<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_21_1354224</id>
	<title>NVIDIA Targeting Real-Time Cloud Rendering</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1256135040000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>MojoKid writes <i>"To date, the majority of cloud computing applications have emphasized storage, group collaboration, or the ability to share information and applications with large groups of people. So far, there's been no push to make GPU power available in a cloud computing environment &mdash; but that's something NVIDIA hopes to change.  The company announced version 3.0 of its RealityServer today. The new revision sports hardware-level 3D acceleration, a new rendering engine (iray), and the ability to create 'images of <a href="http://hothardware.com/News/NVIDIAs-Reality-Server-Aims-to-Deliver-RealTime-Rendering-On-Your-Next-Netbookor-iPhone/">photorealistic scenes at rates approaching an interactive gaming experience</a>.' NVIDIA claims that the combination of RealityServer and its Tesla hardware can deliver those photorealistic scenes on your workstation or your cell phone, with no difference in speed or quality. Instead of relying on a client PC to handle the task of 3D rendering, NVIDIA wants to move the capability into the cloud, where the task of rendering an image or scene is handed off to a specialized Tesla server. Then that server performs the necessary calculations and fires back the finished product to the client."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>MojoKid writes " To date , the majority of cloud computing applications have emphasized storage , group collaboration , or the ability to share information and applications with large groups of people .
So far , there 's been no push to make GPU power available in a cloud computing environment    but that 's something NVIDIA hopes to change .
The company announced version 3.0 of its RealityServer today .
The new revision sports hardware-level 3D acceleration , a new rendering engine ( iray ) , and the ability to create 'images of photorealistic scenes at rates approaching an interactive gaming experience .
' NVIDIA claims that the combination of RealityServer and its Tesla hardware can deliver those photorealistic scenes on your workstation or your cell phone , with no difference in speed or quality .
Instead of relying on a client PC to handle the task of 3D rendering , NVIDIA wants to move the capability into the cloud , where the task of rendering an image or scene is handed off to a specialized Tesla server .
Then that server performs the necessary calculations and fires back the finished product to the client .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MojoKid writes "To date, the majority of cloud computing applications have emphasized storage, group collaboration, or the ability to share information and applications with large groups of people.
So far, there's been no push to make GPU power available in a cloud computing environment — but that's something NVIDIA hopes to change.
The company announced version 3.0 of its RealityServer today.
The new revision sports hardware-level 3D acceleration, a new rendering engine (iray), and the ability to create 'images of photorealistic scenes at rates approaching an interactive gaming experience.
' NVIDIA claims that the combination of RealityServer and its Tesla hardware can deliver those photorealistic scenes on your workstation or your cell phone, with no difference in speed or quality.
Instead of relying on a client PC to handle the task of 3D rendering, NVIDIA wants to move the capability into the cloud, where the task of rendering an image or scene is handed off to a specialized Tesla server.
Then that server performs the necessary calculations and fires back the finished product to the client.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823339</id>
	<title>I don't know...</title>
	<author>gijoel</author>
	<datestamp>1256139540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The last thing I want to see why I'm playing a FPS is buffering.... 32\%</htmltext>
<tokenext>The last thing I want to see why I 'm playing a FPS is buffering.... 32 \ %</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last thing I want to see why I'm playing a FPS is buffering.... 32\%</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823315</id>
	<title>Question</title>
	<author>dorpus</author>
	<datestamp>1256139420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For all the talk of "cloud computing", are there publicly available data sets from Google (or other companies)?  I'm a graduate student interested in data mining of health outcomes data.  My biggest challenge remains the fact that HIPAA and other patient privacy concerns make it very difficult to obtain health outcomes data; it's still a 1980s world where data are granted through official channels after extensive paperwork, or as a favor from people who trust me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For all the talk of " cloud computing " , are there publicly available data sets from Google ( or other companies ) ?
I 'm a graduate student interested in data mining of health outcomes data .
My biggest challenge remains the fact that HIPAA and other patient privacy concerns make it very difficult to obtain health outcomes data ; it 's still a 1980s world where data are granted through official channels after extensive paperwork , or as a favor from people who trust me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For all the talk of "cloud computing", are there publicly available data sets from Google (or other companies)?
I'm a graduate student interested in data mining of health outcomes data.
My biggest challenge remains the fact that HIPAA and other patient privacy concerns make it very difficult to obtain health outcomes data; it's still a 1980s world where data are granted through official channels after extensive paperwork, or as a favor from people who trust me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824963</id>
	<title>Re:Stupidest idea ever</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1256147280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Managing for capacity will certainly be the difficult part of running a cloud server farm.</p><p>It's fairly obvious, that if you build your farm to cope with the peaks, there will be spare capacity during the troughs.</p><p>But there are strategies to deal with this. For a start you can soften the peaks with pricing strategies. You could even offer discounts for off-peak gaming.</p><p>Plus, you could sell your off-peak capacity for other purposes. For example, a Hollywood animation could be rendered using the spare off-peak capacity on a gaming server farm. Substitute your own favourite long-running parallelisable data processing job.</p><p>Appropriately enough, given cloud computing's previous buzzword - grid computing - it's not all that different to the way power companies handle fluctuations in demand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Managing for capacity will certainly be the difficult part of running a cloud server farm.It 's fairly obvious , that if you build your farm to cope with the peaks , there will be spare capacity during the troughs.But there are strategies to deal with this .
For a start you can soften the peaks with pricing strategies .
You could even offer discounts for off-peak gaming.Plus , you could sell your off-peak capacity for other purposes .
For example , a Hollywood animation could be rendered using the spare off-peak capacity on a gaming server farm .
Substitute your own favourite long-running parallelisable data processing job.Appropriately enough , given cloud computing 's previous buzzword - grid computing - it 's not all that different to the way power companies handle fluctuations in demand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Managing for capacity will certainly be the difficult part of running a cloud server farm.It's fairly obvious, that if you build your farm to cope with the peaks, there will be spare capacity during the troughs.But there are strategies to deal with this.
For a start you can soften the peaks with pricing strategies.
You could even offer discounts for off-peak gaming.Plus, you could sell your off-peak capacity for other purposes.
For example, a Hollywood animation could be rendered using the spare off-peak capacity on a gaming server farm.
Substitute your own favourite long-running parallelisable data processing job.Appropriately enough, given cloud computing's previous buzzword - grid computing - it's not all that different to the way power companies handle fluctuations in demand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29841937</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256219700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm the writer of RoadToFailure. I have a CS degree and read quite a few computing history books.</p><p>I'm not going to debate you here... but thanks for inspiring a new article! "Cloud Computing is NOT The New Mainframe". I love Slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm the writer of RoadToFailure .
I have a CS degree and read quite a few computing history books.I 'm not going to debate you here... but thanks for inspiring a new article !
" Cloud Computing is NOT The New Mainframe " .
I love Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm the writer of RoadToFailure.
I have a CS degree and read quite a few computing history books.I'm not going to debate you here... but thanks for inspiring a new article!
"Cloud Computing is NOT The New Mainframe".
I love Slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823413</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256139960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought they had peaked with the hype around AJAX. But you're right, computing publications have taken it to the next level with "cloud computing".</p><p>The people who hype "cloud computing" tend to be young and ignorant. <a href="http://www.roadtofailure.com/2009/09/09/how-to-make-life-suck-less-while-making-scalable-systems/" title="roadtofailure.com" rel="nofollow">Here is a perfect example of this.</a> [roadtofailure.com]</p><p>Simply put, these young punks have a huge ego, but no knowledge of computing history. They don't realize that "cloud computing" is merely what we called "mainframes" back in the day. Their low-powered hand-held devices that'd supposedly benefit from the cloud really aren't different at all from the dumb terminals we hooked up to our mainframes.</p><p>Most enterprises moved away from the mainframe because it just wasn't as useful and efficient as individual desktop systems on each user's desk. Unfortunately, most of those fools pushing "cloud computing" these days were born well after we made that transition. They don't realize that they're just resurrecting problems that we dealt with in the early 1980s.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought they had peaked with the hype around AJAX .
But you 're right , computing publications have taken it to the next level with " cloud computing " .The people who hype " cloud computing " tend to be young and ignorant .
Here is a perfect example of this .
[ roadtofailure.com ] Simply put , these young punks have a huge ego , but no knowledge of computing history .
They do n't realize that " cloud computing " is merely what we called " mainframes " back in the day .
Their low-powered hand-held devices that 'd supposedly benefit from the cloud really are n't different at all from the dumb terminals we hooked up to our mainframes.Most enterprises moved away from the mainframe because it just was n't as useful and efficient as individual desktop systems on each user 's desk .
Unfortunately , most of those fools pushing " cloud computing " these days were born well after we made that transition .
They do n't realize that they 're just resurrecting problems that we dealt with in the early 1980s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought they had peaked with the hype around AJAX.
But you're right, computing publications have taken it to the next level with "cloud computing".The people who hype "cloud computing" tend to be young and ignorant.
Here is a perfect example of this.
[roadtofailure.com]Simply put, these young punks have a huge ego, but no knowledge of computing history.
They don't realize that "cloud computing" is merely what we called "mainframes" back in the day.
Their low-powered hand-held devices that'd supposedly benefit from the cloud really aren't different at all from the dumb terminals we hooked up to our mainframes.Most enterprises moved away from the mainframe because it just wasn't as useful and efficient as individual desktop systems on each user's desk.
Unfortunately, most of those fools pushing "cloud computing" these days were born well after we made that transition.
They don't realize that they're just resurrecting problems that we dealt with in the early 1980s.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29825001</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>Sgt. B</author>
	<datestamp>1256147460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are partially correct. It is not being used as originally intended but it is not meaningless. Most people today use cloud when referring to the computers and resources available over the internet rather than the interconnections of the internet.</p><p>Back before the internet, server admins sending data over fiber channel would visually represent the connections as "the network". That's easy to visualize as a fishing net.  Then as more lines, servers and jumps were added the term evolved to try to stay with a realistic visual representation.   Web was next which was also easy to imagine.  Net Fabric was actually used for a while too as the number of lines went up.</p><p>Eventually there were so many interconnections and links between computers and networks of computers that if you drew it, you would end up with a fine gray blob in between all the destinations.  A net cloud. That's where the term actually came from.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are partially correct .
It is not being used as originally intended but it is not meaningless .
Most people today use cloud when referring to the computers and resources available over the internet rather than the interconnections of the internet.Back before the internet , server admins sending data over fiber channel would visually represent the connections as " the network " .
That 's easy to visualize as a fishing net .
Then as more lines , servers and jumps were added the term evolved to try to stay with a realistic visual representation .
Web was next which was also easy to imagine .
Net Fabric was actually used for a while too as the number of lines went up.Eventually there were so many interconnections and links between computers and networks of computers that if you drew it , you would end up with a fine gray blob in between all the destinations .
A net cloud .
That 's where the term actually came from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are partially correct.
It is not being used as originally intended but it is not meaningless.
Most people today use cloud when referring to the computers and resources available over the internet rather than the interconnections of the internet.Back before the internet, server admins sending data over fiber channel would visually represent the connections as "the network".
That's easy to visualize as a fishing net.
Then as more lines, servers and jumps were added the term evolved to try to stay with a realistic visual representation.
Web was next which was also easy to imagine.
Net Fabric was actually used for a while too as the number of lines went up.Eventually there were so many interconnections and links between computers and networks of computers that if you drew it, you would end up with a fine gray blob in between all the destinations.
A net cloud.
That's where the term actually came from.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823215</id>
	<title>Why is rendering clouds so important?</title>
	<author>szo</author>
	<datestamp>1256138820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>oh, wait...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>oh , wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh, wait...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823313</id>
	<title>Bad idea!</title>
	<author>oo\_HAWK\_oo</author>
	<datestamp>1256139420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And then what happens when your kid fires up his bit torrent!?</htmltext>
<tokenext>And then what happens when your kid fires up his bit torrent !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And then what happens when your kid fires up his bit torrent!
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823533</id>
	<title>Re:Stupidest idea ever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256140500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this is the "whoops" of cloud computing and why it doesn't work for these purposes. Render farms do what they do well, and so does distributed computing. Neither of these are cloud.</p><p>Can we please stop the marketing hype for everything cloud?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this is the " whoops " of cloud computing and why it does n't work for these purposes .
Render farms do what they do well , and so does distributed computing .
Neither of these are cloud.Can we please stop the marketing hype for everything cloud ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this is the "whoops" of cloud computing and why it doesn't work for these purposes.
Render farms do what they do well, and so does distributed computing.
Neither of these are cloud.Can we please stop the marketing hype for everything cloud?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823233</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29825485</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>Nursie</author>
	<datestamp>1256149380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Another is that where the mainframe were typically placed close to the workstations, the servers in the cloud can be placed remotely."</p><p>Uh, but what about latency? Where we talk about rendering in the cloud we need clients to be as close as possible.</p><p>"A third is that the workstations often were unable to function without access to the mainframe, modern desktops are able to use the advantages of the mainframe/cloud as well as the advantages of an autonomous desktop."</p><p>Not in every model, specifically not in OnLive and nVidia's model.</p><p>The way I see it is that the only real difference is that "the cloud" is basically RAID (and maybe offsite-backup built in) for whole computers rather than just for storage. You use commodity hardware and the utilities of something like vmware to move server images around to where there is less load and bring them back up immediately if there was a problem.</p><p>In terms of user experience, it's still client-server.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Another is that where the mainframe were typically placed close to the workstations , the servers in the cloud can be placed remotely .
" Uh , but what about latency ?
Where we talk about rendering in the cloud we need clients to be as close as possible .
" A third is that the workstations often were unable to function without access to the mainframe , modern desktops are able to use the advantages of the mainframe/cloud as well as the advantages of an autonomous desktop .
" Not in every model , specifically not in OnLive and nVidia 's model.The way I see it is that the only real difference is that " the cloud " is basically RAID ( and maybe offsite-backup built in ) for whole computers rather than just for storage .
You use commodity hardware and the utilities of something like vmware to move server images around to where there is less load and bring them back up immediately if there was a problem.In terms of user experience , it 's still client-server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Another is that where the mainframe were typically placed close to the workstations, the servers in the cloud can be placed remotely.
"Uh, but what about latency?
Where we talk about rendering in the cloud we need clients to be as close as possible.
"A third is that the workstations often were unable to function without access to the mainframe, modern desktops are able to use the advantages of the mainframe/cloud as well as the advantages of an autonomous desktop.
"Not in every model, specifically not in OnLive and nVidia's model.The way I see it is that the only real difference is that "the cloud" is basically RAID (and maybe offsite-backup built in) for whole computers rather than just for storage.
You use commodity hardware and the utilities of something like vmware to move server images around to where there is less load and bring them back up immediately if there was a problem.In terms of user experience, it's still client-server.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824777</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1256146560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What I don't understand, even if these young'uns have no knowledge of history, why do they think cloud computing is a good idea? Why would they want to offload all the processing onto some distant central computer, when they have a quadruple CPU sitting right here in front of them?</p></div><p>It's that phrase "central computer" that suggests to me you've misunderstood cloud computing. If there's one "central computer" handling my request, I wouldn't consider that a cloud service. A cloud service is <i>by definition</i> distributed. Don't think "big mainframe in a datacentre". Think "huge datacentre full of servers with dynamically managed roles".</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Why [...] when they have a quadruple CPU sitting right here in front of them?</p></div><p>Maybe they don't have a quad CPU, and maybe they don't want to buy one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I do n't understand , even if these young'uns have no knowledge of history , why do they think cloud computing is a good idea ?
Why would they want to offload all the processing onto some distant central computer , when they have a quadruple CPU sitting right here in front of them ? It 's that phrase " central computer " that suggests to me you 've misunderstood cloud computing .
If there 's one " central computer " handling my request , I would n't consider that a cloud service .
A cloud service is by definition distributed .
Do n't think " big mainframe in a datacentre " .
Think " huge datacentre full of servers with dynamically managed roles " .Why [ ... ] when they have a quadruple CPU sitting right here in front of them ? Maybe they do n't have a quad CPU , and maybe they do n't want to buy one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I don't understand, even if these young'uns have no knowledge of history, why do they think cloud computing is a good idea?
Why would they want to offload all the processing onto some distant central computer, when they have a quadruple CPU sitting right here in front of them?It's that phrase "central computer" that suggests to me you've misunderstood cloud computing.
If there's one "central computer" handling my request, I wouldn't consider that a cloud service.
A cloud service is by definition distributed.
Don't think "big mainframe in a datacentre".
Think "huge datacentre full of servers with dynamically managed roles".Why [...] when they have a quadruple CPU sitting right here in front of them?Maybe they don't have a quad CPU, and maybe they don't want to buy one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29828157</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>TeknoHog</author>
	<datestamp>1256117100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, what should I call my atmospheric simulations then?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what should I call my atmospheric simulations then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what should I call my atmospheric simulations then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823349</id>
	<title>Re:Drawing a cloud in real-time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256139600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Idiot. "Real-time" means that you can draw clouds at the screen refresh rate, not every 5 minutes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Idiot .
" Real-time " means that you can draw clouds at the screen refresh rate , not every 5 minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Idiot.
"Real-time" means that you can draw clouds at the screen refresh rate, not every 5 minutes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823207</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823817</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>PhrostyMcByte</author>
	<datestamp>1256142000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Cloud" is a pretty stupid name, one that bugs me almost as much as "AJAX", but it's hurt even more by being associated with two things at once.</p><p>The first is simply a client-&gt;server connection, or perhaps hosting your data online.  This, I think, doesn't need a new name.  The old names were working fine.</p><p>The second, and far more interesting, is for much more complex systems that are marking a move from managed server hosting to scalable application hosting.  These guys design their systems from the ground up to scale your applications quickly, efficiently, and reliably across a pool of servers.  By doing this all in one place, hopefully with a lower cost than what it would take for you to do something similar on your own.  I think this is a significantly different approach that it needs a new name to differentiate it from what we're used to.  This is also what TFA seems to mean when they say "cloud".</p><p>I'm currently evaluating these cloud services for my company -- the idea that I can simply focus on writing good code and let someone else worry about starting new servers when usage spikes, replacing ones that break, adding more storage for the database, etc... it is <i>very</i> tempting.  The cons?  They all use proprietary APIs that seem similar on the surface but in the end are different enough that you really need to specialize your code for their service -- if you ever want to move your app over to something else, it's not going to be simple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Cloud " is a pretty stupid name , one that bugs me almost as much as " AJAX " , but it 's hurt even more by being associated with two things at once.The first is simply a client- &gt; server connection , or perhaps hosting your data online .
This , I think , does n't need a new name .
The old names were working fine.The second , and far more interesting , is for much more complex systems that are marking a move from managed server hosting to scalable application hosting .
These guys design their systems from the ground up to scale your applications quickly , efficiently , and reliably across a pool of servers .
By doing this all in one place , hopefully with a lower cost than what it would take for you to do something similar on your own .
I think this is a significantly different approach that it needs a new name to differentiate it from what we 're used to .
This is also what TFA seems to mean when they say " cloud " .I 'm currently evaluating these cloud services for my company -- the idea that I can simply focus on writing good code and let someone else worry about starting new servers when usage spikes , replacing ones that break , adding more storage for the database , etc... it is very tempting .
The cons ?
They all use proprietary APIs that seem similar on the surface but in the end are different enough that you really need to specialize your code for their service -- if you ever want to move your app over to something else , it 's not going to be simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Cloud" is a pretty stupid name, one that bugs me almost as much as "AJAX", but it's hurt even more by being associated with two things at once.The first is simply a client-&gt;server connection, or perhaps hosting your data online.
This, I think, doesn't need a new name.
The old names were working fine.The second, and far more interesting, is for much more complex systems that are marking a move from managed server hosting to scalable application hosting.
These guys design their systems from the ground up to scale your applications quickly, efficiently, and reliably across a pool of servers.
By doing this all in one place, hopefully with a lower cost than what it would take for you to do something similar on your own.
I think this is a significantly different approach that it needs a new name to differentiate it from what we're used to.
This is also what TFA seems to mean when they say "cloud".I'm currently evaluating these cloud services for my company -- the idea that I can simply focus on writing good code and let someone else worry about starting new servers when usage spikes, replacing ones that break, adding more storage for the database, etc... it is very tempting.
The cons?
They all use proprietary APIs that seem similar on the surface but in the end are different enough that you really need to specialize your code for their service -- if you ever want to move your app over to something else, it's not going to be simple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823519</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256140440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where's my privacy, oh no I lost my privacy, please help me find my privacy!<br>*Sob sob*</p><p>- Meaningless.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where 's my privacy , oh no I lost my privacy , please help me find my privacy !
* Sob sob * - Meaningless.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where's my privacy, oh no I lost my privacy, please help me find my privacy!
*Sob sob*- Meaningless.com</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823839</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1256142180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Off-topic (as it is rated) for rendering on the cloud, but potentially on-topic for cloud in general. At the moment people want some degree of privacy of data, but "cloud" wants us to throw it to teh interwebz and process it there. Anyone care to guess how much easier it may become to get the data the OP wanted?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Off-topic ( as it is rated ) for rendering on the cloud , but potentially on-topic for cloud in general .
At the moment people want some degree of privacy of data , but " cloud " wants us to throw it to teh interwebz and process it there .
Anyone care to guess how much easier it may become to get the data the OP wanted ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Off-topic (as it is rated) for rendering on the cloud, but potentially on-topic for cloud in general.
At the moment people want some degree of privacy of data, but "cloud" wants us to throw it to teh interwebz and process it there.
Anyone care to guess how much easier it may become to get the data the OP wanted?
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29828889</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>ProzacPatient</author>
	<datestamp>1256120460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree with this.
In reality "cloud" computing is just mainframe computing.
Its a step backward really.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with this .
In reality " cloud " computing is just mainframe computing .
Its a step backward really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with this.
In reality "cloud" computing is just mainframe computing.
Its a step backward really.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824681</id>
	<title>Re:Question</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256146080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You realise that those restrictions are the only reason that the data could be gathered in the first place, right? People won't allow their information to be disclosed at all unless there's some reassurance about what will be done with it. Maybe you should collaborate with somebody who can get access instead of trying to work around it, if only for your own good. It's not good for your career to be known as "the guy who stole all that private medical data and wrote a paper with it". The journals frown upon ethics violations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You realise that those restrictions are the only reason that the data could be gathered in the first place , right ?
People wo n't allow their information to be disclosed at all unless there 's some reassurance about what will be done with it .
Maybe you should collaborate with somebody who can get access instead of trying to work around it , if only for your own good .
It 's not good for your career to be known as " the guy who stole all that private medical data and wrote a paper with it " .
The journals frown upon ethics violations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You realise that those restrictions are the only reason that the data could be gathered in the first place, right?
People won't allow their information to be disclosed at all unless there's some reassurance about what will be done with it.
Maybe you should collaborate with somebody who can get access instead of trying to work around it, if only for your own good.
It's not good for your career to be known as "the guy who stole all that private medical data and wrote a paper with it".
The journals frown upon ethics violations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823315</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29835189</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>middlemen</author>
	<datestamp>1256226660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My own computer may "only" be a Pentium 4, but it's still about 12,000 times faster than the old 8-bit machine where I used to write book reports.</p></div><p>

Cloud computing isn't for everyone. It is for those who want to use their age old Pentium 3's and 4's with old sound cards and graphics cards, and still have a Vista or Windows 7 experience despite having an age old machine that can barely support XP with elan.
<br>
So if I have a P4 machine that works perfect for me, but I want to have a Vista/Win7 machine without the hassle of buying a new machine itself costing around 500$ or more, I can have everything be done in a cloud. That way, I can always work with the latest and greatest versions of OSes if available and have hardly any hardware costs. Plus the beauty of buying a cheap netbook and have it work like a high end desktop.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My own computer may " only " be a Pentium 4 , but it 's still about 12,000 times faster than the old 8-bit machine where I used to write book reports .
Cloud computing is n't for everyone .
It is for those who want to use their age old Pentium 3 's and 4 's with old sound cards and graphics cards , and still have a Vista or Windows 7 experience despite having an age old machine that can barely support XP with elan .
So if I have a P4 machine that works perfect for me , but I want to have a Vista/Win7 machine without the hassle of buying a new machine itself costing around 500 $ or more , I can have everything be done in a cloud .
That way , I can always work with the latest and greatest versions of OSes if available and have hardly any hardware costs .
Plus the beauty of buying a cheap netbook and have it work like a high end desktop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My own computer may "only" be a Pentium 4, but it's still about 12,000 times faster than the old 8-bit machine where I used to write book reports.
Cloud computing isn't for everyone.
It is for those who want to use their age old Pentium 3's and 4's with old sound cards and graphics cards, and still have a Vista or Windows 7 experience despite having an age old machine that can barely support XP with elan.
So if I have a P4 machine that works perfect for me, but I want to have a Vista/Win7 machine without the hassle of buying a new machine itself costing around 500$ or more, I can have everything be done in a cloud.
That way, I can always work with the latest and greatest versions of OSes if available and have hardly any hardware costs.
Plus the beauty of buying a cheap netbook and have it work like a high end desktop.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29827961</id>
	<title>Re:Stupidest idea ever</title>
	<author>dacut</author>
	<datestamp>1256116320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't fathom, though, why nVidia -- a graphics chipset maker which has nothing to do with the ray tracing you're describing -- would be interested in this.</p><p>The bandwidth between the CPU and the graphics chipset is a frequent bottleneck.  This is why the graphics adapter often has a special slot (VLB vs. ISA; AGP vs. PCI; PCI-e x16 vs. PCI-e x1) and why we're starting to see the marriage of the CPU and graphics chipset (AMD buying ATI, nVidia talking about making their own CPU, Intel making graphics chips, etc.).  Put this on the cloud, and your bandwidth is shot, and suddenly latency is a huge issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't fathom , though , why nVidia -- a graphics chipset maker which has nothing to do with the ray tracing you 're describing -- would be interested in this.The bandwidth between the CPU and the graphics chipset is a frequent bottleneck .
This is why the graphics adapter often has a special slot ( VLB vs. ISA ; AGP vs. PCI ; PCI-e x16 vs. PCI-e x1 ) and why we 're starting to see the marriage of the CPU and graphics chipset ( AMD buying ATI , nVidia talking about making their own CPU , Intel making graphics chips , etc. ) .
Put this on the cloud , and your bandwidth is shot , and suddenly latency is a huge issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't fathom, though, why nVidia -- a graphics chipset maker which has nothing to do with the ray tracing you're describing -- would be interested in this.The bandwidth between the CPU and the graphics chipset is a frequent bottleneck.
This is why the graphics adapter often has a special slot (VLB vs. ISA; AGP vs. PCI; PCI-e x16 vs. PCI-e x1) and why we're starting to see the marriage of the CPU and graphics chipset (AMD buying ATI, nVidia talking about making their own CPU, Intel making graphics chips, etc.).
Put this on the cloud, and your bandwidth is shot, and suddenly latency is a huge issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823935</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823477</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256140260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cloud computing is the combination of distributed computing using a cluster and network storage. It's nothing new, but it haven't been harnesses to do general purpose computing 'till recently. I think it happened because of our ability to now run VM into a cluster seamlessly (switching workload between servers) and treat the cluster as one unique entity, hence the could.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cloud computing is the combination of distributed computing using a cluster and network storage .
It 's nothing new , but it have n't been harnesses to do general purpose computing 'till recently .
I think it happened because of our ability to now run VM into a cluster seamlessly ( switching workload between servers ) and treat the cluster as one unique entity , hence the could .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cloud computing is the combination of distributed computing using a cluster and network storage.
It's nothing new, but it haven't been harnesses to do general purpose computing 'till recently.
I think it happened because of our ability to now run VM into a cluster seamlessly (switching workload between servers) and treat the cluster as one unique entity, hence the could.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823259</id>
	<title>Your official guide to the jigaboo presidency</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256139060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger! If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.</p><p>INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.<br>You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model. Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e. chained together. Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever. Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them. This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud. House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape. At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name. Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data. Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger. If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima. Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke. Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes. These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.</p><p>CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGER<br>Owing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords. Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular. However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue. Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much. Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway. Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's). This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boat</p><p>HOUSING YOUR NIGGER.<br>Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars. Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through. The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage. So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers. You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground. Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage. Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now. In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape. As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put. Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.</p><p>FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.<br>Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon. You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it. Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water. Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc. Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day. Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives. He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result. You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained. You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton. You really would. Coffee beans? Don't ask. You have no idea.</p><p>MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.<br>Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind. The nigger's most</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger !
If handled properly , your apeman will give years of valuable , if reluctant , service.INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model .
Field niggers work best in a serial configuration , i.e .
chained together .
Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it , and do n't even think about taking that chain off , ever .
Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them .
This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud .
House niggers work best as standalone units , but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape .
At this stage , your nigger can also be given a name .
Most owners use the same names over and over , since niggers become confused by too much data .
Rufus , Rastus , Remus , Toby , Carslisle , Carlton , Hey-You ! -Yes-you ! , Yeller , Blackstar , and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger .
If your nigger is a ho , it should be called Latrelle , L'Tanya , or Jemima .
Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke .
Pearl , Blossom , and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes .
These names go straight over your nigger 's head , by the way.CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGEROwing to a design error , your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords .
Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - " muh dick " being the most popular .
However , others make barking , yelping , yapping noises and appear to be in some pain , so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger 's tongue .
Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least , you wo n't hear it complaining anywhere near as much .
Niggers have nothing interesting to say , anyway .
Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons ( yours , mine , and that of women , not the nigger 's ) .
This is strongly recommended , and frankly , it 's a mystery why this is not done on the boatHOUSING YOUR NIGGER.Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars .
Make sure , however , that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through .
The rule of thumb is , four niggers per square yard of cage .
So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers .
You can site a nigger cage anywhere , even on soft ground .
Do n't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage .
Niggers never invented the shovel before and they 're not about to now .
In any case , your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape .
As long as the free food holds out , your nigger is living better than it did in Africa , so it will stay put .
Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage , as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.Your Nigger likes fried chicken , corn bread , and watermelon .
You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly does n't deserve it .
Instead , feed it on porridge with salt , and creek water .
Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields , other niggers , etc .
Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat , but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day .
Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer , since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives .
He reports he does n't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result .
You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work , since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained .
You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton .
You really would .
Coffee beans ?
Do n't ask .
You have no idea.MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.Niggers are very , very averse to work of any kind .
The nigger 's most</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger!
If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model.
Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e.
chained together.
Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever.
Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them.
This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud.
House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape.
At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name.
Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data.
Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger.
If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima.
Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke.
Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes.
These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGEROwing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords.
Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular.
However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue.
Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much.
Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway.
Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's).
This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boatHOUSING YOUR NIGGER.Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars.
Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through.
The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage.
So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers.
You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground.
Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage.
Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now.
In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape.
As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put.
Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon.
You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it.
Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water.
Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc.
Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day.
Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives.
He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result.
You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained.
You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton.
You really would.
Coffee beans?
Don't ask.
You have no idea.MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind.
The nigger's most</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824471</id>
	<title>Re:Question</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1256145000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, so you've been modded offtopic.</p><p>But I'm curious why you thought a question about publically available datasets had anything to do with cloud computing? It doesn't look as if you were trolling. So what was it you were misunderstanding?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , so you 've been modded offtopic.But I 'm curious why you thought a question about publically available datasets had anything to do with cloud computing ?
It does n't look as if you were trolling .
So what was it you were misunderstanding ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, so you've been modded offtopic.But I'm curious why you thought a question about publically available datasets had anything to do with cloud computing?
It doesn't look as if you were trolling.
So what was it you were misunderstanding?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823315</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823207</id>
	<title>Drawing a cloud in real-time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256138760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I assume it has nothing to do with <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nLZKOTsEnk" title="youtube.com">this video</a> [youtube.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>I assume it has nothing to do with this video [ youtube.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I assume it has nothing to do with this video [youtube.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824715</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256146260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chance of cloudy interwebs, as a cold corperate front moves past the mid-west.<br>60\% chance of raining microsoft<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ODF and google sharks.<br>Watch out for the dry-online across texas, we're expecting some tesla-nados and severe thunder-lolcats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chance of cloudy interwebs , as a cold corperate front moves past the mid-west.60 \ % chance of raining microsoft .ODF and google sharks.Watch out for the dry-online across texas , we 're expecting some tesla-nados and severe thunder-lolcats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chance of cloudy interwebs, as a cold corperate front moves past the mid-west.60\% chance of raining microsoft .ODF and google sharks.Watch out for the dry-online across texas, we're expecting some tesla-nados and severe thunder-lolcats.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823233</id>
	<title>Stupidest idea ever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256138940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clouds for render farms seems fine. In fact, you are just putting a fancy new cloudy name on the render farms that have been around forever.</p><p>But render farms for on-line gaming seems like the most ridiculous idea. Note the demo nVidia showed:</p><p><em>but the speed of the updates didn't remotely come close to "approaching an interactive gaming experience," unless said experience involved attempting to run Doom on your 16MHz 386 with the screen size set at maximum. Update times varied from 10-20 seconds, and that's a significant lag when discussing online usage patterns.</em></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clouds for render farms seems fine .
In fact , you are just putting a fancy new cloudy name on the render farms that have been around forever.But render farms for on-line gaming seems like the most ridiculous idea .
Note the demo nVidia showed : but the speed of the updates did n't remotely come close to " approaching an interactive gaming experience , " unless said experience involved attempting to run Doom on your 16MHz 386 with the screen size set at maximum .
Update times varied from 10-20 seconds , and that 's a significant lag when discussing online usage patterns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clouds for render farms seems fine.
In fact, you are just putting a fancy new cloudy name on the render farms that have been around forever.But render farms for on-line gaming seems like the most ridiculous idea.
Note the demo nVidia showed:but the speed of the updates didn't remotely come close to "approaching an interactive gaming experience," unless said experience involved attempting to run Doom on your 16MHz 386 with the screen size set at maximum.
Update times varied from 10-20 seconds, and that's a significant lag when discussing online usage patterns.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824017</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256143020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are a number of important differences when comparing mainframe/workstation systems to the modern notion of cloud computing. One significant difference is distributing computational problems to a number of concurrent processes on (possibly) distant systems. Another is that where the mainframe were typically placed close to the workstations, the servers in the cloud can be placed remotely. A third is that the workstations often were unable to function without access to the mainframe, modern desktops are able to use the advantages of the mainframe/cloud as well as the advantages of an autonomous desktop.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a number of important differences when comparing mainframe/workstation systems to the modern notion of cloud computing .
One significant difference is distributing computational problems to a number of concurrent processes on ( possibly ) distant systems .
Another is that where the mainframe were typically placed close to the workstations , the servers in the cloud can be placed remotely .
A third is that the workstations often were unable to function without access to the mainframe , modern desktops are able to use the advantages of the mainframe/cloud as well as the advantages of an autonomous desktop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a number of important differences when comparing mainframe/workstation systems to the modern notion of cloud computing.
One significant difference is distributing computational problems to a number of concurrent processes on (possibly) distant systems.
Another is that where the mainframe were typically placed close to the workstations, the servers in the cloud can be placed remotely.
A third is that the workstations often were unable to function without access to the mainframe, modern desktops are able to use the advantages of the mainframe/cloud as well as the advantages of an autonomous desktop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823309</id>
	<title>Brought to you by the letter G for Greedy.</title>
	<author>TimeElf1</author>
	<datestamp>1256139360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And how much is this going to cost the end user? Just so we can have realistic clouds? No one looks at the clouds. How about realistic trees instead?</htmltext>
<tokenext>And how much is this going to cost the end user ?
Just so we can have realistic clouds ?
No one looks at the clouds .
How about realistic trees instead ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how much is this going to cost the end user?
Just so we can have realistic clouds?
No one looks at the clouds.
How about realistic trees instead?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823935</id>
	<title>Re:Stupidest idea ever</title>
	<author>im\_thatoneguy</author>
	<datestamp>1256142600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I take it you don't have a render farm.   If you're closer to delivery your render farm is probably completely occupied rendering final frames.  If you are in the middle of a project it's probably running at quarter or half capacity.   A render farm is often either over burdened or under burdened.  That's a situation that's perfect for cloud computing.   Instead of wasting thousands and thousands of dollars in idle machines you simply pay for the time when you need processing power.  And since most of the world won't be rendering simultaneously a shared farm better distributes the investment.   The only challenge now will be asset management and synchronizing a couple of GBs of scene data back and forth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I take it you do n't have a render farm .
If you 're closer to delivery your render farm is probably completely occupied rendering final frames .
If you are in the middle of a project it 's probably running at quarter or half capacity .
A render farm is often either over burdened or under burdened .
That 's a situation that 's perfect for cloud computing .
Instead of wasting thousands and thousands of dollars in idle machines you simply pay for the time when you need processing power .
And since most of the world wo n't be rendering simultaneously a shared farm better distributes the investment .
The only challenge now will be asset management and synchronizing a couple of GBs of scene data back and forth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I take it you don't have a render farm.
If you're closer to delivery your render farm is probably completely occupied rendering final frames.
If you are in the middle of a project it's probably running at quarter or half capacity.
A render farm is often either over burdened or under burdened.
That's a situation that's perfect for cloud computing.
Instead of wasting thousands and thousands of dollars in idle machines you simply pay for the time when you need processing power.
And since most of the world won't be rendering simultaneously a shared farm better distributes the investment.
The only challenge now will be asset management and synchronizing a couple of GBs of scene data back and forth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29828269</id>
	<title>Re:Stupidest idea ever</title>
	<author>poetmatt</author>
	<datestamp>1256117400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>uh, do you not understand the disingenuous statement of misunderstanding what a render farm *is* versus cloud computing?</p><p>If you have a render farm, synchronizing GB's back and forth is obviously not an issue already.</p><p>People have rented out their computing for many many years, just because it's "cloud" doesn't mean it's new or creative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>uh , do you not understand the disingenuous statement of misunderstanding what a render farm * is * versus cloud computing ? If you have a render farm , synchronizing GB 's back and forth is obviously not an issue already.People have rented out their computing for many many years , just because it 's " cloud " does n't mean it 's new or creative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>uh, do you not understand the disingenuous statement of misunderstanding what a render farm *is* versus cloud computing?If you have a render farm, synchronizing GB's back and forth is obviously not an issue already.People have rented out their computing for many many years, just because it's "cloud" doesn't mean it's new or creative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823935</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824357</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1256144460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;It's nothing new, but it haven't been harnesses to do general purpose computing 'till recently.</p><p>That's odd.  I seem to recall use my VAX terminal to "cloud compute" and do general computing (math problems) back in the 80s.  Maybe you think that doesn't count for some reason?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; It 's nothing new , but it have n't been harnesses to do general purpose computing 'till recently.That 's odd .
I seem to recall use my VAX terminal to " cloud compute " and do general computing ( math problems ) back in the 80s .
Maybe you think that does n't count for some reason ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt;It's nothing new, but it haven't been harnesses to do general purpose computing 'till recently.That's odd.
I seem to recall use my VAX terminal to "cloud compute" and do general computing (math problems) back in the 80s.
Maybe you think that doesn't count for some reason?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824305</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1256144280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;these young punks have a huge ego, but no knowledge of computing history. They don't realize that "cloud computing" is merely what we called "mainframes" back in the day.<br>&gt;&gt;&gt;</p><p>What I don't understand, even if these young'uns have no knowledge of history, why do they think cloud computing is a good idea?  Why would they want to offload all the processing onto some distant central computer, when they have a quadruple CPU sitting right here in front of them?  It makes no logical sense.</p><p>My own computer may "only" be a Pentium 4, but it's still about 12,000 times faster than the old 8-bit machine where I used to write book reports.  If that ancient machine could handle the workload than my current computer certainly can - there's no need to connect to some distant mainframe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; these young punks have a huge ego , but no knowledge of computing history .
They do n't realize that " cloud computing " is merely what we called " mainframes " back in the day. &gt; &gt; &gt; What I do n't understand , even if these young'uns have no knowledge of history , why do they think cloud computing is a good idea ?
Why would they want to offload all the processing onto some distant central computer , when they have a quadruple CPU sitting right here in front of them ?
It makes no logical sense.My own computer may " only " be a Pentium 4 , but it 's still about 12,000 times faster than the old 8-bit machine where I used to write book reports .
If that ancient machine could handle the workload than my current computer certainly can - there 's no need to connect to some distant mainframe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt;these young punks have a huge ego, but no knowledge of computing history.
They don't realize that "cloud computing" is merely what we called "mainframes" back in the day.&gt;&gt;&gt;What I don't understand, even if these young'uns have no knowledge of history, why do they think cloud computing is a good idea?
Why would they want to offload all the processing onto some distant central computer, when they have a quadruple CPU sitting right here in front of them?
It makes no logical sense.My own computer may "only" be a Pentium 4, but it's still about 12,000 times faster than the old 8-bit machine where I used to write book reports.
If that ancient machine could handle the workload than my current computer certainly can - there's no need to connect to some distant mainframe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823181</id>
	<title>Your official guide to the Jigaboo presidency</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256138700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger! If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.</p><p>INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.<br>You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model. Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e. chained together. Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever. Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them. This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud. House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape. At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name. Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data. Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger. If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima. Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke. Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes. These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.</p><p>CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGER<br>Owing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords. Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular. However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue. Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much. Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway. Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's). This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boat</p><p>HOUSING YOUR NIGGER.<br>Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars. Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through. The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage. So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers. You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground. Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage. Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now. In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape. As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put. Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.</p><p>FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.<br>Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon. You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it. Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water. Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc. Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day. Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives. He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result. You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained. You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton. You really would. Coffee beans? Don't ask. You have no idea.</p><p>MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.<br>Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind. The nigger's most</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger !
If handled properly , your apeman will give years of valuable , if reluctant , service.INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model .
Field niggers work best in a serial configuration , i.e .
chained together .
Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it , and do n't even think about taking that chain off , ever .
Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them .
This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud .
House niggers work best as standalone units , but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape .
At this stage , your nigger can also be given a name .
Most owners use the same names over and over , since niggers become confused by too much data .
Rufus , Rastus , Remus , Toby , Carslisle , Carlton , Hey-You ! -Yes-you ! , Yeller , Blackstar , and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger .
If your nigger is a ho , it should be called Latrelle , L'Tanya , or Jemima .
Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke .
Pearl , Blossom , and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes .
These names go straight over your nigger 's head , by the way.CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGEROwing to a design error , your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords .
Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - " muh dick " being the most popular .
However , others make barking , yelping , yapping noises and appear to be in some pain , so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger 's tongue .
Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least , you wo n't hear it complaining anywhere near as much .
Niggers have nothing interesting to say , anyway .
Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons ( yours , mine , and that of women , not the nigger 's ) .
This is strongly recommended , and frankly , it 's a mystery why this is not done on the boatHOUSING YOUR NIGGER.Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars .
Make sure , however , that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through .
The rule of thumb is , four niggers per square yard of cage .
So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers .
You can site a nigger cage anywhere , even on soft ground .
Do n't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage .
Niggers never invented the shovel before and they 're not about to now .
In any case , your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape .
As long as the free food holds out , your nigger is living better than it did in Africa , so it will stay put .
Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage , as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.Your Nigger likes fried chicken , corn bread , and watermelon .
You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly does n't deserve it .
Instead , feed it on porridge with salt , and creek water .
Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields , other niggers , etc .
Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat , but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day .
Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer , since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives .
He reports he does n't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result .
You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work , since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained .
You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton .
You really would .
Coffee beans ?
Do n't ask .
You have no idea.MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.Niggers are very , very averse to work of any kind .
The nigger 's most</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger!
If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model.
Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e.
chained together.
Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever.
Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them.
This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud.
House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape.
At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name.
Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data.
Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger.
If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima.
Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke.
Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes.
These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGEROwing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords.
Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular.
However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue.
Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much.
Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway.
Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's).
This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boatHOUSING YOUR NIGGER.Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars.
Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through.
The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage.
So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers.
You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground.
Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage.
Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now.
In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape.
As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put.
Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon.
You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it.
Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water.
Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc.
Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day.
Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives.
He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result.
You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained.
You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton.
You really would.
Coffee beans?
Don't ask.
You have no idea.MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind.
The nigger's most</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823563</id>
	<title>Re:Stupidest idea ever</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256140620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the new name is supposed to be for the specific case of moving traditionally local computing tasks off to farms. Doing a movie on a remote render-farm is hardly cloud computing, but re-encoding your holiday video is.</p><p>Latency aside, my worry is that you're buying a gaming timeshare. It's cheaper to pay for the computing time you actually use, in principle. However online game communities depend on lots of people playing at the same time, which is exactly the sort of thing that would make online gaming uneconomical. Example:</p><p>Somebody's got to pay for the shedloads of hardware.</p><p>If you have six users, and their usage is distributed over the whole day so each is on for 4 hours with no overlap, then you only have to invest in one "virtual games PC" worth of hardware for those six users. You've got six paying customers for an investment in one games PC! Charge them each a quarter of the cost of an up-to-date games machine over a year, and there's your profit margin (you get back 1.5 times the cost of the hardware), and the value for the end user (they only have to pay 0.25 the cost of the hardware).</p><p>If you have six users, and four of them are online at the same time because they're in the US and Western Europe and playing against each other, then you need four "virtual games PCs" worth of hardware to handle that peak demand. The rest of the day, you have two users, sharing the four computers. So over the day you're bringing in an average of three users over four "virtual games PCs" that you've invested in. It's hard to find a way to make that profitable, except having off-peak discounts to try to smooth out the usage patterns.</p><p>I guess what I'm saying is that when it comes to gaming, computing power isn't fungible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the new name is supposed to be for the specific case of moving traditionally local computing tasks off to farms .
Doing a movie on a remote render-farm is hardly cloud computing , but re-encoding your holiday video is.Latency aside , my worry is that you 're buying a gaming timeshare .
It 's cheaper to pay for the computing time you actually use , in principle .
However online game communities depend on lots of people playing at the same time , which is exactly the sort of thing that would make online gaming uneconomical .
Example : Somebody 's got to pay for the shedloads of hardware.If you have six users , and their usage is distributed over the whole day so each is on for 4 hours with no overlap , then you only have to invest in one " virtual games PC " worth of hardware for those six users .
You 've got six paying customers for an investment in one games PC !
Charge them each a quarter of the cost of an up-to-date games machine over a year , and there 's your profit margin ( you get back 1.5 times the cost of the hardware ) , and the value for the end user ( they only have to pay 0.25 the cost of the hardware ) .If you have six users , and four of them are online at the same time because they 're in the US and Western Europe and playing against each other , then you need four " virtual games PCs " worth of hardware to handle that peak demand .
The rest of the day , you have two users , sharing the four computers .
So over the day you 're bringing in an average of three users over four " virtual games PCs " that you 've invested in .
It 's hard to find a way to make that profitable , except having off-peak discounts to try to smooth out the usage patterns.I guess what I 'm saying is that when it comes to gaming , computing power is n't fungible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the new name is supposed to be for the specific case of moving traditionally local computing tasks off to farms.
Doing a movie on a remote render-farm is hardly cloud computing, but re-encoding your holiday video is.Latency aside, my worry is that you're buying a gaming timeshare.
It's cheaper to pay for the computing time you actually use, in principle.
However online game communities depend on lots of people playing at the same time, which is exactly the sort of thing that would make online gaming uneconomical.
Example:Somebody's got to pay for the shedloads of hardware.If you have six users, and their usage is distributed over the whole day so each is on for 4 hours with no overlap, then you only have to invest in one "virtual games PC" worth of hardware for those six users.
You've got six paying customers for an investment in one games PC!
Charge them each a quarter of the cost of an up-to-date games machine over a year, and there's your profit margin (you get back 1.5 times the cost of the hardware), and the value for the end user (they only have to pay 0.25 the cost of the hardware).If you have six users, and four of them are online at the same time because they're in the US and Western Europe and playing against each other, then you need four "virtual games PCs" worth of hardware to handle that peak demand.
The rest of the day, you have two users, sharing the four computers.
So over the day you're bringing in an average of three users over four "virtual games PCs" that you've invested in.
It's hard to find a way to make that profitable, except having off-peak discounts to try to smooth out the usage patterns.I guess what I'm saying is that when it comes to gaming, computing power isn't fungible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823233</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</id>
	<title>No more!!</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1256139180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please stop talking about "cloud" computing -- it is one of the dumbest buzzwords I have ever heard in my entire life -- not to mention the fact that it is a totally meaningless term.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please stop talking about " cloud " computing -- it is one of the dumbest buzzwords I have ever heard in my entire life -- not to mention the fact that it is a totally meaningless term .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please stop talking about "cloud" computing -- it is one of the dumbest buzzwords I have ever heard in my entire life -- not to mention the fact that it is a totally meaningless term.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823177</id>
	<title>Ouch!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256138700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This story caused me to poor hot grits down my pants.  Natalie Portman wasn't involved.</p><p>Thank you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This story caused me to poor hot grits down my pants .
Natalie Portman was n't involved.Thank you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story caused me to poor hot grits down my pants.
Natalie Portman wasn't involved.Thank you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823537</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>glop</author>
	<datestamp>1256140500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am not that sure actually. It's not very well defined and different people use it differently, sometimes with a marketing agenda.<br>But it also conveys some property quite clearly:<br>
&nbsp; - cloud computing is not precisely located and you don't really care<br>
&nbsp; - it's not happening in your home<br>
&nbsp; - it's everywhere or almost<br>
&nbsp; - it's out of your control (others may access it without your knowledge etc.)<br>
&nbsp; - it can disappear and be unavailable anytime (just like real clouds<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>The previous terms were not bad either, but the market made them more precise. For instance, there was Grid computing: it's always a cluster inside a company that provides centralized computing power for embarassingly parallel problems. The original idea was that it would be like the electrical grid and you would just send your problems to the computing grid and they would go wherever there was an excess supply of computing power. Very cloud-like actually...</p><p>I don't think the term is useless and I actually think it's nice to change the buzzwords every so often...</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not that sure actually .
It 's not very well defined and different people use it differently , sometimes with a marketing agenda.But it also conveys some property quite clearly :   - cloud computing is not precisely located and you do n't really care   - it 's not happening in your home   - it 's everywhere or almost   - it 's out of your control ( others may access it without your knowledge etc .
)   - it can disappear and be unavailable anytime ( just like real clouds ; - ) The previous terms were not bad either , but the market made them more precise .
For instance , there was Grid computing : it 's always a cluster inside a company that provides centralized computing power for embarassingly parallel problems .
The original idea was that it would be like the electrical grid and you would just send your problems to the computing grid and they would go wherever there was an excess supply of computing power .
Very cloud-like actually...I do n't think the term is useless and I actually think it 's nice to change the buzzwords every so often.. .  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not that sure actually.
It's not very well defined and different people use it differently, sometimes with a marketing agenda.But it also conveys some property quite clearly:
  - cloud computing is not precisely located and you don't really care
  - it's not happening in your home
  - it's everywhere or almost
  - it's out of your control (others may access it without your knowledge etc.
)
  - it can disappear and be unavailable anytime (just like real clouds ;-)The previous terms were not bad either, but the market made them more precise.
For instance, there was Grid computing: it's always a cluster inside a company that provides centralized computing power for embarassingly parallel problems.
The original idea was that it would be like the electrical grid and you would just send your problems to the computing grid and they would go wherever there was an excess supply of computing power.
Very cloud-like actually...I don't think the term is useless and I actually think it's nice to change the buzzwords every so often...
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29837713</id>
	<title>Re:No more!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256237160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Please stop talking about "cloud" computing -- it is one of the dumbest buzzwords I have ever heard in my entire life -- not to mention the fact that it is a totally meaningless term.</p></div><p>No it's not meaningless. That's like saying that if I have an application that creates a specific output, and someone writes a service that does the same thing that the service is useless along with all services because we already have applications. The service is hardware agnostic. It can run on any platform an still produce results. The same applies here.</p><p>Why cluster an instance of SQL for that matter?! Who needs all that redundancy and security? Freakin losers! (sarcasm)</p><p>A cloud is a computing model served to you from a widely redundant hardware and network subsystem, often employing virtualized applications, servers, or appliances to accomplish this. It's not the same old thing revisited. It is far more dynamic and the fact that you barely understand it doesn't make it useless.</p><p>reinforce your geek cred, use google, and figure this crap out before you chime in on the subject.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please stop talking about " cloud " computing -- it is one of the dumbest buzzwords I have ever heard in my entire life -- not to mention the fact that it is a totally meaningless term.No it 's not meaningless .
That 's like saying that if I have an application that creates a specific output , and someone writes a service that does the same thing that the service is useless along with all services because we already have applications .
The service is hardware agnostic .
It can run on any platform an still produce results .
The same applies here.Why cluster an instance of SQL for that matter ? !
Who needs all that redundancy and security ?
Freakin losers !
( sarcasm ) A cloud is a computing model served to you from a widely redundant hardware and network subsystem , often employing virtualized applications , servers , or appliances to accomplish this .
It 's not the same old thing revisited .
It is far more dynamic and the fact that you barely understand it does n't make it useless.reinforce your geek cred , use google , and figure this crap out before you chime in on the subject .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please stop talking about "cloud" computing -- it is one of the dumbest buzzwords I have ever heard in my entire life -- not to mention the fact that it is a totally meaningless term.No it's not meaningless.
That's like saying that if I have an application that creates a specific output, and someone writes a service that does the same thing that the service is useless along with all services because we already have applications.
The service is hardware agnostic.
It can run on any platform an still produce results.
The same applies here.Why cluster an instance of SQL for that matter?!
Who needs all that redundancy and security?
Freakin losers!
(sarcasm)A cloud is a computing model served to you from a widely redundant hardware and network subsystem, often employing virtualized applications, servers, or appliances to accomplish this.
It's not the same old thing revisited.
It is far more dynamic and the fact that you barely understand it doesn't make it useless.reinforce your geek cred, use google, and figure this crap out before you chime in on the subject.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823315
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29828889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29827961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823233
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29825001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29837713
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29825485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823207
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29828157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29828269
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823233
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29835189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823233
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823315
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1354224_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29841937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1354224.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823215
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1354224.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823309
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1354224.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823339
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1354224.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823533
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823935
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29828269
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29827961
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823563
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824963
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1354224.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823207
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823349
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1354224.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823181
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1354224.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823315
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824471
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824681
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1354224.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823275
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29825001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29828157
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29837713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823413
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824305
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824777
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29835189
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824017
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29825485
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29841937
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823817
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823477
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823839
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29824357
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29828889
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823519
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1354224.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1354224.29823313
</commentlist>
</conversation>
