots of money on expensive hardware, a simple web browser with internet connectivity (over a fat pipe!) is all it takes. This saves you large amounts of cash.</p><p>It also opens up the possibility of allowing your games and applications to stay with you wherever you go. You could bring up a GaiKai iPhone app and play WoW during lunch or on the train or wherever. Once you get home you can fire it up on your big screen TV via the media center's web browser.</p><p>For the software companies this gives them a great opportunity to make even more money by moving to a subscription service. No longer do you pay once for Photoshop, now you pay maybe $5 or $10 a month to use it. To you it seems cheaper, to Adobe they see an unending stream of money that doesn't stop a month after release of a new product.</p><p>For the advertisers they have a new stream to inject themselves into. That's not any ordinary version of Photoshop, it's one that's been sponsored by Brand X and will have Brand X logos and styling and maybe even Brand X brushes and filters. Think of all the new possibilities to get eye time!</p><p>Bandwidth concerns? Bah. Worst-case you bulk up the hardware on the server and do some realtime encoding to H.264. The video quality might not be great, but you can still use all your apps regardless of available resources.</p><p>Privacy is, of course, the big concern. No longer do I worry about my login and password being hijacked between my machine and Blizzard, I now have to worry about the connection between my computer and "the cloud" as well as whatever hijinx there may be going in "the cloud".</p><p>And where, exactly, are these images I create in Photoshop being stored? Locally on my computer? That means "the cloud" and read/write to my computer. Do you really want that? But wait, "the cloud" has its own storage space and for a few extra dollars a month you can store all your goods there. Now you don't have to carry a flash drive around with you all the time. You just travel to your destination, connect to "the cloud", and there are your files! Of course "the cloud" company will need some sort of executive license agreement with provisions for responsibility and liability if data is lost or stolen. For that "the cloud" company can charge lots more dollars and stick the VPs on their own "executive cloud".</p><p>For the REALLY wealthy there will be a "personal cloud" in the form of a single server that is entirely at your disposal. With routine backups and lots of A/V and firewalls to keep you protected.</p><p>But for the elite wealthy, that 1\% of 1\%, there will be the home cloud. A machine that will sit on your desktop and do all of this without ever going out over the internet!</p><p>The future is amazin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The point is that you do n't have to spend lots of money on expensive hardware , a simple web browser with internet connectivity ( over a fat pipe !
) is all it takes .
This saves you large amounts of cash.It also opens up the possibility of allowing your games and applications to stay with you wherever you go .
You could bring up a GaiKai iPhone app and play WoW during lunch or on the train or wherever .
Once you get home you can fire it up on your big screen TV via the media center 's web browser.For the software companies this gives them a great opportunity to make even more money by moving to a subscription service .
No longer do you pay once for Photoshop , now you pay maybe $ 5 or $ 10 a month to use it .
To you it seems cheaper , to Adobe they see an unending stream of money that does n't stop a month after release of a new product.For the advertisers they have a new stream to inject themselves into .
That 's not any ordinary version of Photoshop , it 's one that 's been sponsored by Brand X and will have Brand X logos and styling and maybe even Brand X brushes and filters .
Think of all the new possibilities to get eye time ! Bandwidth concerns ?
Bah. Worst-case you bulk up the hardware on the server and do some realtime encoding to H.264 .
The video quality might not be great , but you can still use all your apps regardless of available resources.Privacy is , of course , the big concern .
No longer do I worry about my login and password being hijacked between my machine and Blizzard , I now have to worry about the connection between my computer and " the cloud " as well as whatever hijinx there may be going in " the cloud " .And where , exactly , are these images I create in Photoshop being stored ?
Locally on my computer ?
That means " the cloud " and read/write to my computer .
Do you really want that ?
But wait , " the cloud " has its own storage space and for a few extra dollars a month you can store all your goods there .
Now you do n't have to carry a flash drive around with you all the time .
You just travel to your destination , connect to " the cloud " , and there are your files !
Of course " the cloud " company will need some sort of executive license agreement with provisions for responsibility and liability if data is lost or stolen .
For that " the cloud " company can charge lots more dollars and stick the VPs on their own " executive cloud " .For the REALLY wealthy there will be a " personal cloud " in the form of a single server that is entirely at your disposal .
With routine backups and lots of A/V and firewalls to keep you protected.But for the elite wealthy , that 1 \ % of 1 \ % , there will be the home cloud .
A machine that will sit on your desktop and do all of this without ever going out over the internet ! The future is amazin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The point is that you don't have to spend lots of money on expensive hardware, a simple web browser with internet connectivity (over a fat pipe!
) is all it takes.
This saves you large amounts of cash.It also opens up the possibility of allowing your games and applications to stay with you wherever you go.
You could bring up a GaiKai iPhone app and play WoW during lunch or on the train or wherever.
Once you get home you can fire it up on your big screen TV via the media center's web browser.For the software companies this gives them a great opportunity to make even more money by moving to a subscription service.
No longer do you pay once for Photoshop, now you pay maybe $5 or $10 a month to use it.
To you it seems cheaper, to Adobe they see an unending stream of money that doesn't stop a month after release of a new product.For the advertisers they have a new stream to inject themselves into.
That's not any ordinary version of Photoshop, it's one that's been sponsored by Brand X and will have Brand X logos and styling and maybe even Brand X brushes and filters.
Think of all the new possibilities to get eye time!Bandwidth concerns?
Bah. Worst-case you bulk up the hardware on the server and do some realtime encoding to H.264.
The video quality might not be great, but you can still use all your apps regardless of available resources.Privacy is, of course, the big concern.
No longer do I worry about my login and password being hijacked between my machine and Blizzard, I now have to worry about the connection between my computer and "the cloud" as well as whatever hijinx there may be going in "the cloud".And where, exactly, are these images I create in Photoshop being stored?
Locally on my computer?
That means "the cloud" and read/write to my computer.
Do you really want that?
But wait, "the cloud" has its own storage space and for a few extra dollars a month you can store all your goods there.
Now you don't have to carry a flash drive around with you all the time.
You just travel to your destination, connect to "the cloud", and there are your files!
Of course "the cloud" company will need some sort of executive license agreement with provisions for responsibility and liability if data is lost or stolen.
For that "the cloud" company can charge lots more dollars and stick the VPs on their own "executive cloud".For the REALLY wealthy there will be a "personal cloud" in the form of a single server that is entirely at your disposal.
With routine backups and lots of A/V and firewalls to keep you protected.But for the elite wealthy, that 1\% of 1\%, there will be the home cloud.
A machine that will sit on your desktop and do all of this without ever going out over the internet!The future is amazin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28554919</id>
	<title>Re:Why doesn't this work with VNC?</title>
	<author>julesh</author>
	<datestamp>1246567980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Now there are a lot of VNC technologies out there - why haven't any of them gotten this right before? How come this guy can magically do what those vendors couldn't?</i></p><p><i>I'm sincerely asking. I would think it'd be damn hard to send high quality video streams of your desktop at some constraint network capacity.</i></p><p><i>Theres three explanations: this is snake oil, this company has developed a really awesome new compression scheme, or at least something was missing from that video.</i></p><p>None of the above.  I imagine he's using custom hardware to get the video encoding done with minimum latency.  Streaming an MPEG4 or similar of your desktop wouldn't take an awful lot of network throughput, but there's no way you can do it without a significant slowdown using standard hardware... but hack your graphics system (either card or driver) to work with a hardware video encoder and suddenly an awful lot of stuff becomes possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now there are a lot of VNC technologies out there - why have n't any of them gotten this right before ?
How come this guy can magically do what those vendors could n't ? I 'm sincerely asking .
I would think it 'd be damn hard to send high quality video streams of your desktop at some constraint network capacity.Theres three explanations : this is snake oil , this company has developed a really awesome new compression scheme , or at least something was missing from that video.None of the above .
I imagine he 's using custom hardware to get the video encoding done with minimum latency .
Streaming an MPEG4 or similar of your desktop would n't take an awful lot of network throughput , but there 's no way you can do it without a significant slowdown using standard hardware... but hack your graphics system ( either card or driver ) to work with a hardware video encoder and suddenly an awful lot of stuff becomes possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now there are a lot of VNC technologies out there - why haven't any of them gotten this right before?
How come this guy can magically do what those vendors couldn't?I'm sincerely asking.
I would think it'd be damn hard to send high quality video streams of your desktop at some constraint network capacity.Theres three explanations: this is snake oil, this company has developed a really awesome new compression scheme, or at least something was missing from that video.None of the above.
I imagine he's using custom hardware to get the video encoding done with minimum latency.
Streaming an MPEG4 or similar of your desktop wouldn't take an awful lot of network throughput, but there's no way you can do it without a significant slowdown using standard hardware... but hack your graphics system (either card or driver) to work with a hardware video encoder and suddenly an awful lot of stuff becomes possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545973</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545049</id>
	<title>Re:Notably missing from the video:</title>
	<author>hetz</author>
	<datestamp>1246471980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Regarding the bandwidth: take a look at the left side of the video, it shows the needed info.</p><p>One thing many people missed: Almost at the end of the demo, he shows Photoshop CS4, and then he moves the windows. Take a good look at the cursor, specially when the cursor is out of the window it shows something which might be familiar to any Linux user<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Regarding the bandwidth : take a look at the left side of the video , it shows the needed info.One thing many people missed : Almost at the end of the demo , he shows Photoshop CS4 , and then he moves the windows .
Take a good look at the cursor , specially when the cursor is out of the window it shows something which might be familiar to any Linux user : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Regarding the bandwidth: take a look at the left side of the video, it shows the needed info.One thing many people missed: Almost at the end of the demo, he shows Photoshop CS4, and then he moves the windows.
Take a good look at the cursor, specially when the cursor is out of the window it shows something which might be familiar to any Linux user :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171</id>
	<title>Notably missing from the video:</title>
	<author>anomnomnomymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246466520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are some (quite important) things missing from the video:<br> <br>
- Why no mention of what connection he is on? Or for that matter, why no mention of where the server is located? (besides some vague "Oh, I've never been as far from a server as I am at the moment!")<br>
- Where's the fullscreen? I can see how it would be quite hard to properly stream current screensizes (such as 1680x1050, or even 1280x1024)<br>
<br>
Other than that, I noticed a few odd things, such as:<br>
- When playing MarioKart 64, at the end he all of a sudden crashes into a wall, which he tells is because "he hasn't been playing the game for quite some time"; Seems quite odd, and looked more like it had to do with the actual command not properly coming through.<br>
- Howcome he's allowed to have MK64 running on an emulator anyways? I thought it was illegal to do so (even if you have the game yourself); though I might be wrong on that.<br> <br>
Whereas I like the idea (but can't see myself using it in the next decades), I think the price has to be really low for people to actually use it. Though I can definitely see a use for it for some new sort of console (Phantom, anyone?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D ), where one would be using a subscription service to be able to play a big library.<br>
Still, I always wondered how this would scale if it got really popular: I can't imagine a computer being able to stream multiple high-graphics game for multiple clients.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some ( quite important ) things missing from the video : - Why no mention of what connection he is on ?
Or for that matter , why no mention of where the server is located ?
( besides some vague " Oh , I 've never been as far from a server as I am at the moment !
" ) - Where 's the fullscreen ?
I can see how it would be quite hard to properly stream current screensizes ( such as 1680x1050 , or even 1280x1024 ) Other than that , I noticed a few odd things , such as : - When playing MarioKart 64 , at the end he all of a sudden crashes into a wall , which he tells is because " he has n't been playing the game for quite some time " ; Seems quite odd , and looked more like it had to do with the actual command not properly coming through .
- Howcome he 's allowed to have MK64 running on an emulator anyways ?
I thought it was illegal to do so ( even if you have the game yourself ) ; though I might be wrong on that .
Whereas I like the idea ( but ca n't see myself using it in the next decades ) , I think the price has to be really low for people to actually use it .
Though I can definitely see a use for it for some new sort of console ( Phantom , anyone ?
: D ) , where one would be using a subscription service to be able to play a big library .
Still , I always wondered how this would scale if it got really popular : I ca n't imagine a computer being able to stream multiple high-graphics game for multiple clients .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some (quite important) things missing from the video: 
- Why no mention of what connection he is on?
Or for that matter, why no mention of where the server is located?
(besides some vague "Oh, I've never been as far from a server as I am at the moment!
")
- Where's the fullscreen?
I can see how it would be quite hard to properly stream current screensizes (such as 1680x1050, or even 1280x1024)

Other than that, I noticed a few odd things, such as:
- When playing MarioKart 64, at the end he all of a sudden crashes into a wall, which he tells is because "he hasn't been playing the game for quite some time"; Seems quite odd, and looked more like it had to do with the actual command not properly coming through.
- Howcome he's allowed to have MK64 running on an emulator anyways?
I thought it was illegal to do so (even if you have the game yourself); though I might be wrong on that.
Whereas I like the idea (but can't see myself using it in the next decades), I think the price has to be really low for people to actually use it.
Though I can definitely see a use for it for some new sort of console (Phantom, anyone?
:D ), where one would be using a subscription service to be able to play a big library.
Still, I always wondered how this would scale if it got really popular: I can't imagine a computer being able to stream multiple high-graphics game for multiple clients.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28549183</id>
	<title>There are some big unanswered questions here......</title>
	<author>vicious0000</author>
	<datestamp>1246441320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First off, from what I saw both these models (OnLive and Gaikai) seem to be based on you buying the games through them.</p><p>If so, what about games I already own? I own games on physical media (like Spore) that are already on the catalog for Gaikai. I also own digital copies of games bought through Steam. Am I completely out of luck trying to use anything I already own with such a service?</p><p>What if I want to mod my game? It's incredibly common for people like WoW players to use addons for enhancing functions and features in the game. And I know there are lots of Spore mods out there.</p><p>Also, I see a lot of EA titles as listed games. Last time I bought a game as a digital download from EA (the Battlefield 2142 expansion), they would only allow me to download it for 6 months. If I needed to re-install after that time and needed the installer file, I'd have to buy it again. (Note: They may have changed this kind of policy...... I'm just speaking for what I experienced.)</p><p>I think most of us are going to be very cautious about purchasing games from small startups without some assurance that we'll still be able to play them if the company goes under. I'd think an agreement from EA and the other publishers that we would have full download rights to games purchased through one of these services ONLY if they go bankrupt/close down would be a big motivation for trying them out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First off , from what I saw both these models ( OnLive and Gaikai ) seem to be based on you buying the games through them.If so , what about games I already own ?
I own games on physical media ( like Spore ) that are already on the catalog for Gaikai .
I also own digital copies of games bought through Steam .
Am I completely out of luck trying to use anything I already own with such a service ? What if I want to mod my game ?
It 's incredibly common for people like WoW players to use addons for enhancing functions and features in the game .
And I know there are lots of Spore mods out there.Also , I see a lot of EA titles as listed games .
Last time I bought a game as a digital download from EA ( the Battlefield 2142 expansion ) , they would only allow me to download it for 6 months .
If I needed to re-install after that time and needed the installer file , I 'd have to buy it again .
( Note : They may have changed this kind of policy...... I 'm just speaking for what I experienced .
) I think most of us are going to be very cautious about purchasing games from small startups without some assurance that we 'll still be able to play them if the company goes under .
I 'd think an agreement from EA and the other publishers that we would have full download rights to games purchased through one of these services ONLY if they go bankrupt/close down would be a big motivation for trying them out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First off, from what I saw both these models (OnLive and Gaikai) seem to be based on you buying the games through them.If so, what about games I already own?
I own games on physical media (like Spore) that are already on the catalog for Gaikai.
I also own digital copies of games bought through Steam.
Am I completely out of luck trying to use anything I already own with such a service?What if I want to mod my game?
It's incredibly common for people like WoW players to use addons for enhancing functions and features in the game.
And I know there are lots of Spore mods out there.Also, I see a lot of EA titles as listed games.
Last time I bought a game as a digital download from EA (the Battlefield 2142 expansion), they would only allow me to download it for 6 months.
If I needed to re-install after that time and needed the installer file, I'd have to buy it again.
(Note: They may have changed this kind of policy...... I'm just speaking for what I experienced.
)I think most of us are going to be very cautious about purchasing games from small startups without some assurance that we'll still be able to play them if the company goes under.
I'd think an agreement from EA and the other publishers that we would have full download rights to games purchased through one of these services ONLY if they go bankrupt/close down would be a big motivation for trying them out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544775</id>
	<title>Re:Head in the cloud(s)</title>
	<author>julesh</author>
	<datestamp>1246471140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What exactly is the point of having games run in The Cloud, other than the wish to remain buzzword compliant? </i></p><p>Gamers spend serious cash on hardware.  AIUI, a typical gamer will put down an average of $500-1000 per annum on hardware, just so that they can continue running the latest and greatest games.  That hardware sits unused most of the time.</p><p>The idea of cloud gaming is to put some fraction of that money into shared hardware instead.  You'll spend maybe $180 per annum renting access to the hardware, but you'll \_always\_ have latest generation, best possible kit available when you need it.  And if you're playing a game that doesn't need it, you'll be quietly downgraded so that somebody else can get a chance at the high end stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What exactly is the point of having games run in The Cloud , other than the wish to remain buzzword compliant ?
Gamers spend serious cash on hardware .
AIUI , a typical gamer will put down an average of $ 500-1000 per annum on hardware , just so that they can continue running the latest and greatest games .
That hardware sits unused most of the time.The idea of cloud gaming is to put some fraction of that money into shared hardware instead .
You 'll spend maybe $ 180 per annum renting access to the hardware , but you 'll \ _always \ _ have latest generation , best possible kit available when you need it .
And if you 're playing a game that does n't need it , you 'll be quietly downgraded so that somebody else can get a chance at the high end stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What exactly is the point of having games run in The Cloud, other than the wish to remain buzzword compliant?
Gamers spend serious cash on hardware.
AIUI, a typical gamer will put down an average of $500-1000 per annum on hardware, just so that they can continue running the latest and greatest games.
That hardware sits unused most of the time.The idea of cloud gaming is to put some fraction of that money into shared hardware instead.
You'll spend maybe $180 per annum renting access to the hardware, but you'll \_always\_ have latest generation, best possible kit available when you need it.
And if you're playing a game that doesn't need it, you'll be quietly downgraded so that somebody else can get a chance at the high end stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543873</id>
	<title>Re:Notably missing from the video:</title>
	<author>PieSquared</author>
	<datestamp>1246468560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>During the video he says he's using less then 1 Mb/s connection speed, though he doesn't say how much he actually has available.  On the FAQ page he says the server is 800 miles away, but that he has a 21 ms ping.<br>
<br>
It does also seem to me that fullscreen means more bandwidth.  All that's going his way is the video, but streaming full-screen video is obviously more bandwidth intensive then streaming a lower resolution.<br>
<br>
He crashes into the wall because he's stopped playing, as far as I can tell.  I suspect he's using a gamepad or something, because playing mario cart with a mouse just isn't feasible.  I assume he set the gamepad down, and then a second or so later we see the mouse going to the "close" button.  And I believe that it's only downloading ROM's that's illegal.  The emulator itself and using your own ROMs should both be fair use.<br>
<br>
Honestly, I like the idea of remote-running programs - I'd assumed that's the way things would end up going as soon as I heard people actually buying netbooks.  I think it's something I'll use extensively eventually.  Of course, I completely reject the idea of letting someone else host them for me - I suspect eventually people will have home servers plus netbooks or something like that.  So I won't be using *this* service, but I don't doubt that I'll eventually be running something like it.  Also I'm certain I won't be running photoshop inside flash inside firefox.  If this sort of thing gets popular there will be a custom application for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>During the video he says he 's using less then 1 Mb/s connection speed , though he does n't say how much he actually has available .
On the FAQ page he says the server is 800 miles away , but that he has a 21 ms ping .
It does also seem to me that fullscreen means more bandwidth .
All that 's going his way is the video , but streaming full-screen video is obviously more bandwidth intensive then streaming a lower resolution .
He crashes into the wall because he 's stopped playing , as far as I can tell .
I suspect he 's using a gamepad or something , because playing mario cart with a mouse just is n't feasible .
I assume he set the gamepad down , and then a second or so later we see the mouse going to the " close " button .
And I believe that it 's only downloading ROM 's that 's illegal .
The emulator itself and using your own ROMs should both be fair use .
Honestly , I like the idea of remote-running programs - I 'd assumed that 's the way things would end up going as soon as I heard people actually buying netbooks .
I think it 's something I 'll use extensively eventually .
Of course , I completely reject the idea of letting someone else host them for me - I suspect eventually people will have home servers plus netbooks or something like that .
So I wo n't be using * this * service , but I do n't doubt that I 'll eventually be running something like it .
Also I 'm certain I wo n't be running photoshop inside flash inside firefox .
If this sort of thing gets popular there will be a custom application for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>During the video he says he's using less then 1 Mb/s connection speed, though he doesn't say how much he actually has available.
On the FAQ page he says the server is 800 miles away, but that he has a 21 ms ping.
It does also seem to me that fullscreen means more bandwidth.
All that's going his way is the video, but streaming full-screen video is obviously more bandwidth intensive then streaming a lower resolution.
He crashes into the wall because he's stopped playing, as far as I can tell.
I suspect he's using a gamepad or something, because playing mario cart with a mouse just isn't feasible.
I assume he set the gamepad down, and then a second or so later we see the mouse going to the "close" button.
And I believe that it's only downloading ROM's that's illegal.
The emulator itself and using your own ROMs should both be fair use.
Honestly, I like the idea of remote-running programs - I'd assumed that's the way things would end up going as soon as I heard people actually buying netbooks.
I think it's something I'll use extensively eventually.
Of course, I completely reject the idea of letting someone else host them for me - I suspect eventually people will have home servers plus netbooks or something like that.
So I won't be using *this* service, but I don't doubt that I'll eventually be running something like it.
Also I'm certain I won't be running photoshop inside flash inside firefox.
If this sort of thing gets popular there will be a custom application for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28554365</id>
	<title>Re:Won't anyone think of the ISPs?</title>
	<author>Eskarel</author>
	<datestamp>1246475220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Comcast won't be brought to heel, US internet consumers will be forced to accept bandwidth caps which means Comcast won't need to be assholes to make a profit. All you can eat doesn't work anymore, but the US consumers won't let ISPs end it, so they have to be even more evil than usual.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Comcast wo n't be brought to heel , US internet consumers will be forced to accept bandwidth caps which means Comcast wo n't need to be assholes to make a profit .
All you can eat does n't work anymore , but the US consumers wo n't let ISPs end it , so they have to be even more evil than usual .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Comcast won't be brought to heel, US internet consumers will be forced to accept bandwidth caps which means Comcast won't need to be assholes to make a profit.
All you can eat doesn't work anymore, but the US consumers won't let ISPs end it, so they have to be even more evil than usual.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543397</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28555115</id>
	<title>Re:Notably missing from the video:</title>
	<author>Turiko</author>
	<datestamp>1246527300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Still, I always wondered how this would scale if it got really popular: I can't imagine a computer being able to stream multiple high-graphics game for multiple clients.</p></div><p>Well, just run multiple games on one pc. One pc with 2 decent graphics cards should be able to run a new game(albeight not at ultr and a few old ones (or 10 million mario kart 64's...)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Still , I always wondered how this would scale if it got really popular : I ca n't imagine a computer being able to stream multiple high-graphics game for multiple clients.Well , just run multiple games on one pc .
One pc with 2 decent graphics cards should be able to run a new game ( albeight not at ultr and a few old ones ( or 10 million mario kart 64 's... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Still, I always wondered how this would scale if it got really popular: I can't imagine a computer being able to stream multiple high-graphics game for multiple clients.Well, just run multiple games on one pc.
One pc with 2 decent graphics cards should be able to run a new game(albeight not at ultr and a few old ones (or 10 million mario kart 64's...)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543987</id>
	<title>Backend machines</title>
	<author>diagonti</author>
	<datestamp>1246468860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I look at this and think "some machine, some where has to be running the code".  When you play flash games, all the work is being done on your local machine.  When I play wow, its pegging a 2ghz processor to the extent it slows other things running in the background noticeably.  When you start doing complex work in photoshop, your limitation is often the amount of memory in the machine running it.  While this is awesome for streaming content from remote servers, I really question the ability to provide the server resources to run these applications in any sort of high volume situation.  What would the system requirements be to be able to run 10,000+ users through a single machine?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I look at this and think " some machine , some where has to be running the code " .
When you play flash games , all the work is being done on your local machine .
When I play wow , its pegging a 2ghz processor to the extent it slows other things running in the background noticeably .
When you start doing complex work in photoshop , your limitation is often the amount of memory in the machine running it .
While this is awesome for streaming content from remote servers , I really question the ability to provide the server resources to run these applications in any sort of high volume situation .
What would the system requirements be to be able to run 10,000 + users through a single machine ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I look at this and think "some machine, some where has to be running the code".
When you play flash games, all the work is being done on your local machine.
When I play wow, its pegging a 2ghz processor to the extent it slows other things running in the background noticeably.
When you start doing complex work in photoshop, your limitation is often the amount of memory in the machine running it.
While this is awesome for streaming content from remote servers, I really question the ability to provide the server resources to run these applications in any sort of high volume situation.
What would the system requirements be to be able to run 10,000+ users through a single machine?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28553615</id>
	<title>Re:This is cool and worrisome at the same time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246465860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"While some claim that bandwidth isn't up to snuff...his will all change in a short amount of time"</p><p>True.  But until they can do something about the speed of light, such a service will only be useful with lots of server farms scattered around.  That is a lot of data centers.  I don't see that happening.</p><p>Even if you had so many server locations that you were always  20ms from a fixed connection such as cable or ADSl, it's still going to suck from variable ping / speed wireless connections.</p><p>So until you can change the laws of physics, this isn't going to work as an all encompassing technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" While some claim that bandwidth is n't up to snuff...his will all change in a short amount of time " True .
But until they can do something about the speed of light , such a service will only be useful with lots of server farms scattered around .
That is a lot of data centers .
I do n't see that happening.Even if you had so many server locations that you were always 20ms from a fixed connection such as cable or ADSl , it 's still going to suck from variable ping / speed wireless connections.So until you can change the laws of physics , this is n't going to work as an all encompassing technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"While some claim that bandwidth isn't up to snuff...his will all change in a short amount of time"True.
But until they can do something about the speed of light, such a service will only be useful with lots of server farms scattered around.
That is a lot of data centers.
I don't see that happening.Even if you had so many server locations that you were always  20ms from a fixed connection such as cable or ADSl, it's still going to suck from variable ping / speed wireless connections.So until you can change the laws of physics, this isn't going to work as an all encompassing technology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545343</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28546191</id>
	<title>Ping</title>
	<author>JimboFBX</author>
	<datestamp>1246475280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The ping requirements make this unfeasible. As more "casual" people get connections that trade-off bandwidth for latency (such as wireless broadband or just plain crappy ISPs that 80\% of the US has to deal with) I don't see how this could ever be usable except for a select few.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The ping requirements make this unfeasible .
As more " casual " people get connections that trade-off bandwidth for latency ( such as wireless broadband or just plain crappy ISPs that 80 \ % of the US has to deal with ) I do n't see how this could ever be usable except for a select few .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ping requirements make this unfeasible.
As more "casual" people get connections that trade-off bandwidth for latency (such as wireless broadband or just plain crappy ISPs that 80\% of the US has to deal with) I don't see how this could ever be usable except for a select few.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544867</id>
	<title>Wait Until It Gets Popular...</title>
	<author>Nemyst</author>
	<datestamp>1246471380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If standard multiplayer gaming, which involves far less data being sent back and forth between players, still doesn't properly work and often ends up in disconnections, lag and desync issues, I seriously doubt they'll fare any better, bar having servers in every major city in the world with fiber connections linking them together. At that point, the price tag would probably be so high it would become useless to subscribe. Sure, right now it's looking good with a handful of players all set in perfect conditions (see OnLive with a few dozens of players at most), but if they get a couple thousands, their stuff will crawl to a halt or they'll need to severely diminish the quality of what you're getting (be it smaller resolution, worse graphics fidelity, faster/worse looking encoding or a mix of all that and more). Remember they have to send the commands from the client, then stream the video and the audio back. Since it's unlikely they'll send that unencoded (otherwise it'd never run on 1Mb/s), they have to encode both live while not losing too much quality; that surely means a large impact on maximum performance.<br>
<br>
I seriously don't see that working anytime soon, except if it is 100$/month in South Korea only.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If standard multiplayer gaming , which involves far less data being sent back and forth between players , still does n't properly work and often ends up in disconnections , lag and desync issues , I seriously doubt they 'll fare any better , bar having servers in every major city in the world with fiber connections linking them together .
At that point , the price tag would probably be so high it would become useless to subscribe .
Sure , right now it 's looking good with a handful of players all set in perfect conditions ( see OnLive with a few dozens of players at most ) , but if they get a couple thousands , their stuff will crawl to a halt or they 'll need to severely diminish the quality of what you 're getting ( be it smaller resolution , worse graphics fidelity , faster/worse looking encoding or a mix of all that and more ) .
Remember they have to send the commands from the client , then stream the video and the audio back .
Since it 's unlikely they 'll send that unencoded ( otherwise it 'd never run on 1Mb/s ) , they have to encode both live while not losing too much quality ; that surely means a large impact on maximum performance .
I seriously do n't see that working anytime soon , except if it is 100 $ /month in South Korea only .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If standard multiplayer gaming, which involves far less data being sent back and forth between players, still doesn't properly work and often ends up in disconnections, lag and desync issues, I seriously doubt they'll fare any better, bar having servers in every major city in the world with fiber connections linking them together.
At that point, the price tag would probably be so high it would become useless to subscribe.
Sure, right now it's looking good with a handful of players all set in perfect conditions (see OnLive with a few dozens of players at most), but if they get a couple thousands, their stuff will crawl to a halt or they'll need to severely diminish the quality of what you're getting (be it smaller resolution, worse graphics fidelity, faster/worse looking encoding or a mix of all that and more).
Remember they have to send the commands from the client, then stream the video and the audio back.
Since it's unlikely they'll send that unencoded (otherwise it'd never run on 1Mb/s), they have to encode both live while not losing too much quality; that surely means a large impact on maximum performance.
I seriously don't see that working anytime soon, except if it is 100$/month in South Korea only.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543313</id>
	<title>Re:Just needs a better name</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1246466940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He needs to get back to making games.  Dude ported some great games back in the day, Smash TV, Cool Spot, Aladdin. Then started Shiny which put out some real classics, Earthworm Jim, Wild 9, MDK.  Then Shiny made 2 crappy Matrix games and did nothing else of note until getting bought out.</p><p>Perry, quit dicking around on the business side of the industry and make some fucking games again!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He needs to get back to making games .
Dude ported some great games back in the day , Smash TV , Cool Spot , Aladdin .
Then started Shiny which put out some real classics , Earthworm Jim , Wild 9 , MDK .
Then Shiny made 2 crappy Matrix games and did nothing else of note until getting bought out.Perry , quit dicking around on the business side of the industry and make some fucking games again !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He needs to get back to making games.
Dude ported some great games back in the day, Smash TV, Cool Spot, Aladdin.
Then started Shiny which put out some real classics, Earthworm Jim, Wild 9, MDK.
Then Shiny made 2 crappy Matrix games and did nothing else of note until getting bought out.Perry, quit dicking around on the business side of the industry and make some fucking games again!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28548757</id>
	<title>I want to run my own server</title>
	<author>Sark666</author>
	<datestamp>1246440120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about being able to stream your own games like this when you're on the go.  Say I'm at a friends who has a good net connection, nice screen, but some crippled onboard video (not to mention I'm not going to bring my games and do the install/update/patch setup the config thing).  It would be nice to log into your own 'kaigai' server and play your collection.  Sell me this as a product instead of a service and I'm onboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about being able to stream your own games like this when you 're on the go .
Say I 'm at a friends who has a good net connection , nice screen , but some crippled onboard video ( not to mention I 'm not going to bring my games and do the install/update/patch setup the config thing ) .
It would be nice to log into your own 'kaigai ' server and play your collection .
Sell me this as a product instead of a service and I 'm onboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about being able to stream your own games like this when you're on the go.
Say I'm at a friends who has a good net connection, nice screen, but some crippled onboard video (not to mention I'm not going to bring my games and do the install/update/patch setup the config thing).
It would be nice to log into your own 'kaigai' server and play your collection.
Sell me this as a product instead of a service and I'm onboard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545343</id>
	<title>This is cool and worrisome at the same time</title>
	<author>LS</author>
	<datestamp>1246472760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While some claim that bandwidth isn't up to snuff, and maintaining enough servers to support a massive number of gamers is not feasible, etc, etc, this will all change in a short amount of time.  This type of service is on the cusp of being a reality, and it will change computing forever.  If a video game can be supported through a remote terminal, then ANY application could be supported.  Eventually more and more apps will be available only on the cloud, and hardware costs will go down, then you'll find that 20 years later only dumb terminals exist in the hands of the average consumer.  As wireless connectivity matures even phones will all just be dumb terminals.  You never need to upgrade your phone, unless you want a bigger screen or different input method.  The applications you RENT will be unpiratable, because there is no publicly available platform to run them on, and you can use the same app across your desktop and phone, but with modified interfaces as the device would report it's capabilities to the cloud, and the cloud would change the interface appropriately.</p><p>How does linux fit into all of this?  Will there be a new ideological movement in the future to keep processing power in the hands of consumers?  How do you install linux on a dumb terminal?</p><p>LS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While some claim that bandwidth is n't up to snuff , and maintaining enough servers to support a massive number of gamers is not feasible , etc , etc , this will all change in a short amount of time .
This type of service is on the cusp of being a reality , and it will change computing forever .
If a video game can be supported through a remote terminal , then ANY application could be supported .
Eventually more and more apps will be available only on the cloud , and hardware costs will go down , then you 'll find that 20 years later only dumb terminals exist in the hands of the average consumer .
As wireless connectivity matures even phones will all just be dumb terminals .
You never need to upgrade your phone , unless you want a bigger screen or different input method .
The applications you RENT will be unpiratable , because there is no publicly available platform to run them on , and you can use the same app across your desktop and phone , but with modified interfaces as the device would report it 's capabilities to the cloud , and the cloud would change the interface appropriately.How does linux fit into all of this ?
Will there be a new ideological movement in the future to keep processing power in the hands of consumers ?
How do you install linux on a dumb terminal ? LS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While some claim that bandwidth isn't up to snuff, and maintaining enough servers to support a massive number of gamers is not feasible, etc, etc, this will all change in a short amount of time.
This type of service is on the cusp of being a reality, and it will change computing forever.
If a video game can be supported through a remote terminal, then ANY application could be supported.
Eventually more and more apps will be available only on the cloud, and hardware costs will go down, then you'll find that 20 years later only dumb terminals exist in the hands of the average consumer.
As wireless connectivity matures even phones will all just be dumb terminals.
You never need to upgrade your phone, unless you want a bigger screen or different input method.
The applications you RENT will be unpiratable, because there is no publicly available platform to run them on, and you can use the same app across your desktop and phone, but with modified interfaces as the device would report it's capabilities to the cloud, and the cloud would change the interface appropriately.How does linux fit into all of this?
Will there be a new ideological movement in the future to keep processing power in the hands of consumers?
How do you install linux on a dumb terminal?LS</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907</id>
	<title>Just needs a better name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246465560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>GaiKai is a name destined for failure.  He's obviously not in Marketing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>GaiKai is a name destined for failure .
He 's obviously not in Marketing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GaiKai is a name destined for failure.
He's obviously not in Marketing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28546395</id>
	<title>Re:Head in the cloud(s)</title>
	<author>Viking Coder</author>
	<datestamp>1246475880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Casual gamers can try the game instantly, at work, in the library, anywhere.</p><p>Try Before You Buy is a really nice model.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Casual gamers can try the game instantly , at work , in the library , anywhere.Try Before You Buy is a really nice model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Casual gamers can try the game instantly, at work, in the library, anywhere.Try Before You Buy is a really nice model.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544591</id>
	<title>Re:Just needs a better name</title>
	<author>vertinox</author>
	<datestamp>1246470600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Aside privacy conserns, it doesn't make that much sense to run games via internet line.</i></p><p>I don't mean to sound silly but what sensitive information does one put into your video games?</p><p>I mean, I try to not name my WoW characters using my SSN or my secrete password hints.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside privacy conserns , it does n't make that much sense to run games via internet line.I do n't mean to sound silly but what sensitive information does one put into your video games ? I mean , I try to not name my WoW characters using my SSN or my secrete password hints .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside privacy conserns, it doesn't make that much sense to run games via internet line.I don't mean to sound silly but what sensitive information does one put into your video games?I mean, I try to not name my WoW characters using my SSN or my secrete password hints.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542981</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543311</id>
	<title>Re:No plugins?!</title>
	<author>nicolas.kassis</author>
	<datestamp>1246466940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that post smells like lawsuit material.</htmltext>
<tokenext>that post smells like lawsuit material .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that post smells like lawsuit material.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543001</id>
	<title>No plugins?!</title>
	<author>El\_Muerte\_TDS</author>
	<datestamp>1246465980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So... they're using the &lt;video&gt; tag, and use javascript to redirect the input to the remote server?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So... they 're using the tag , and use javascript to redirect the input to the remote server ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So... they're using the  tag, and use javascript to redirect the input to the remote server?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543489</id>
	<title>Re:Notably missing from the video:</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1246467420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Howcome he's allowed to have MK64 running on an emulator anyways? I thought it was illegal to do so (even if you have the game yourself); though I might be wrong on that.</i></p><p>Nope it's <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#117" title="copyright.gov">legal</a> [copyright.gov]:</p><blockquote><div><p>(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy. -- Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:</p><p>(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner</p></div></blockquote><p>Note that this exception is only for computer programs.  No such exception exists for other works.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Howcome he 's allowed to have MK64 running on an emulator anyways ?
I thought it was illegal to do so ( even if you have the game yourself ) ; though I might be wrong on that.Nope it 's legal [ copyright.gov ] : ( a ) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy .
-- Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 , it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided : ( 1 ) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other mannerNote that this exception is only for computer programs .
No such exception exists for other works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Howcome he's allowed to have MK64 running on an emulator anyways?
I thought it was illegal to do so (even if you have the game yourself); though I might be wrong on that.Nope it's legal [copyright.gov]:(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.
-- Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other mannerNote that this exception is only for computer programs.
No such exception exists for other works.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542981</id>
	<title>Re:Just needs a better name</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1246465920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I must agree it looked to work somewhat nicely, but people are taking  this cloud computing thing way too far. I want to run the stuff on my own box and not somewhere else. Aside privacy conserns, it doesn't make that much sense to run games via internet line. Theres lag issues, bandwidth issues, connectivity issues and latency issues. Sometimes the old model works better than the new 'cool' model.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I must agree it looked to work somewhat nicely , but people are taking this cloud computing thing way too far .
I want to run the stuff on my own box and not somewhere else .
Aside privacy conserns , it does n't make that much sense to run games via internet line .
Theres lag issues , bandwidth issues , connectivity issues and latency issues .
Sometimes the old model works better than the new 'cool ' model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I must agree it looked to work somewhat nicely, but people are taking  this cloud computing thing way too far.
I want to run the stuff on my own box and not somewhere else.
Aside privacy conserns, it doesn't make that much sense to run games via internet line.
Theres lag issues, bandwidth issues, connectivity issues and latency issues.
Sometimes the old model works better than the new 'cool' model.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544655</id>
	<title>Re:Just needs a better name</title>
	<author>vertinox</author>
	<datestamp>1246470720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I want to run the stuff on my own box and not somewhere else.</i></p><p>Oh and one more thing...</p><p>What about all the times you want to play games on <i>someone else's</i> computer?</p><p>Say like when you are at work... When you should be working... Not like I'd do something like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want to run the stuff on my own box and not somewhere else.Oh and one more thing...What about all the times you want to play games on someone else 's computer ? Say like when you are at work... When you should be working... Not like I 'd do something like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want to run the stuff on my own box and not somewhere else.Oh and one more thing...What about all the times you want to play games on someone else's computer?Say like when you are at work... When you should be working... Not like I'd do something like that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542981</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542995</id>
	<title>Head in the cloud(s)</title>
	<author>Adrian Lopez</author>
	<datestamp>1246465920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What exactly is the point of having games run in The Cloud, other than the wish to remain buzzword compliant? It seems like such a waste of network resources, and a pointless centralization of computing resources as well.</p><p>Frankly, I can't wait for the "cloud computing" bubble to finally burst.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What exactly is the point of having games run in The Cloud , other than the wish to remain buzzword compliant ?
It seems like such a waste of network resources , and a pointless centralization of computing resources as well.Frankly , I ca n't wait for the " cloud computing " bubble to finally burst .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What exactly is the point of having games run in The Cloud, other than the wish to remain buzzword compliant?
It seems like such a waste of network resources, and a pointless centralization of computing resources as well.Frankly, I can't wait for the "cloud computing" bubble to finally burst.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28549489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28554365
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543397
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28555115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542995
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543313
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542995
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28553615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545343
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28554919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545973
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28547135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542995
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543263
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543001
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28590379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543397
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28546395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542995
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28546569
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543987
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1522210_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28546191
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543263
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543311
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543171
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28555115
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543873
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543987
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28546569
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543397
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28590379
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28554365
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542995
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543369
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544775
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28546395
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542993
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542925
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28543313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28542981
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544591
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28544655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28549489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28547135
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545343
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28553615
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1522210.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28545973
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1522210.28554919
</commentlist>
</conversation>
