<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_22_2315250</id>
	<title>HTC Finally Releases Hero Source Code</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1256210220000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"After months of prodding by developers, HTC has <a href="http://www.phonenews.com/htc-releases-hero-source-code-for-developers-9308/">finally released the long-requested Android source code</a> for the HTC Hero. This follows up on a  recent report on Slashdot concerning device manufacturer HTC's  <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/10/16/1720224/HTC-Dragging-Feet-On-GPL-Source-Release-For-Hero-Phone">perceived stonewalling over releasing source code</a> for the device after repeated attempts to initially obtain source were met with vague responses."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " After months of prodding by developers , HTC has finally released the long-requested Android source code for the HTC Hero .
This follows up on a recent report on Slashdot concerning device manufacturer HTC 's perceived stonewalling over releasing source code for the device after repeated attempts to initially obtain source were met with vague responses .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "After months of prodding by developers, HTC has finally released the long-requested Android source code for the HTC Hero.
This follows up on a  recent report on Slashdot concerning device manufacturer HTC's  perceived stonewalling over releasing source code for the device after repeated attempts to initially obtain source were met with vague responses.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842489</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256227020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Believe it or not, one single phone could bring down an entire tower!"</p><p>I call shenanigans! If this were true at all, then terrorists or whatever we're currently supposed to be afraid of would have done it already, and we'd know about it. Some Nokias and an eeprom burner are pretty cheap, although I'm not sure if H1N1 has hands yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Believe it or not , one single phone could bring down an entire tower !
" I call shenanigans !
If this were true at all , then terrorists or whatever we 're currently supposed to be afraid of would have done it already , and we 'd know about it .
Some Nokias and an eeprom burner are pretty cheap , although I 'm not sure if H1N1 has hands yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Believe it or not, one single phone could bring down an entire tower!
"I call shenanigans!
If this were true at all, then terrorists or whatever we're currently supposed to be afraid of would have done it already, and we'd know about it.
Some Nokias and an eeprom burner are pretty cheap, although I'm not sure if H1N1 has hands yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842993</id>
	<title>Edimax</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1256235300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a look at a company who does things differently, have a look at Edimax. For example, for their <a href="http://www.edimax.com/en/produce\_detail.php?pd\_id=272&amp;pl1\_id=18&amp;pl2\_id=75" title="edimax.com">NS-2502 NAS appliance</a> [edimax.com], they provide a link to the source code right on the product page.</p><p>Unfortunately, the source code doesn't come with instructions for compiling it into a firmware package that you can install on the device, but then, it doesn't look like the GPL actually mandates that, either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a look at a company who does things differently , have a look at Edimax .
For example , for their NS-2502 NAS appliance [ edimax.com ] , they provide a link to the source code right on the product page.Unfortunately , the source code does n't come with instructions for compiling it into a firmware package that you can install on the device , but then , it does n't look like the GPL actually mandates that , either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a look at a company who does things differently, have a look at Edimax.
For example, for their NS-2502 NAS appliance [edimax.com], they provide a link to the source code right on the product page.Unfortunately, the source code doesn't come with instructions for compiling it into a firmware package that you can install on the device, but then, it doesn't look like the GPL actually mandates that, either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842417</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Ungrounded Lightning</author>
	<datestamp>1256226180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>... anyone who didn't ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO have a iPhone would be with [Verizon] due to network strength.</i></p><p>I'd have been with them since 2000 or so, when I first needed a cellphone, if they'd just put in ONE MORE TOWER.  My Nevada place is on AT&amp;T's LAST tower in the outskirts of the Reno-Taho/Carson City/Minden-Gardnerville/southbound-US395 coverage area and Verizon's last TWO towers are behind TWO hills and don't cover the valley.  B-b</p><p>Sprint/Clearwire could have a bunch of customers, too, if they'd just put in a couple hotspots to relay from their Gardnerville tower to this dead spot.  Right now all it's got is slow dialup (28k) and a mom-and-pop WiFi WISP(at $85ish/month to share a pair of T1s with several towns).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... anyone who did n't ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO have a iPhone would be with [ Verizon ] due to network strength.I 'd have been with them since 2000 or so , when I first needed a cellphone , if they 'd just put in ONE MORE TOWER .
My Nevada place is on AT&amp;T 's LAST tower in the outskirts of the Reno-Taho/Carson City/Minden-Gardnerville/southbound-US395 coverage area and Verizon 's last TWO towers are behind TWO hills and do n't cover the valley .
B-bSprint/Clearwire could have a bunch of customers , too , if they 'd just put in a couple hotspots to relay from their Gardnerville tower to this dead spot .
Right now all it 's got is slow dialup ( 28k ) and a mom-and-pop WiFi WISP ( at $ 85ish/month to share a pair of T1s with several towns ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... anyone who didn't ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO have a iPhone would be with [Verizon] due to network strength.I'd have been with them since 2000 or so, when I first needed a cellphone, if they'd just put in ONE MORE TOWER.
My Nevada place is on AT&amp;T's LAST tower in the outskirts of the Reno-Taho/Carson City/Minden-Gardnerville/southbound-US395 coverage area and Verizon's last TWO towers are behind TWO hills and don't cover the valley.
B-bSprint/Clearwire could have a bunch of customers, too, if they'd just put in a couple hotspots to relay from their Gardnerville tower to this dead spot.
Right now all it's got is slow dialup (28k) and a mom-and-pop WiFi WISP(at $85ish/month to share a pair of T1s with several towns).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256223240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you mean the that the main reason for this is bad network design.</p><p>If one single phone could do that then their engineering dept needs to be fired.<br>Imagine if computer networks worked this way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you mean the that the main reason for this is bad network design.If one single phone could do that then their engineering dept needs to be fired.Imagine if computer networks worked this way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you mean the that the main reason for this is bad network design.If one single phone could do that then their engineering dept needs to be fired.Imagine if computer networks worked this way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841607</id>
	<title>Nice</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1256215500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, I know, they were supposed to, by law. But they at least didn't drag their feet too long, and deserve some kudos for choosing an open-source platform to begin with.</p><p>What, if any, is the (physical or otherwise) obstacle for this device to become a hacker's darling? Here "hacker" is used in that old, positive meaning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , I know , they were supposed to , by law .
But they at least did n't drag their feet too long , and deserve some kudos for choosing an open-source platform to begin with.What , if any , is the ( physical or otherwise ) obstacle for this device to become a hacker 's darling ?
Here " hacker " is used in that old , positive meaning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, I know, they were supposed to, by law.
But they at least didn't drag their feet too long, and deserve some kudos for choosing an open-source platform to begin with.What, if any, is the (physical or otherwise) obstacle for this device to become a hacker's darling?
Here "hacker" is used in that old, positive meaning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29848019</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>Stupendoussteve</author>
	<datestamp>1256322000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All that they released was the linux kernel, version 2.6.27, along with their modifications to it. This is both not locked down (it can't be, they have to release what they shipped) and the kernel alone is not going to suddenly let you break the network.</p><p>Aside from that, the rest of Android from the HTC Hero is kept to themselves, as the license allows. The article title and article itself are very badly labeled, this is not the Android source code. Releasing this does not magically allow you to mess with the OS on the HTC Hero. It doesn't even allow you to build the Sense UI for another platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All that they released was the linux kernel , version 2.6.27 , along with their modifications to it .
This is both not locked down ( it ca n't be , they have to release what they shipped ) and the kernel alone is not going to suddenly let you break the network.Aside from that , the rest of Android from the HTC Hero is kept to themselves , as the license allows .
The article title and article itself are very badly labeled , this is not the Android source code .
Releasing this does not magically allow you to mess with the OS on the HTC Hero .
It does n't even allow you to build the Sense UI for another platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All that they released was the linux kernel, version 2.6.27, along with their modifications to it.
This is both not locked down (it can't be, they have to release what they shipped) and the kernel alone is not going to suddenly let you break the network.Aside from that, the rest of Android from the HTC Hero is kept to themselves, as the license allows.
The article title and article itself are very badly labeled, this is not the Android source code.
Releasing this does not magically allow you to mess with the OS on the HTC Hero.
It doesn't even allow you to build the Sense UI for another platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842523</id>
	<title>If I told you, I'd have to kill you ...</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1256227560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you promise not to tell anyone, I'll let you in on <a href="http://www.google.com/" title="google.com">this secret source of information</a> [google.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you promise not to tell anyone , I 'll let you in on this secret source of information [ google.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you promise not to tell anyone, I'll let you in on this secret source of information [google.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841415</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29846207</id>
	<title>RE:. the  first iphone must have failed tasting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256313660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>remember how they were killing at&amp;t's network, when they first came out... some sort of bug that would suddenly overwhelm the tower with spurious packets....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>remember how they were killing at&amp;t 's network , when they first came out... some sort of bug that would suddenly overwhelm the tower with spurious packets... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>remember how they were killing at&amp;t's network, when they first came out... some sort of bug that would suddenly overwhelm the tower with spurious packets....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681</id>
	<title>Re:Not so bad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256216040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm assuming good faith, but personally, I'm not concerned that it took so long to release the source code. Most likely, the developers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... had to postpone lower-priority tasks to meet that deadline.</p></div><p>You think that meeting legal requirements is a low priority task? And that pirating free software goes with good faith?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm assuming good faith , but personally , I 'm not concerned that it took so long to release the source code .
Most likely , the developers ... had to postpone lower-priority tasks to meet that deadline.You think that meeting legal requirements is a low priority task ?
And that pirating free software goes with good faith ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm assuming good faith, but personally, I'm not concerned that it took so long to release the source code.
Most likely, the developers ... had to postpone lower-priority tasks to meet that deadline.You think that meeting legal requirements is a low priority task?
And that pirating free software goes with good faith?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843513</id>
	<title>Re:Not so bad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256331480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>please please PLEASE don't call that pirating. Just as downloading something shouldn't be made worse by using a scary name, so shouldn't license violations.</p><p>Yes, they should've complied right from the start. Yes, GPL violations are very bad.</p><p>But don't go calling them pirates, if you do you're no better than the MAFIAAs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>please please PLEASE do n't call that pirating .
Just as downloading something should n't be made worse by using a scary name , so should n't license violations.Yes , they should 've complied right from the start .
Yes , GPL violations are very bad.But do n't go calling them pirates , if you do you 're no better than the MAFIAAs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>please please PLEASE don't call that pirating.
Just as downloading something shouldn't be made worse by using a scary name, so shouldn't license violations.Yes, they should've complied right from the start.
Yes, GPL violations are very bad.But don't go calling them pirates, if you do you're no better than the MAFIAAs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841849</id>
	<title>Code cleanup</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256218200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They were probably stalling for time while they read over the source code to remove all the swear words and personal attacks against coworkers...</p><p>=Smidge=</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They were probably stalling for time while they read over the source code to remove all the swear words and personal attacks against coworkers... = Smidge =</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were probably stalling for time while they read over the source code to remove all the swear words and personal attacks against coworkers...=Smidge=</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841927</id>
	<title>Re:Code cleanup</title>
	<author>dbc</author>
	<datestamp>1256219640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who knows if that was truly the case here, but I can believe that it applies in some cases.  Grown-up programmers don't put that slosh in the comments to begin with.  Sadly, you see a fair amount of that in close-source code.  Less than in the old days, but still too much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who knows if that was truly the case here , but I can believe that it applies in some cases .
Grown-up programmers do n't put that slosh in the comments to begin with .
Sadly , you see a fair amount of that in close-source code .
Less than in the old days , but still too much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who knows if that was truly the case here, but I can believe that it applies in some cases.
Grown-up programmers don't put that slosh in the comments to begin with.
Sadly, you see a fair amount of that in close-source code.
Less than in the old days, but still too much.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844813</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1256305320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you nuts?  only with maybe a 1000 watt transmitter blasting across the band on a high gain antenna directly at the cell tower.  There is no way in hell you or anyone else can modify a callphone to jam a tower. hell good luck even jamming a single channel with your tiny power output on a handset..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you nuts ?
only with maybe a 1000 watt transmitter blasting across the band on a high gain antenna directly at the cell tower .
There is no way in hell you or anyone else can modify a callphone to jam a tower .
hell good luck even jamming a single channel with your tiny power output on a handset. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you nuts?
only with maybe a 1000 watt transmitter blasting across the band on a high gain antenna directly at the cell tower.
There is no way in hell you or anyone else can modify a callphone to jam a tower.
hell good luck even jamming a single channel with your tiny power output on a handset..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843503</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256331120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The carrier must be able to count on your phone acting in a predetermined way in order to keep the network on the air. Believe it or not, one single phone could bring down an entire tower!</p></div><p>Then this is a shocking vulnerability that should be fixed.  Hiding the code from the user is a half-arsed hack around it - sooner or later, it's going to happen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The carrier must be able to count on your phone acting in a predetermined way in order to keep the network on the air .
Believe it or not , one single phone could bring down an entire tower ! Then this is a shocking vulnerability that should be fixed .
Hiding the code from the user is a half-arsed hack around it - sooner or later , it 's going to happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The carrier must be able to count on your phone acting in a predetermined way in order to keep the network on the air.
Believe it or not, one single phone could bring down an entire tower!Then this is a shocking vulnerability that should be fixed.
Hiding the code from the user is a half-arsed hack around it - sooner or later, it's going to happen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841507</id>
	<title>Re:HTC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256214600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know, but I hope it includes a grammar checker!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know , but I hope it includes a grammar checker !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know, but I hope it includes a grammar checker!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841415</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842149</id>
	<title>Re:Not so bad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256222940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll keep their low priority to license agreements in mind when they start trying to enforce EULAs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll keep their low priority to license agreements in mind when they start trying to enforce EULAs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll keep their low priority to license agreements in mind when they start trying to enforce EULAs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844393</id>
	<title>Re:Not so bad...</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256301780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It was never a "legal requirement". It's Apache licenced, so changes to the original (available) Android source don't have to be added back in. It's to encourage commercial devs to develop "exclusives" like the HTC Sense features. Noncommercials are free to release the source on their modifications, but it's not an obligation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was never a " legal requirement " .
It 's Apache licenced , so changes to the original ( available ) Android source do n't have to be added back in .
It 's to encourage commercial devs to develop " exclusives " like the HTC Sense features .
Noncommercials are free to release the source on their modifications , but it 's not an obligation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was never a "legal requirement".
It's Apache licenced, so changes to the original (available) Android source don't have to be added back in.
It's to encourage commercial devs to develop "exclusives" like the HTC Sense features.
Noncommercials are free to release the source on their modifications, but it's not an obligation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844811</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>dlgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1256305320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To be fair, a transmitter you can fit in your pocket can "take down" (block) cell service for a pretty decently sized area around it. Jamming, RFI, etc are pretty much unavoidable in any RF based system. You can mitigate them to some extent, but there's pretty much no way any network architecture can prevent me from taking down an area of service with a strong enough jammer.<br> <br>
Cell phones can also jam each other with bad programming (hence the required testing) if they do things like transmit in the wrong timeslot (GSM) or with the wrong hamming codes (CDMA). Because the "wire" interface is RF, there are all kinds of ways for a phone with a bad radio to interfere with all the phones on the tower.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To be fair , a transmitter you can fit in your pocket can " take down " ( block ) cell service for a pretty decently sized area around it .
Jamming , RFI , etc are pretty much unavoidable in any RF based system .
You can mitigate them to some extent , but there 's pretty much no way any network architecture can prevent me from taking down an area of service with a strong enough jammer .
Cell phones can also jam each other with bad programming ( hence the required testing ) if they do things like transmit in the wrong timeslot ( GSM ) or with the wrong hamming codes ( CDMA ) .
Because the " wire " interface is RF , there are all kinds of ways for a phone with a bad radio to interfere with all the phones on the tower .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be fair, a transmitter you can fit in your pocket can "take down" (block) cell service for a pretty decently sized area around it.
Jamming, RFI, etc are pretty much unavoidable in any RF based system.
You can mitigate them to some extent, but there's pretty much no way any network architecture can prevent me from taking down an area of service with a strong enough jammer.
Cell phones can also jam each other with bad programming (hence the required testing) if they do things like transmit in the wrong timeslot (GSM) or with the wrong hamming codes (CDMA).
Because the "wire" interface is RF, there are all kinds of ways for a phone with a bad radio to interfere with all the phones on the tower.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842951</id>
	<title>Re:Not so bad...</title>
	<author>Sarten-X</author>
	<datestamp>1256234340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it's not so much that the "legal product" aspect is low priority, but as mentioned above, simply pushed too far back. There is a fair amount work involved in preparing source code for public release. It has to be retrieved from wherever it's stored (which may be distributed), cleaned of any sensitive information, separated from what isn't going to be released (data files, compilation scripts, etc.), packaged, and finally placed in a public location. I simply doubt that with all the pressure involved in a project like this, that process was a high priority. The fact is that 90\% or more of the target market doesn't care about the source, but they would care about having the release date pushed back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's not so much that the " legal product " aspect is low priority , but as mentioned above , simply pushed too far back .
There is a fair amount work involved in preparing source code for public release .
It has to be retrieved from wherever it 's stored ( which may be distributed ) , cleaned of any sensitive information , separated from what is n't going to be released ( data files , compilation scripts , etc .
) , packaged , and finally placed in a public location .
I simply doubt that with all the pressure involved in a project like this , that process was a high priority .
The fact is that 90 \ % or more of the target market does n't care about the source , but they would care about having the release date pushed back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's not so much that the "legal product" aspect is low priority, but as mentioned above, simply pushed too far back.
There is a fair amount work involved in preparing source code for public release.
It has to be retrieved from wherever it's stored (which may be distributed), cleaned of any sensitive information, separated from what isn't going to be released (data files, compilation scripts, etc.
), packaged, and finally placed in a public location.
I simply doubt that with all the pressure involved in a project like this, that process was a high priority.
The fact is that 90\% or more of the target market doesn't care about the source, but they would care about having the release date pushed back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841873</id>
	<title>Re:Not so bad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256218740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes to coders, legal requirements is a lower task than creating a quality product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes to coders , legal requirements is a lower task than creating a quality product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes to coders, legal requirements is a lower task than creating a quality product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842843</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1256232840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>``The carrier must be able to count on your phone acting in a predetermined way in order to keep the network on the air. Believe it or not, one single phone could bring down an entire tower!''</p><p>If that is true, I foresee Interesting Times. There are always<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... individuals<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... who think it's great fun to break things, not to mention people who actively seek to do harm<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>` ` The carrier must be able to count on your phone acting in a predetermined way in order to keep the network on the air .
Believe it or not , one single phone could bring down an entire tower !
''If that is true , I foresee Interesting Times .
There are always ... individuals ... who think it 's great fun to break things , not to mention people who actively seek to do harm .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>``The carrier must be able to count on your phone acting in a predetermined way in order to keep the network on the air.
Believe it or not, one single phone could bring down an entire tower!
''If that is true, I foresee Interesting Times.
There are always ... individuals ... who think it's great fun to break things, not to mention people who actively seek to do harm ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842533</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>bushing</author>
	<datestamp>1256227680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A major complication is the fact that today's PDA phones are basically cellular winmodems. [...] In contrast, the humble i300 was literally a cell phone radio bolted to a PalmOS PDA, connected by LITERALLY a serial port.</p><p>[...]As I understand it, a phone running Android (or Windows Mobile, for that matter) is kind of like a PC running Linux under VMware under Windows (or vice-versa). </p></div><p>This is not true, at least not in the case of the iPhone (which has an Infineon baseband processor connected to a Samsung "Applications Processor" by "LITERALLY a serial port") or the Palm Pre (Qualcomm baseband, TI OMAP AP).
</p><p>
Qualcomm's product info page for the <a href="http://www.qctconnect.com/products/msm\_7201.html" title="qctconnect.com">MSM7201</a> [qctconnect.com] processor used in the HTC Hero says that it includes "Integrated ARM11 applications processor and ARM9 modem, QDSP4000 and QDSP5000 high-performance digital signal processors (DSP)".  It would seem likely that the ARM9 core (in combination with one or both of the DSPs) does all of the modem work; I see no reason to suspect that the ARM11 ever "steals cycles from cpu #1".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A major complication is the fact that today 's PDA phones are basically cellular winmodems .
[ ... ] In contrast , the humble i300 was literally a cell phone radio bolted to a PalmOS PDA , connected by LITERALLY a serial port. [ .. .
] As I understand it , a phone running Android ( or Windows Mobile , for that matter ) is kind of like a PC running Linux under VMware under Windows ( or vice-versa ) .
This is not true , at least not in the case of the iPhone ( which has an Infineon baseband processor connected to a Samsung " Applications Processor " by " LITERALLY a serial port " ) or the Palm Pre ( Qualcomm baseband , TI OMAP AP ) .
Qualcomm 's product info page for the MSM7201 [ qctconnect.com ] processor used in the HTC Hero says that it includes " Integrated ARM11 applications processor and ARM9 modem , QDSP4000 and QDSP5000 high-performance digital signal processors ( DSP ) " .
It would seem likely that the ARM9 core ( in combination with one or both of the DSPs ) does all of the modem work ; I see no reason to suspect that the ARM11 ever " steals cycles from cpu # 1 " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A major complication is the fact that today's PDA phones are basically cellular winmodems.
[...] In contrast, the humble i300 was literally a cell phone radio bolted to a PalmOS PDA, connected by LITERALLY a serial port.[...
]As I understand it, a phone running Android (or Windows Mobile, for that matter) is kind of like a PC running Linux under VMware under Windows (or vice-versa).
This is not true, at least not in the case of the iPhone (which has an Infineon baseband processor connected to a Samsung "Applications Processor" by "LITERALLY a serial port") or the Palm Pre (Qualcomm baseband, TI OMAP AP).
Qualcomm's product info page for the MSM7201 [qctconnect.com] processor used in the HTC Hero says that it includes "Integrated ARM11 applications processor and ARM9 modem, QDSP4000 and QDSP5000 high-performance digital signal processors (DSP)".
It would seem likely that the ARM9 core (in combination with one or both of the DSPs) does all of the modem work; I see no reason to suspect that the ARM11 ever "steals cycles from cpu #1".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841977</id>
	<title>not android source code</title>
	<author>wcoenen</author>
	<datestamp>1256220180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is not actually about android source code as the summary says. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android\_(operating\_system)#Licensing" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Android source code is distributed under the Apache License</a> [wikipedia.org], which doesn't require you to "give back" modifications to the open source community.

This is just about the GPL-ed part: the linux kernel.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not actually about android source code as the summary says .
Android source code is distributed under the Apache License [ wikipedia.org ] , which does n't require you to " give back " modifications to the open source community .
This is just about the GPL-ed part : the linux kernel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not actually about android source code as the summary says.
Android source code is distributed under the Apache License [wikipedia.org], which doesn't require you to "give back" modifications to the open source community.
This is just about the GPL-ed part: the linux kernel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842201</id>
	<title>Re:Not so bad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256223840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wah wah wah</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wah wah wah</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wah wah wah</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841691</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256216040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't believe Verizon will FINALLY have a phone which can legitimately be decrippled.  Maybe they won't even try to cripple it at all.   Too bad too, because if Verizon gave up on that little game, anyone who didn't ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO have a iPhone would be with them due to network strength.  Let's hope the dust clears within the next 1 month and 1 week when my AT&amp;T contract finally expires.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't believe Verizon will FINALLY have a phone which can legitimately be decrippled .
Maybe they wo n't even try to cripple it at all .
Too bad too , because if Verizon gave up on that little game , anyone who did n't ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO have a iPhone would be with them due to network strength .
Let 's hope the dust clears within the next 1 month and 1 week when my AT&amp;T contract finally expires .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't believe Verizon will FINALLY have a phone which can legitimately be decrippled.
Maybe they won't even try to cripple it at all.
Too bad too, because if Verizon gave up on that little game, anyone who didn't ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO have a iPhone would be with them due to network strength.
Let's hope the dust clears within the next 1 month and 1 week when my AT&amp;T contract finally expires.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842577</id>
	<title>It's not pirating if the intent is good</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1256228400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>You think that meeting legal requirements is a low priority task?</i></p><p>That depends on who might sue you.  Certainly to technical people it would generally be a low priority, and even to business managers anxious to get something out in the market and revenue going.  The company lawyers don't win every battle you know.</p><p><i>And that pirating free software goes with good faith?</i></p><p>It's not pirating if the intent is to comply.  Just like it's not really pirating if you truly download media with intent to review.</p><p>In other words, cut people some slack - generally they mean well, and in this case specifically they obviously meant well since they complied fully.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You think that meeting legal requirements is a low priority task ? That depends on who might sue you .
Certainly to technical people it would generally be a low priority , and even to business managers anxious to get something out in the market and revenue going .
The company lawyers do n't win every battle you know.And that pirating free software goes with good faith ? It 's not pirating if the intent is to comply .
Just like it 's not really pirating if you truly download media with intent to review.In other words , cut people some slack - generally they mean well , and in this case specifically they obviously meant well since they complied fully .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You think that meeting legal requirements is a low priority task?That depends on who might sue you.
Certainly to technical people it would generally be a low priority, and even to business managers anxious to get something out in the market and revenue going.
The company lawyers don't win every battle you know.And that pirating free software goes with good faith?It's not pirating if the intent is to comply.
Just like it's not really pirating if you truly download media with intent to review.In other words, cut people some slack - generally they mean well, and in this case specifically they obviously meant well since they complied fully.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842973</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1256234820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All your points are valid, but they don't negate the fact that if you use code under a license that requires you to make your code or modifications available to those you distribute the binaries to, you have to abide by the terms of the license and do so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All your points are valid , but they do n't negate the fact that if you use code under a license that requires you to make your code or modifications available to those you distribute the binaries to , you have to abide by the terms of the license and do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All your points are valid, but they don't negate the fact that if you use code under a license that requires you to make your code or modifications available to those you distribute the binaries to, you have to abide by the terms of the license and do so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842063</id>
	<title>Re:Not so bad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256221620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it's most likely because they are Chinese (Taiwanese, same thing) and don't give a shit about open source anything. Having worked with Chinese and Taiwanese OEMs, I can tell you firsthand that getting them to abide by any open source licensing is like pulling teeth. If it's free to download, it's free to use however they like, period.</p><p>Posting anon because naive politically-correct types with zero Asian development experience will mod me down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it 's most likely because they are Chinese ( Taiwanese , same thing ) and do n't give a shit about open source anything .
Having worked with Chinese and Taiwanese OEMs , I can tell you firsthand that getting them to abide by any open source licensing is like pulling teeth .
If it 's free to download , it 's free to use however they like , period.Posting anon because naive politically-correct types with zero Asian development experience will mod me down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it's most likely because they are Chinese (Taiwanese, same thing) and don't give a shit about open source anything.
Having worked with Chinese and Taiwanese OEMs, I can tell you firsthand that getting them to abide by any open source licensing is like pulling teeth.
If it's free to download, it's free to use however they like, period.Posting anon because naive politically-correct types with zero Asian development experience will mod me down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844787</id>
	<title>Not the game</title>
	<author>1s44c</author>
	<datestamp>1256305200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did they have to make it sound like they released the source code to the classic game?</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.E.R.O" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.E.R.O</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did they have to make it sound like they released the source code to the classic game ? http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.E.R.O [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did they have to make it sound like they released the source code to the classic game?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.E.R.O [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843991</id>
	<title>Re:Not so bad...</title>
	<author>twoblink</author>
	<datestamp>1256296440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone currently in Taiwan and who's worked for dozens of IT companies..</p><p>In asia,  "Copyright = Right to Copy".  PERIOD.  Taiwanese don't even respect their own lives, just look at the traffic!!  Let alone respect laws.  There's a reason why the former president if Taiwan is in Jail for life.  Respecting GPL or any of that "nonsense" is not for the Taiwanese..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone currently in Taiwan and who 's worked for dozens of IT companies..In asia , " Copyright = Right to Copy " .
PERIOD. Taiwanese do n't even respect their own lives , just look at the traffic ! !
Let alone respect laws .
There 's a reason why the former president if Taiwan is in Jail for life .
Respecting GPL or any of that " nonsense " is not for the Taiwanese. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone currently in Taiwan and who's worked for dozens of IT companies..In asia,  "Copyright = Right to Copy".
PERIOD.  Taiwanese don't even respect their own lives, just look at the traffic!!
Let alone respect laws.
There's a reason why the former president if Taiwan is in Jail for life.
Respecting GPL or any of that "nonsense" is not for the Taiwanese..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842063</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842389</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>lordlod</author>
	<datestamp>1256225820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The good thing about Winmodem-like cellphones is... um... er... uh... well, I'm sure there's something good about it.</p></div><p>
It's <b>cheaper</b>.  Cost is the God in consumer electronics upon which everything else is sacrificed.  The could be saving up to $5 per phone doing it this way.  Ship 20 million phones and that's $100 million dollars in the bank.  The effort made in consumer electronics to save four cents (over 10 million units) would probably make your head spin.
</p><p>
The difference in the two approaches isn't as much as you are making out to be.  The dedicated radio chip is still running a microprocessor written in software.  By combining the two processors in the single package you save cost and space (more cost).
</p><p>
The major downside to this is debugging the radio processing where it's interfered with by other actions on the phone, having two cores probably helps a lot with this.  That said, assigning three engineers full time for a year to figure it out is trivial compared to the savings you get.
</p><p>
(I spent a year of my life fixing a 'creative' electronic circuit that saved us 8 cents per board).
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The good thing about Winmodem-like cellphones is... um... er... uh... well , I 'm sure there 's something good about it .
It 's cheaper .
Cost is the God in consumer electronics upon which everything else is sacrificed .
The could be saving up to $ 5 per phone doing it this way .
Ship 20 million phones and that 's $ 100 million dollars in the bank .
The effort made in consumer electronics to save four cents ( over 10 million units ) would probably make your head spin .
The difference in the two approaches is n't as much as you are making out to be .
The dedicated radio chip is still running a microprocessor written in software .
By combining the two processors in the single package you save cost and space ( more cost ) .
The major downside to this is debugging the radio processing where it 's interfered with by other actions on the phone , having two cores probably helps a lot with this .
That said , assigning three engineers full time for a year to figure it out is trivial compared to the savings you get .
( I spent a year of my life fixing a 'creative ' electronic circuit that saved us 8 cents per board ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The good thing about Winmodem-like cellphones is... um... er... uh... well, I'm sure there's something good about it.
It's cheaper.
Cost is the God in consumer electronics upon which everything else is sacrificed.
The could be saving up to $5 per phone doing it this way.
Ship 20 million phones and that's $100 million dollars in the bank.
The effort made in consumer electronics to save four cents (over 10 million units) would probably make your head spin.
The difference in the two approaches isn't as much as you are making out to be.
The dedicated radio chip is still running a microprocessor written in software.
By combining the two processors in the single package you save cost and space (more cost).
The major downside to this is debugging the radio processing where it's interfered with by other actions on the phone, having two cores probably helps a lot with this.
That said, assigning three engineers full time for a year to figure it out is trivial compared to the savings you get.
(I spent a year of my life fixing a 'creative' electronic circuit that saved us 8 cents per board).

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844735</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1256304840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Contrary to what people think, you are not allowed to do what ever you want to a phone.</i></p><p>Um yes I can,  Please give me the LAWS that state otherwise.</p><p>I can do ANYTHING I WANT with my phone.  I have an openmoko on AT&amp;T and they cant control my phone other than turning off service.  I can do anything I want with my phone, and the worse they can do is turn off service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Contrary to what people think , you are not allowed to do what ever you want to a phone.Um yes I can , Please give me the LAWS that state otherwise.I can do ANYTHING I WANT with my phone .
I have an openmoko on AT&amp;T and they cant control my phone other than turning off service .
I can do anything I want with my phone , and the worse they can do is turn off service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Contrary to what people think, you are not allowed to do what ever you want to a phone.Um yes I can,  Please give me the LAWS that state otherwise.I can do ANYTHING I WANT with my phone.
I have an openmoko on AT&amp;T and they cant control my phone other than turning off service.
I can do anything I want with my phone, and the worse they can do is turn off service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843277</id>
	<title>As far as I see, it's only kernel source ...</title>
	<author>kojot350</author>
	<datestamp>1256240460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I see only kernel source here: <a href="http://developer.htc.com/" title="htc.com" rel="nofollow">http://developer.htc.com/</a> [htc.com] so it looks like they released only the part they had too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I see only kernel source here : http : //developer.htc.com/ [ htc.com ] so it looks like they released only the part they had too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see only kernel source here: http://developer.htc.com/ [htc.com] so it looks like they released only the part they had too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842291</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>Miamicanes</author>
	<datestamp>1256224680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A major complication is the fact that today's PDA phones are basically cellular winmodems. Ever wonder why a Samsung SPH-i300 with ~40MHz 680x0-ish Dragonfire didn't feel all that much slower than a 400MHz dual-core ARM running WinMo? Part of the problem is WinMo's bloat... but an even bigger part of the problem is the fact that cpu #2 spends basically 100\% of its time being a software-based faux DSP anytime the radio is in use... and occasionally steals cycles from cpu #1 while it's at it. In contrast, the humble i300 was literally a cell phone radio bolted to a PalmOS PDA, connected by LITERALLY a serial port. In every meaningful way, the two were completely independent. Dialed a number on the LCD-rendered keypad? The Palm side sent what was basically an ATDT command to the phone side. Incoming call? The phone side did the actual ringtone (the beefy speaker was connected to the phone; the palm side just had a wimpy piezo), and sent ###RING xxxxxxxxxx down the serial port for the Palm to decide what to do with it. Pressed the green button to answer the call? The Palm side sent (literally) ATA down the serial port to the phone. And so on.</p><p>The good thing about Winmodem-like cellphones is... um... er... uh... well, I'm sure there's something good about it. But anyway, the bad thing is that it means that you're basically talking about a gigahertz-rate raw DAC and ADC creating a software-defined radio. The supreme irony is that the hardware in a G1 probably COULD be hacked to do UMTS at 850MHz on AT&amp;T... but it would be utterly illegal, precisely because it would wreak havoc with AT&amp;T's network and mess up your neighbors' service while you spent saturday afternoon debugging it.</p><p>As I understand it, a phone running Android (or Windows Mobile, for that matter) is kind of like a PC running Linux under VMware under Windows (or vice-versa). You have the hypervisor-like "Supreme Controller" that runs the software that makes it a radio, with Linux-nee-Android running under the hypervisor. So you really ARE root as far as Linux/Android is concerned, but behind the curtain, Root has a metaphorical deity of his own to serve. I'm not entirely sure how it's enforced, and how much of it is handled by actual hardware partitioning (ie, whether the CPU takes a cue from memory curtaining, so that the core running the radio has ram and registers that the core running the UI and apps can't touch), but that's a rough summary of what happens behind the scenes on an Android phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A major complication is the fact that today 's PDA phones are basically cellular winmodems .
Ever wonder why a Samsung SPH-i300 with ~ 40MHz 680x0-ish Dragonfire did n't feel all that much slower than a 400MHz dual-core ARM running WinMo ?
Part of the problem is WinMo 's bloat... but an even bigger part of the problem is the fact that cpu # 2 spends basically 100 \ % of its time being a software-based faux DSP anytime the radio is in use... and occasionally steals cycles from cpu # 1 while it 's at it .
In contrast , the humble i300 was literally a cell phone radio bolted to a PalmOS PDA , connected by LITERALLY a serial port .
In every meaningful way , the two were completely independent .
Dialed a number on the LCD-rendered keypad ?
The Palm side sent what was basically an ATDT command to the phone side .
Incoming call ?
The phone side did the actual ringtone ( the beefy speaker was connected to the phone ; the palm side just had a wimpy piezo ) , and sent # # # RING xxxxxxxxxx down the serial port for the Palm to decide what to do with it .
Pressed the green button to answer the call ?
The Palm side sent ( literally ) ATA down the serial port to the phone .
And so on.The good thing about Winmodem-like cellphones is... um... er... uh... well , I 'm sure there 's something good about it .
But anyway , the bad thing is that it means that you 're basically talking about a gigahertz-rate raw DAC and ADC creating a software-defined radio .
The supreme irony is that the hardware in a G1 probably COULD be hacked to do UMTS at 850MHz on AT&amp;T... but it would be utterly illegal , precisely because it would wreak havoc with AT&amp;T 's network and mess up your neighbors ' service while you spent saturday afternoon debugging it.As I understand it , a phone running Android ( or Windows Mobile , for that matter ) is kind of like a PC running Linux under VMware under Windows ( or vice-versa ) .
You have the hypervisor-like " Supreme Controller " that runs the software that makes it a radio , with Linux-nee-Android running under the hypervisor .
So you really ARE root as far as Linux/Android is concerned , but behind the curtain , Root has a metaphorical deity of his own to serve .
I 'm not entirely sure how it 's enforced , and how much of it is handled by actual hardware partitioning ( ie , whether the CPU takes a cue from memory curtaining , so that the core running the radio has ram and registers that the core running the UI and apps ca n't touch ) , but that 's a rough summary of what happens behind the scenes on an Android phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A major complication is the fact that today's PDA phones are basically cellular winmodems.
Ever wonder why a Samsung SPH-i300 with ~40MHz 680x0-ish Dragonfire didn't feel all that much slower than a 400MHz dual-core ARM running WinMo?
Part of the problem is WinMo's bloat... but an even bigger part of the problem is the fact that cpu #2 spends basically 100\% of its time being a software-based faux DSP anytime the radio is in use... and occasionally steals cycles from cpu #1 while it's at it.
In contrast, the humble i300 was literally a cell phone radio bolted to a PalmOS PDA, connected by LITERALLY a serial port.
In every meaningful way, the two were completely independent.
Dialed a number on the LCD-rendered keypad?
The Palm side sent what was basically an ATDT command to the phone side.
Incoming call?
The phone side did the actual ringtone (the beefy speaker was connected to the phone; the palm side just had a wimpy piezo), and sent ###RING xxxxxxxxxx down the serial port for the Palm to decide what to do with it.
Pressed the green button to answer the call?
The Palm side sent (literally) ATA down the serial port to the phone.
And so on.The good thing about Winmodem-like cellphones is... um... er... uh... well, I'm sure there's something good about it.
But anyway, the bad thing is that it means that you're basically talking about a gigahertz-rate raw DAC and ADC creating a software-defined radio.
The supreme irony is that the hardware in a G1 probably COULD be hacked to do UMTS at 850MHz on AT&amp;T... but it would be utterly illegal, precisely because it would wreak havoc with AT&amp;T's network and mess up your neighbors' service while you spent saturday afternoon debugging it.As I understand it, a phone running Android (or Windows Mobile, for that matter) is kind of like a PC running Linux under VMware under Windows (or vice-versa).
You have the hypervisor-like "Supreme Controller" that runs the software that makes it a radio, with Linux-nee-Android running under the hypervisor.
So you really ARE root as far as Linux/Android is concerned, but behind the curtain, Root has a metaphorical deity of his own to serve.
I'm not entirely sure how it's enforced, and how much of it is handled by actual hardware partitioning (ie, whether the CPU takes a cue from memory curtaining, so that the core running the radio has ram and registers that the core running the UI and apps can't touch), but that's a rough summary of what happens behind the scenes on an Android phone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842091</id>
	<title>Re:Nice</title>
	<author>stinerman</author>
	<datestamp>1256222040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Sure, I know, they were supposed to, by law. But they at least didn't drag their feet too long, and deserve some kudos for choosing an open-source platform to begin with.</p></div></blockquote><p>I disagree here.  Simply choosing to use open source software and then trying to stiff people their rights granted under that license isn't any better than choosing a closed source platform.</p><p>Let's not beat around the bush here.  If there weren't enough people demanding the code, it would have never been released.  I don't know about you, but I don't applaud anyone who is doing exactly what is required of them and no more.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , I know , they were supposed to , by law .
But they at least did n't drag their feet too long , and deserve some kudos for choosing an open-source platform to begin with.I disagree here .
Simply choosing to use open source software and then trying to stiff people their rights granted under that license is n't any better than choosing a closed source platform.Let 's not beat around the bush here .
If there were n't enough people demanding the code , it would have never been released .
I do n't know about you , but I do n't applaud anyone who is doing exactly what is required of them and no more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, I know, they were supposed to, by law.
But they at least didn't drag their feet too long, and deserve some kudos for choosing an open-source platform to begin with.I disagree here.
Simply choosing to use open source software and then trying to stiff people their rights granted under that license isn't any better than choosing a closed source platform.Let's not beat around the bush here.
If there weren't enough people demanding the code, it would have never been released.
I don't know about you, but I don't applaud anyone who is doing exactly what is required of them and no more.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841607</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844873</id>
	<title>Re:Code cleanup</title>
	<author>Webcommando</author>
	<datestamp>1256305740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They were probably stalling for time while they read over the source code to remove all the swear words and personal attacks against coworkers...</p><p>=Smidge=</p></div><p>Don't forget they had to remove the 1000's of TODO's that were still in the code comments with several "We really should fix this before release" and a couple of "This works but I'm not sure why."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They were probably stalling for time while they read over the source code to remove all the swear words and personal attacks against coworkers... = Smidge = Do n't forget they had to remove the 1000 's of TODO 's that were still in the code comments with several " We really should fix this before release " and a couple of " This works but I 'm not sure why .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were probably stalling for time while they read over the source code to remove all the swear words and personal attacks against coworkers...=Smidge=Don't forget they had to remove the 1000's of TODO's that were still in the code comments with several "We really should fix this before release" and a couple of "This works but I'm not sure why.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011</id>
	<title>A little unfair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256220660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would venture to say that any decision to delay the release of code has very little to do with HTC trying to stonewall.<br>Contrary to what people think, you are not allowed to do what ever you want to a phone.<br>Naturally, Andriod has access to the phones protocol and RF layers. Giving the user access to these layers is a VERY, VERY bad idea.<br>To sell a mobile phone in North America, a manufacture must obtain PTCRB certification. This is a very stringent set of tests which look at all layers and all the hardware, including the antenna performance. We are talking more than 6000 tests and more than $800K!!<br>Once they pass..this SVN (Software version number) is locked in. ANY changes in code or hardware and the manufacture must make an ECO with PTCRB and make some additional checks.<br>The main reasons for this is network health and link budgets.<br>The carrier must be able to count on your phone acting in a predetermined way in order to keep the network on the air. Believe it or not, one single phone could bring down an entire tower!<br>I can promise you that the carriers will NEVER allow a situation where YOU can alter those layers and kill the network.<br>I am sure HTC need a fair amount of time to figure out how to lock it down and still let you mess with the OS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would venture to say that any decision to delay the release of code has very little to do with HTC trying to stonewall.Contrary to what people think , you are not allowed to do what ever you want to a phone.Naturally , Andriod has access to the phones protocol and RF layers .
Giving the user access to these layers is a VERY , VERY bad idea.To sell a mobile phone in North America , a manufacture must obtain PTCRB certification .
This is a very stringent set of tests which look at all layers and all the hardware , including the antenna performance .
We are talking more than 6000 tests and more than $ 800K !
! Once they pass..this SVN ( Software version number ) is locked in .
ANY changes in code or hardware and the manufacture must make an ECO with PTCRB and make some additional checks.The main reasons for this is network health and link budgets.The carrier must be able to count on your phone acting in a predetermined way in order to keep the network on the air .
Believe it or not , one single phone could bring down an entire tower ! I can promise you that the carriers will NEVER allow a situation where YOU can alter those layers and kill the network.I am sure HTC need a fair amount of time to figure out how to lock it down and still let you mess with the OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would venture to say that any decision to delay the release of code has very little to do with HTC trying to stonewall.Contrary to what people think, you are not allowed to do what ever you want to a phone.Naturally, Andriod has access to the phones protocol and RF layers.
Giving the user access to these layers is a VERY, VERY bad idea.To sell a mobile phone in North America, a manufacture must obtain PTCRB certification.
This is a very stringent set of tests which look at all layers and all the hardware, including the antenna performance.
We are talking more than 6000 tests and more than $800K!
!Once they pass..this SVN (Software version number) is locked in.
ANY changes in code or hardware and the manufacture must make an ECO with PTCRB and make some additional checks.The main reasons for this is network health and link budgets.The carrier must be able to count on your phone acting in a predetermined way in order to keep the network on the air.
Believe it or not, one single phone could bring down an entire tower!I can promise you that the carriers will NEVER allow a situation where YOU can alter those layers and kill the network.I am sure HTC need a fair amount of time to figure out how to lock it down and still let you mess with the OS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842061</id>
	<title>Re:Code cleanup</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256221560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>They were probably stalling for time while they read over the source code to remove all the swear words and personal attacks against coworkers...</i>
<br>Man, they should have taken more time so that our outrage wouldn't go away... I need to find another reason to be outraged!1!!! Has apple released all their source code? omg! who is violating the GPL?!?!?</htmltext>
<tokenext>They were probably stalling for time while they read over the source code to remove all the swear words and personal attacks against coworkers.. . Man , they should have taken more time so that our outrage would n't go away... I need to find another reason to be outraged ! 1 ! ! !
Has apple released all their source code ?
omg ! who is violating the GPL ? ! ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were probably stalling for time while they read over the source code to remove all the swear words and personal attacks against coworkers...
Man, they should have taken more time so that our outrage wouldn't go away... I need to find another reason to be outraged!1!!!
Has apple released all their source code?
omg! who is violating the GPL?!?!
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842837</id>
	<title>Not GPL</title>
	<author>paul248</author>
	<datestamp>1256232540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The last I heard, the only GPL'd part of Android is the kernel.  Everything else is Apache/BSD.  So, aside from the kernel, HTC wasn't really "dragging their feet," since they released their modifications voluntarily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The last I heard , the only GPL 'd part of Android is the kernel .
Everything else is Apache/BSD .
So , aside from the kernel , HTC was n't really " dragging their feet , " since they released their modifications voluntarily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last I heard, the only GPL'd part of Android is the kernel.
Everything else is Apache/BSD.
So, aside from the kernel, HTC wasn't really "dragging their feet," since they released their modifications voluntarily.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525</id>
	<title>Not so bad...</title>
	<author>Sarten-X</author>
	<datestamp>1256214720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm assuming good faith, but personally, I'm not concerned that it took so long to release the source code. Most likely, the developers were under a deadline to have the phone in working order, and had to postpone lower-priority tasks to meet that deadline. These lower-priority tasks were probably such trivial things as comments, changed names, formatting, and all those other bits that get neglected under heavy pressure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm assuming good faith , but personally , I 'm not concerned that it took so long to release the source code .
Most likely , the developers were under a deadline to have the phone in working order , and had to postpone lower-priority tasks to meet that deadline .
These lower-priority tasks were probably such trivial things as comments , changed names , formatting , and all those other bits that get neglected under heavy pressure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm assuming good faith, but personally, I'm not concerned that it took so long to release the source code.
Most likely, the developers were under a deadline to have the phone in working order, and had to postpone lower-priority tasks to meet that deadline.
These lower-priority tasks were probably such trivial things as comments, changed names, formatting, and all those other bits that get neglected under heavy pressure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843145</id>
	<title>Re:Not so bad...</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1256238240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Chinese (Taiwanese, same thing)</i> <br> <br>

I think there's strong cultural behavioral differences between the two.<br> <br>

Anyway, though, I agree with your statement about the difficulty in getting them to abide by licensing.  It's not just them, though; it's a problem with most societies outside of North America and the EU (and Japan, Australia, Israel, etc.).  I don't think they're as concerned with legal niceties.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese ( Taiwanese , same thing ) I think there 's strong cultural behavioral differences between the two .
Anyway , though , I agree with your statement about the difficulty in getting them to abide by licensing .
It 's not just them , though ; it 's a problem with most societies outside of North America and the EU ( and Japan , Australia , Israel , etc. ) .
I do n't think they 're as concerned with legal niceties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese (Taiwanese, same thing)  

I think there's strong cultural behavioral differences between the two.
Anyway, though, I agree with your statement about the difficulty in getting them to abide by licensing.
It's not just them, though; it's a problem with most societies outside of North America and the EU (and Japan, Australia, Israel, etc.).
I don't think they're as concerned with legal niceties.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842063</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842379</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>jeffstar</author>
	<datestamp>1256225700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it is wireless, a shared medium. only one client on any given frequency at any given time. it will always be possible to jam radio signals. no amount of engineering can change this</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it is wireless , a shared medium .
only one client on any given frequency at any given time .
it will always be possible to jam radio signals .
no amount of engineering can change this</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it is wireless, a shared medium.
only one client on any given frequency at any given time.
it will always be possible to jam radio signals.
no amount of engineering can change this</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29863245</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>Random5</author>
	<datestamp>1256468340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Way to not know what you're talking about.

Any fixed frequency wireless network can be taken down by a single client behaving badly, computer WiFi networks included (well assuming the client has sufficient transmission strength). I'm not so sure how easy it would be with something like bluetooth which hops frequencies repeatedly, but it's still definitely still possible to disrupt.

Wired computer networks are a different matter these days because they're entirely switched, but a malicious client on an unmanaged switch can still wreak havoc with other PCs on that switch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Way to not know what you 're talking about .
Any fixed frequency wireless network can be taken down by a single client behaving badly , computer WiFi networks included ( well assuming the client has sufficient transmission strength ) .
I 'm not so sure how easy it would be with something like bluetooth which hops frequencies repeatedly , but it 's still definitely still possible to disrupt .
Wired computer networks are a different matter these days because they 're entirely switched , but a malicious client on an unmanaged switch can still wreak havoc with other PCs on that switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Way to not know what you're talking about.
Any fixed frequency wireless network can be taken down by a single client behaving badly, computer WiFi networks included (well assuming the client has sufficient transmission strength).
I'm not so sure how easy it would be with something like bluetooth which hops frequencies repeatedly, but it's still definitely still possible to disrupt.
Wired computer networks are a different matter these days because they're entirely switched, but a malicious client on an unmanaged switch can still wreak havoc with other PCs on that switch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842503</id>
	<title>Re:A little unfair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256227260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The radio software and SPL (second program loader) in a HTC Android phone are closed source, Android sits on top of this and is more analogous to a VM running on a light OS underneath. (As someone points out below, you may think have root on your droid, but you don't really have root). Thus it is not really harmful to have the Android code out there, as the low-level software that would do the most harm is proprietary and fairly well protected.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The radio software and SPL ( second program loader ) in a HTC Android phone are closed source , Android sits on top of this and is more analogous to a VM running on a light OS underneath .
( As someone points out below , you may think have root on your droid , but you do n't really have root ) .
Thus it is not really harmful to have the Android code out there , as the low-level software that would do the most harm is proprietary and fairly well protected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The radio software and SPL (second program loader) in a HTC Android phone are closed source, Android sits on top of this and is more analogous to a VM running on a light OS underneath.
(As someone points out below, you may think have root on your droid, but you don't really have root).
Thus it is not really harmful to have the Android code out there, as the low-level software that would do the most harm is proprietary and fairly well protected.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841415</id>
	<title>HTC</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1256214000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's great HTC started releasing Android phones too, their Windows Mobile phones have been really nice (with their own tweaks and UI redesign to make it more useful)</p><p>Anyone know what kind of custom stuff they're build for Android?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's great HTC started releasing Android phones too , their Windows Mobile phones have been really nice ( with their own tweaks and UI redesign to make it more useful ) Anyone know what kind of custom stuff they 're build for Android ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's great HTC started releasing Android phones too, their Windows Mobile phones have been really nice (with their own tweaks and UI redesign to make it more useful)Anyone know what kind of custom stuff they're build for Android?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842279</id>
	<title>Sweet</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1256224680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean I can finally kick some ass on Guitar Hero?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean I can finally kick some ass on Guitar Hero ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean I can finally kick some ass on Guitar Hero?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842843
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841415
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842091
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844813
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842379
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842149
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842973
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29846207
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842417
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29863245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29848019
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842577
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841507
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841415
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843991
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_2315250_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2315250.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842503
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842167
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842379
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844813
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29863245
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844811
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842291
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842389
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843503
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842973
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29846207
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29848019
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2315250.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841977
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2315250.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841415
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842523
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841507
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2315250.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842061
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844873
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2315250.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842417
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2315250.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842063
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843991
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843145
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841681
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843513
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841873
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29844393
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842951
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842577
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842149
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2315250.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29843277
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_2315250.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29841607
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_2315250.29842091
</commentlist>
</conversation>
