<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_05_227236</id>
	<title>Going Head To Head With Genius On Playlists</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1257416100000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>brownerthanu writes <i>"Engineers at the University of California, San Diego are developing a system to include an ignored sector of music, dubbed the 'long tail,' in music recommendations. It's well known that radio suffers from a popularity bias, where the most popular songs receive an inordinate amount of exposure. In Apple's music recommender system, iTunes' Genius, this bias is magnified. An underground artist will never be recommended in a playlist due to insufficient data. It's an artifact of the popular collaborative filtering recommender algorithm, which Genius is based on. In order to establish a more holistic model of the music world, Luke Barrington and researchers at the Computer Audition Laboratory have created a machine learning system which <a href="http://www.jacobsschool.ucsd.edu/news/news\_releases/release.sfe?id=897">classifies songs in an automated, Pandora-like, fashion</a>. Instead of using humans to explicitly categorize individual songs, they capture the wisdom of the crowds via a <a href="http://apps.facebook.com/herd-it/?refcode=slashdot">Facebook game, <em>Herd It</em>,</a> and use the data to train statistical models. The machine can then 'listen to,' describe and recommend any song, popular or not.  As more people play the game, the machines get smarter.  Their experiments show that automatic recommendations work at least as well as Genius for recommending undiscovered music."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>brownerthanu writes " Engineers at the University of California , San Diego are developing a system to include an ignored sector of music , dubbed the 'long tail, ' in music recommendations .
It 's well known that radio suffers from a popularity bias , where the most popular songs receive an inordinate amount of exposure .
In Apple 's music recommender system , iTunes ' Genius , this bias is magnified .
An underground artist will never be recommended in a playlist due to insufficient data .
It 's an artifact of the popular collaborative filtering recommender algorithm , which Genius is based on .
In order to establish a more holistic model of the music world , Luke Barrington and researchers at the Computer Audition Laboratory have created a machine learning system which classifies songs in an automated , Pandora-like , fashion .
Instead of using humans to explicitly categorize individual songs , they capture the wisdom of the crowds via a Facebook game , Herd It , and use the data to train statistical models .
The machine can then 'listen to, ' describe and recommend any song , popular or not .
As more people play the game , the machines get smarter .
Their experiments show that automatic recommendations work at least as well as Genius for recommending undiscovered music .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>brownerthanu writes "Engineers at the University of California, San Diego are developing a system to include an ignored sector of music, dubbed the 'long tail,' in music recommendations.
It's well known that radio suffers from a popularity bias, where the most popular songs receive an inordinate amount of exposure.
In Apple's music recommender system, iTunes' Genius, this bias is magnified.
An underground artist will never be recommended in a playlist due to insufficient data.
It's an artifact of the popular collaborative filtering recommender algorithm, which Genius is based on.
In order to establish a more holistic model of the music world, Luke Barrington and researchers at the Computer Audition Laboratory have created a machine learning system which classifies songs in an automated, Pandora-like, fashion.
Instead of using humans to explicitly categorize individual songs, they capture the wisdom of the crowds via a Facebook game, Herd It, and use the data to train statistical models.
The machine can then 'listen to,' describe and recommend any song, popular or not.
As more people play the game, the machines get smarter.
Their experiments show that automatic recommendations work at least as well as Genius for recommending undiscovered music.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002014</id>
	<title>Herd?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257428820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So i herd u liek mudkipz.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So i herd u liek mudkipz .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So i herd u liek mudkipz.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001086</id>
	<title>Great idea until I saw "Facebook game"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257421860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Facebook game? are these lads taking the piss here? I don't want some Facebook hipster with long hair and a scarf and an overpriced Caramelatte or some middle aged goon with a huge mortgage and kids who just uploaded snapshots of their dinner party choosing my songs for me. No, they can fuck off.<br> <br>

Seriously I was hoping for something more 'integrated' rather than relying on Facebook morons (and most FB users areindeed morons) for 'wisdom'. Posting as AC because closet Facebookies already have the -1 points ready for me<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook game ?
are these lads taking the piss here ?
I do n't want some Facebook hipster with long hair and a scarf and an overpriced Caramelatte or some middle aged goon with a huge mortgage and kids who just uploaded snapshots of their dinner party choosing my songs for me .
No , they can fuck off .
Seriously I was hoping for something more 'integrated ' rather than relying on Facebook morons ( and most FB users areindeed morons ) for 'wisdom' .
Posting as AC because closet Facebookies already have the -1 points ready for me : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Facebook game?
are these lads taking the piss here?
I don't want some Facebook hipster with long hair and a scarf and an overpriced Caramelatte or some middle aged goon with a huge mortgage and kids who just uploaded snapshots of their dinner party choosing my songs for me.
No, they can fuck off.
Seriously I was hoping for something more 'integrated' rather than relying on Facebook morons (and most FB users areindeed morons) for 'wisdom'.
Posting as AC because closet Facebookies already have the -1 points ready for me :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001184</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257422280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, no. Popular bands are popular cause they pay a lot for coverage advertising and record labels.</p><p>*Some are very good, some are crap. My point is that being popular does not necessarily correlate with being good.*</p><p>I listen to music, I play music, I'm not one of the "all new music sucks" idiots, I also listen at least something from each genre so it's not that I don't like X genre and while people do.<br>I know a lot of people who listen to good music, most of my friends spend a lot of time showing each other songs and bands--we don't always like eachothers music, but we admit that it's at least good. A lot of people do this, but there are also a great majority of people who only really have 20 songs on their iPod that they bought because they thought it was cool as they heard it on hot 99.5 or such.</p><p>Now, I'm talking about highschool kids so maybe my observations are biased.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , no .
Popular bands are popular cause they pay a lot for coverage advertising and record labels .
* Some are very good , some are crap .
My point is that being popular does not necessarily correlate with being good .
* I listen to music , I play music , I 'm not one of the " all new music sucks " idiots , I also listen at least something from each genre so it 's not that I do n't like X genre and while people do.I know a lot of people who listen to good music , most of my friends spend a lot of time showing each other songs and bands--we do n't always like eachothers music , but we admit that it 's at least good .
A lot of people do this , but there are also a great majority of people who only really have 20 songs on their iPod that they bought because they thought it was cool as they heard it on hot 99.5 or such.Now , I 'm talking about highschool kids so maybe my observations are biased .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, no.
Popular bands are popular cause they pay a lot for coverage advertising and record labels.
*Some are very good, some are crap.
My point is that being popular does not necessarily correlate with being good.
*I listen to music, I play music, I'm not one of the "all new music sucks" idiots, I also listen at least something from each genre so it's not that I don't like X genre and while people do.I know a lot of people who listen to good music, most of my friends spend a lot of time showing each other songs and bands--we don't always like eachothers music, but we admit that it's at least good.
A lot of people do this, but there are also a great majority of people who only really have 20 songs on their iPod that they bought because they thought it was cool as they heard it on hot 99.5 or such.Now, I'm talking about highschool kids so maybe my observations are biased.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001062</id>
	<title>Launchcast was great</title>
	<author>DogDude</author>
	<datestamp>1257421740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to say that the best AI for this kind of thing was Yahoo's Launchcast service (recently sold to, and dismantled by CBS).  Almost every day, I discovered new music that I'd never even heard of, and the vast majority actually suited my tastes.  Unfortunately, when CBS bought Launchcast from Yahoo, they took out the only valuable part of the service (the "create your own station" part that had the fantastic AI), and they left just plain old streaming radio stations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to say that the best AI for this kind of thing was Yahoo 's Launchcast service ( recently sold to , and dismantled by CBS ) .
Almost every day , I discovered new music that I 'd never even heard of , and the vast majority actually suited my tastes .
Unfortunately , when CBS bought Launchcast from Yahoo , they took out the only valuable part of the service ( the " create your own station " part that had the fantastic AI ) , and they left just plain old streaming radio stations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to say that the best AI for this kind of thing was Yahoo's Launchcast service (recently sold to, and dismantled by CBS).
Almost every day, I discovered new music that I'd never even heard of, and the vast majority actually suited my tastes.
Unfortunately, when CBS bought Launchcast from Yahoo, they took out the only valuable part of the service (the "create your own station" part that had the fantastic AI), and they left just plain old streaming radio stations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001262</id>
	<title>People like what other people like</title>
	<author>ptaff</author>
	<datestamp>1257422700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For possibly the great majority of the population, music can be compared to fashion; does not really matter if the art is good per se, what matters is the trend and popularity, on a local scale (what my friends listen to) and global scale (media).</p><p>With the rock'n'roll revolution in the fifties, lots of teenagers liked that new music in part because it wasn't their <em>parents</em>' music.  Same story can be said of disco, rap and grunge.</p><p>Problem with the long-tail approach is that people mostly judge music by non-musical criteria.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For possibly the great majority of the population , music can be compared to fashion ; does not really matter if the art is good per se , what matters is the trend and popularity , on a local scale ( what my friends listen to ) and global scale ( media ) .With the rock'n'roll revolution in the fifties , lots of teenagers liked that new music in part because it was n't their parents ' music .
Same story can be said of disco , rap and grunge.Problem with the long-tail approach is that people mostly judge music by non-musical criteria .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For possibly the great majority of the population, music can be compared to fashion; does not really matter if the art is good per se, what matters is the trend and popularity, on a local scale (what my friends listen to) and global scale (media).With the rock'n'roll revolution in the fifties, lots of teenagers liked that new music in part because it wasn't their parents' music.
Same story can be said of disco, rap and grunge.Problem with the long-tail approach is that people mostly judge music by non-musical criteria.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001416</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257423660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're wrong.  People will listen to and enjoy any music they are exposed to (the current success of the music industry proves this).  People would be just as happy with music from unsigned bands they have never heard of as they are with the music the record labels produce, the only problem is exposing them to the music in the first place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're wrong .
People will listen to and enjoy any music they are exposed to ( the current success of the music industry proves this ) .
People would be just as happy with music from unsigned bands they have never heard of as they are with the music the record labels produce , the only problem is exposing them to the music in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're wrong.
People will listen to and enjoy any music they are exposed to (the current success of the music industry proves this).
People would be just as happy with music from unsigned bands they have never heard of as they are with the music the record labels produce, the only problem is exposing them to the music in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30005368</id>
	<title>Re:It's time to put it to a vote:</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1257521100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "wisdom of the crowds" nor iTunes' Genius wonn't help if you have music that's so unique that it can't be pigeonholed. Think Ska in the 50s, Raggae in the sixties, Rap in the seventies.</p><p>None of these genres were anywhere near popular when when they were new in the times listed. Nor were they played on the radio.</p><p>I doubt that iTunes Genius will ever serve up <i>The Station</i> to anyone, despite the fact that IINM you can "buy" their stuff from iTunes (or get it free from <a href="http://www.archive.org/details/TheStation" title="archive.org">archive.org)</a> [archive.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " wisdom of the crowds " nor iTunes ' Genius won n't help if you have music that 's so unique that it ca n't be pigeonholed .
Think Ska in the 50s , Raggae in the sixties , Rap in the seventies.None of these genres were anywhere near popular when when they were new in the times listed .
Nor were they played on the radio.I doubt that iTunes Genius will ever serve up The Station to anyone , despite the fact that IINM you can " buy " their stuff from iTunes ( or get it free from archive.org ) [ archive.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "wisdom of the crowds" nor iTunes' Genius wonn't help if you have music that's so unique that it can't be pigeonholed.
Think Ska in the 50s, Raggae in the sixties, Rap in the seventies.None of these genres were anywhere near popular when when they were new in the times listed.
Nor were they played on the radio.I doubt that iTunes Genius will ever serve up The Station to anyone, despite the fact that IINM you can "buy" their stuff from iTunes (or get it free from archive.org) [archive.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30003714</id>
	<title>I'll care when...</title>
	<author>sitarlo</author>
	<datestamp>1257498300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They invent an algorithm that will always recommend old Metallica over new Metallica!</htmltext>
<tokenext>They invent an algorithm that will always recommend old Metallica over new Metallica !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They invent an algorithm that will always recommend old Metallica over new Metallica!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001642</id>
	<title>At least as well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257425400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>An underground artist will <b>never</b> be recommended in a playlist due to insufficient data. It's an artifact of the popular collaborative filtering recommender algorithm, which Genius is based on.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>Their experiments show that automatic recommendations work <b>at least as well as Genius</b> for recommending undiscovered music.</p></div><p>At least as well as never recommending? That is astounding.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>An underground artist will never be recommended in a playlist due to insufficient data .
It 's an artifact of the popular collaborative filtering recommender algorithm , which Genius is based on.Their experiments show that automatic recommendations work at least as well as Genius for recommending undiscovered music.At least as well as never recommending ?
That is astounding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An underground artist will never be recommended in a playlist due to insufficient data.
It's an artifact of the popular collaborative filtering recommender algorithm, which Genius is based on.Their experiments show that automatic recommendations work at least as well as Genius for recommending undiscovered music.At least as well as never recommending?
That is astounding.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001454</id>
	<title>Re:They should go through my collection...</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1257423900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>P.S.</p><p>I also enjoy listening to Radio Jackie in London - <a href="http://yp.shoutcast.com/sbin/tunein-station.pls?id=225101" title="shoutcast.com">http://yp.shoutcast.com/sbin/tunein-station.pls?id=225101</a> [shoutcast.com] (dialup)  - <a href="http://yp.shoutcast.com/sbin/tunein-station.pls?id=715112" title="shoutcast.com">http://yp.shoutcast.com/sbin/tunein-station.pls?id=715112</a> [shoutcast.com] (broadband)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>P.S.I also enjoy listening to Radio Jackie in London - http : //yp.shoutcast.com/sbin/tunein-station.pls ? id = 225101 [ shoutcast.com ] ( dialup ) - http : //yp.shoutcast.com/sbin/tunein-station.pls ? id = 715112 [ shoutcast.com ] ( broadband )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>P.S.I also enjoy listening to Radio Jackie in London - http://yp.shoutcast.com/sbin/tunein-station.pls?id=225101 [shoutcast.com] (dialup)  - http://yp.shoutcast.com/sbin/tunein-station.pls?id=715112 [shoutcast.com] (broadband)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001290</id>
	<title>Last.fm</title>
	<author>Shadyman</author>
	<datestamp>1257422880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Last.fm's "neighbor" system works similarly, except it looks at what each person listens to.  Keep in mind that it takes a fair bit of training to find neighbors who are actually close to your likes, but once you've listened to enough music, it's pretty good at finding things I like but have never heard of.  <b>I.E.</b> <i>if I like song A B C and D, and you like song A, B and C, you might like song D.</i> <br> <br>The neighbor system groups people with similar musical tastes, and allows each person to tune to his/her "Neighbor Radio", to listen to songs liked by your neighbors. <br> <br>(Disclaimer: I have no vested interest in last.fm besides being a paid member. <a href="http://www.last.fm/user/Shadyman" title="www.last.fm">[My Profile]</a> [www.last.fm])</htmltext>
<tokenext>Last.fm 's " neighbor " system works similarly , except it looks at what each person listens to .
Keep in mind that it takes a fair bit of training to find neighbors who are actually close to your likes , but once you 've listened to enough music , it 's pretty good at finding things I like but have never heard of .
I.E. if I like song A B C and D , and you like song A , B and C , you might like song D. The neighbor system groups people with similar musical tastes , and allows each person to tune to his/her " Neighbor Radio " , to listen to songs liked by your neighbors .
( Disclaimer : I have no vested interest in last.fm besides being a paid member .
[ My Profile ] [ www.last.fm ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last.fm's "neighbor" system works similarly, except it looks at what each person listens to.
Keep in mind that it takes a fair bit of training to find neighbors who are actually close to your likes, but once you've listened to enough music, it's pretty good at finding things I like but have never heard of.
I.E. if I like song A B C and D, and you like song A, B and C, you might like song D.  The neighbor system groups people with similar musical tastes, and allows each person to tune to his/her "Neighbor Radio", to listen to songs liked by your neighbors.
(Disclaimer: I have no vested interest in last.fm besides being a paid member.
[My Profile] [www.last.fm])</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002242</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257431400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe the right approach looks more like pandora or last.fm, they associate songs in clusters depending on different parameters. The systems suggest music in the same cluster you have been voting you like.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the right approach looks more like pandora or last.fm , they associate songs in clusters depending on different parameters .
The systems suggest music in the same cluster you have been voting you like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the right approach looks more like pandora or last.fm, they associate songs in clusters depending on different parameters.
The systems suggest music in the same cluster you have been voting you like.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002378</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257432540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parent has a point, GP.  Not only did he use a perfect example, he used one that sucks ass and is popular.  "Use Somebody" comes on all the time at work, and it is god awful.  Even the ladies I work with who like listening to the top 40's channels hate it.  Its being pushed to the top of the charts by repetition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Parent has a point , GP .
Not only did he use a perfect example , he used one that sucks ass and is popular .
" Use Somebody " comes on all the time at work , and it is god awful .
Even the ladies I work with who like listening to the top 40 's channels hate it .
Its being pushed to the top of the charts by repetition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parent has a point, GP.
Not only did he use a perfect example, he used one that sucks ass and is popular.
"Use Somebody" comes on all the time at work, and it is god awful.
Even the ladies I work with who like listening to the top 40's channels hate it.
Its being pushed to the top of the charts by repetition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001092</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>hansraj</author>
	<datestamp>1257421860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you generally this obtuse?</p><p>The idea is not to popularize shitty bands. Given perfect AI, this program is supposed to do the following:</p><p>1) Listen to all popular music (for various classes of popular).<br>2) Figure out why that music is popular (for its class).<br>3) Listen to any *new* track and figure out if it is like those popular tracks (and any popular class).</p><p>Now of course we don't have that kind of AI and hence all this research.</p><p>The idea is to promote good bands that would have been popular except for the fact that they are not already popular and hence might go unnoticed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you generally this obtuse ? The idea is not to popularize shitty bands .
Given perfect AI , this program is supposed to do the following : 1 ) Listen to all popular music ( for various classes of popular ) .2 ) Figure out why that music is popular ( for its class ) .3 ) Listen to any * new * track and figure out if it is like those popular tracks ( and any popular class ) .Now of course we do n't have that kind of AI and hence all this research.The idea is to promote good bands that would have been popular except for the fact that they are not already popular and hence might go unnoticed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you generally this obtuse?The idea is not to popularize shitty bands.
Given perfect AI, this program is supposed to do the following:1) Listen to all popular music (for various classes of popular).2) Figure out why that music is popular (for its class).3) Listen to any *new* track and figure out if it is like those popular tracks (and any popular class).Now of course we don't have that kind of AI and hence all this research.The idea is to promote good bands that would have been popular except for the fact that they are not already popular and hence might go unnoticed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000968</id>
	<title>Anyone actually use "Genius"?</title>
	<author>l0ungeb0y</author>
	<datestamp>1257421320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried Genius for awhile, but I recently disabled it for two reasons:</p><p>1) The "recommendations" were not very good nor did they maintain a "common theme", by which I mean, I chose a rather edgy electronica/punk song by Crystal Castles... three songs down we get something by The Nationals... which is very mellow rock. If I choose a song that is edgy, electric, and with a faster pace, I want ALL the songs in that 25 song playlist to be at least within a similar genre.</p><p>2) It takes up too much time when importing vast libraries to new machines. I recently centralized my 300+ GB music library on a Mac Mini Server, iTunes was unusable due to genius choking on the sheer volume of data it had to deal with.</p><p>In the end, it's really nothing more than a way for Apple to try to get you to buy more crap from the Apple store.<br>They lost my wallet years ago to Amazon MP3 store who had no DRM. I see no reason to go back to iTMS even now that their DRM is gone. Especially seeing what dicks Apple has been with their conduct around ACC, "fair play", and App Store lock-down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried Genius for awhile , but I recently disabled it for two reasons : 1 ) The " recommendations " were not very good nor did they maintain a " common theme " , by which I mean , I chose a rather edgy electronica/punk song by Crystal Castles... three songs down we get something by The Nationals... which is very mellow rock .
If I choose a song that is edgy , electric , and with a faster pace , I want ALL the songs in that 25 song playlist to be at least within a similar genre.2 ) It takes up too much time when importing vast libraries to new machines .
I recently centralized my 300 + GB music library on a Mac Mini Server , iTunes was unusable due to genius choking on the sheer volume of data it had to deal with.In the end , it 's really nothing more than a way for Apple to try to get you to buy more crap from the Apple store.They lost my wallet years ago to Amazon MP3 store who had no DRM .
I see no reason to go back to iTMS even now that their DRM is gone .
Especially seeing what dicks Apple has been with their conduct around ACC , " fair play " , and App Store lock-down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried Genius for awhile, but I recently disabled it for two reasons:1) The "recommendations" were not very good nor did they maintain a "common theme", by which I mean, I chose a rather edgy electronica/punk song by Crystal Castles... three songs down we get something by The Nationals... which is very mellow rock.
If I choose a song that is edgy, electric, and with a faster pace, I want ALL the songs in that 25 song playlist to be at least within a similar genre.2) It takes up too much time when importing vast libraries to new machines.
I recently centralized my 300+ GB music library on a Mac Mini Server, iTunes was unusable due to genius choking on the sheer volume of data it had to deal with.In the end, it's really nothing more than a way for Apple to try to get you to buy more crap from the Apple store.They lost my wallet years ago to Amazon MP3 store who had no DRM.
I see no reason to go back to iTMS even now that their DRM is gone.
Especially seeing what dicks Apple has been with their conduct around ACC, "fair play", and App Store lock-down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001224</id>
	<title>Engineers at the University of California vs. Me</title>
	<author>clinko</author>
	<datestamp>1257422460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wrote something earlier this week to do the same thing with the hashtags in the Twitter API and my music DB.</p><p>If you're bored, check it out. The recommendations are pretty close (bottom left). <a href="http://clinko.com/Metallica" title="clinko.com">Metallica</a> [clinko.com] or <a href="http://clinko.com/Weezer" title="clinko.com">Weezer</a> [clinko.com]</p><p>I found this one interesting <a href="http://clinko.com/Beatles" title="clinko.com">Beatles</a> [clinko.com] because it finds the singers names.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wrote something earlier this week to do the same thing with the hashtags in the Twitter API and my music DB.If you 're bored , check it out .
The recommendations are pretty close ( bottom left ) .
Metallica [ clinko.com ] or Weezer [ clinko.com ] I found this one interesting Beatles [ clinko.com ] because it finds the singers names .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wrote something earlier this week to do the same thing with the hashtags in the Twitter API and my music DB.If you're bored, check it out.
The recommendations are pretty close (bottom left).
Metallica [clinko.com] or Weezer [clinko.com]I found this one interesting Beatles [clinko.com] because it finds the singers names.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001196</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>TheGreenNuke</author>
	<datestamp>1257422340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's try an example.  Kings of Leon is enjoying some pretty good success right now with songs from their most recent album reaching the top 5 of Billbaord, Hot 100, and other charts.  But the band formed in 1999.  For for the better part of a decade they were only "good" to a small number as you put it.  But then how did they suddenly jump out of relative obscurity to the top of mainstream charts?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's try an example .
Kings of Leon is enjoying some pretty good success right now with songs from their most recent album reaching the top 5 of Billbaord , Hot 100 , and other charts .
But the band formed in 1999 .
For for the better part of a decade they were only " good " to a small number as you put it .
But then how did they suddenly jump out of relative obscurity to the top of mainstream charts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's try an example.
Kings of Leon is enjoying some pretty good success right now with songs from their most recent album reaching the top 5 of Billbaord, Hot 100, and other charts.
But the band formed in 1999.
For for the better part of a decade they were only "good" to a small number as you put it.
But then how did they suddenly jump out of relative obscurity to the top of mainstream charts?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001314</id>
	<title>Inordination without Disproportion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257423060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"the most popular songs receive an inordinate amount of exposure"
<br> <br>
More to the point, I think the popular songs get played in disproportion to (above &amp; beyond) their popularity. Versus the songs getting inordinate exposure? Anything played on air.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" the most popular songs receive an inordinate amount of exposure " More to the point , I think the popular songs get played in disproportion to ( above &amp; beyond ) their popularity .
Versus the songs getting inordinate exposure ?
Anything played on air .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"the most popular songs receive an inordinate amount of exposure"
 
More to the point, I think the popular songs get played in disproportion to (above &amp; beyond) their popularity.
Versus the songs getting inordinate exposure?
Anything played on air.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30013668</id>
	<title>Re</title>
	<author>joejolie</author>
	<datestamp>1257599760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nice conversation. If anyone having problems with their mac then use this free tool <a href="http://www.datarecoverymac.org/" title="datarecoverymac.org" rel="nofollow">Mac Data Recovery</a> [datarecoverymac.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice conversation .
If anyone having problems with their mac then use this free tool Mac Data Recovery [ datarecoverymac.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice conversation.
If anyone having problems with their mac then use this free tool Mac Data Recovery [datarecoverymac.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000756</id>
	<title>So...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257420240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean more or less Miley Cyrus?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean more or less Miley Cyrus ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean more or less Miley Cyrus?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001102</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257421860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you're an idiot</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you 're an idiot</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you're an idiot</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30005492</id>
	<title>Re:They should go through my collection...</title>
	<author>radtea</author>
	<datestamp>1257522000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>and not just because I'm an alumnae</i></p><p>There's more than one of you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and not just because I 'm an alumnaeThere 's more than one of you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and not just because I'm an alumnaeThere's more than one of you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30006046</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1257525840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>When are people going to realize that unpopular music is unpopular for a reason.</i></p><p>No, there are many reasons why a piece of music may be unpopular, the most obvious being <i>nobody's heard it!</i></p><p>You assume that unpopular art = bad art. Were you aware that Vincent Van Gogh only sold ONE painting in his entire life, to his brother, in payment for rent? <b>Van Gogh was immensely unpopular</b>. But that doesn't mean he wasn't one of the finest painters in history ever to hold a brush.</p><p>The "hamster dance" page was popular in its time, are you asserting that it was somehow good?</p><p>Popular != good, unpopular != bad. Just because my journals are popular among slashdot readers doesn't make them good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When are people going to realize that unpopular music is unpopular for a reason.No , there are many reasons why a piece of music may be unpopular , the most obvious being nobody 's heard it ! You assume that unpopular art = bad art .
Were you aware that Vincent Van Gogh only sold ONE painting in his entire life , to his brother , in payment for rent ?
Van Gogh was immensely unpopular .
But that does n't mean he was n't one of the finest painters in history ever to hold a brush.The " hamster dance " page was popular in its time , are you asserting that it was somehow good ? Popular ! = good , unpopular ! = bad .
Just because my journals are popular among slashdot readers does n't make them good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When are people going to realize that unpopular music is unpopular for a reason.No, there are many reasons why a piece of music may be unpopular, the most obvious being nobody's heard it!You assume that unpopular art = bad art.
Were you aware that Vincent Van Gogh only sold ONE painting in his entire life, to his brother, in payment for rent?
Van Gogh was immensely unpopular.
But that doesn't mean he wasn't one of the finest painters in history ever to hold a brush.The "hamster dance" page was popular in its time, are you asserting that it was somehow good?Popular != good, unpopular != bad.
Just because my journals are popular among slashdot readers doesn't make them good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30006186</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>ConceptJunkie</author>
	<datestamp>1257526620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like a wide variety of music.  Most of it is not popular at all.  A lot of it is very ecletic.  What's wrong with trying to develop a system that can make recommendations for someone like me?</p><p>You seem to think if it's not popular there's no point in even acknowledging it exists.  Maybe you only like popular music.  That's fine.</p><p>But this kind of research will definitely benefit some like me.  Guess what?  I spend a lot of money on music.  More than most people, and not just because I don't pirate music.  It would behoove artists to try to find a way to expose their music to people like me.  It will make them money.  It also behooves me to find another way to discover new music I like.  It gives me a lot of pleasure to do so.</p><p>So far from being useless or futile, I think this kind of research is valuable.  Plus, if it works for music, it will tell us how to do similar things for other kinds of pattern matching, including things that are more important than art appreciation.   Medical diagnostics, computer vision, human-computer interaction... there's no telling what kind of advances could be triggered by this research.</p><p>Furthermore, I have no doubts that the music business heavily influences what becomes "popular" regardless of what a lot of people (not just folks like me) would like if they only heard it.  The biggest reason for this is that commercial radio and other similar media are incredibly narrow and limited in scope.  I've read the average radio station has a playlist of 400 songs.  If true, that's absurd.  There is no doubt in my mind much more, and more interesting, music would garner popularity if it had the right exposure.  Unfortunately, this still requires a ton of money, but it's becoming less and less so over time, especially as the huge media conglomerates lose relevance in the face of the effectively unlimited distribution network called the Internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like a wide variety of music .
Most of it is not popular at all .
A lot of it is very ecletic .
What 's wrong with trying to develop a system that can make recommendations for someone like me ? You seem to think if it 's not popular there 's no point in even acknowledging it exists .
Maybe you only like popular music .
That 's fine.But this kind of research will definitely benefit some like me .
Guess what ?
I spend a lot of money on music .
More than most people , and not just because I do n't pirate music .
It would behoove artists to try to find a way to expose their music to people like me .
It will make them money .
It also behooves me to find another way to discover new music I like .
It gives me a lot of pleasure to do so.So far from being useless or futile , I think this kind of research is valuable .
Plus , if it works for music , it will tell us how to do similar things for other kinds of pattern matching , including things that are more important than art appreciation .
Medical diagnostics , computer vision , human-computer interaction... there 's no telling what kind of advances could be triggered by this research.Furthermore , I have no doubts that the music business heavily influences what becomes " popular " regardless of what a lot of people ( not just folks like me ) would like if they only heard it .
The biggest reason for this is that commercial radio and other similar media are incredibly narrow and limited in scope .
I 've read the average radio station has a playlist of 400 songs .
If true , that 's absurd .
There is no doubt in my mind much more , and more interesting , music would garner popularity if it had the right exposure .
Unfortunately , this still requires a ton of money , but it 's becoming less and less so over time , especially as the huge media conglomerates lose relevance in the face of the effectively unlimited distribution network called the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like a wide variety of music.
Most of it is not popular at all.
A lot of it is very ecletic.
What's wrong with trying to develop a system that can make recommendations for someone like me?You seem to think if it's not popular there's no point in even acknowledging it exists.
Maybe you only like popular music.
That's fine.But this kind of research will definitely benefit some like me.
Guess what?
I spend a lot of money on music.
More than most people, and not just because I don't pirate music.
It would behoove artists to try to find a way to expose their music to people like me.
It will make them money.
It also behooves me to find another way to discover new music I like.
It gives me a lot of pleasure to do so.So far from being useless or futile, I think this kind of research is valuable.
Plus, if it works for music, it will tell us how to do similar things for other kinds of pattern matching, including things that are more important than art appreciation.
Medical diagnostics, computer vision, human-computer interaction... there's no telling what kind of advances could be triggered by this research.Furthermore, I have no doubts that the music business heavily influences what becomes "popular" regardless of what a lot of people (not just folks like me) would like if they only heard it.
The biggest reason for this is that commercial radio and other similar media are incredibly narrow and limited in scope.
I've read the average radio station has a playlist of 400 songs.
If true, that's absurd.
There is no doubt in my mind much more, and more interesting, music would garner popularity if it had the right exposure.
Unfortunately, this still requires a ton of money, but it's becoming less and less so over time, especially as the huge media conglomerates lose relevance in the face of the effectively unlimited distribution network called the Internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000982</id>
	<title>for some, 'good' and 'popular' are the same</title>
	<author>lapsed</author>
	<datestamp>1257421380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>More precisely, popular <i>causes</i> good. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm\_(sociology)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Norms</a> [wikipedia.org] cause people to want to act the same way. Some people will listen to music because of its artistic appeal and others will listen to a specific type of music to distinguish themselves from the norm in some way. But the crowd will want to listen to what the crowd listens to *because* that's what the crowd is listening to. Nobody wants to take from the long tail exactly because there's nobody paying attention to the long tail.</htmltext>
<tokenext>More precisely , popular causes good .
Norms [ wikipedia.org ] cause people to want to act the same way .
Some people will listen to music because of its artistic appeal and others will listen to a specific type of music to distinguish themselves from the norm in some way .
But the crowd will want to listen to what the crowd listens to * because * that 's what the crowd is listening to .
Nobody wants to take from the long tail exactly because there 's nobody paying attention to the long tail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More precisely, popular causes good.
Norms [wikipedia.org] cause people to want to act the same way.
Some people will listen to music because of its artistic appeal and others will listen to a specific type of music to distinguish themselves from the norm in some way.
But the crowd will want to listen to what the crowd listens to *because* that's what the crowd is listening to.
Nobody wants to take from the long tail exactly because there's nobody paying attention to the long tail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30006308</id>
	<title>An uprising...</title>
	<author>Super Dave Osbourne</author>
	<datestamp>1257527400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And then what happens when all the music in the world is 'discovered?'.  There will be an uprising like seen no other!  There has to be undiscovered music to keep the malcontents at bay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And then what happens when all the music in the world is 'discovered ? ' .
There will be an uprising like seen no other !
There has to be undiscovered music to keep the malcontents at bay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And then what happens when all the music in the world is 'discovered?'.
There will be an uprising like seen no other!
There has to be undiscovered music to keep the malcontents at bay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046</id>
	<title>The Academic meets Capitalism</title>
	<author>antirelic</author>
	<datestamp>1257421680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Capitalism: Hello there Academic. How are you?</p><p>Academic: Hi... what they heck are you? You look so strange to me...</p><p>Capitalism: I'm Capitalism. Oh, I'm really not all that strange, but I might be a little complicated to understand.</p><p>Academic: Complicated!?! I am the master of complicated, I am an Academic for crying out loud.</p><p>Capitalism: Ok then. Let me try to explain myself. I am a system that provides stuff via supply and demand.</p><p>Academic: Nonsense! I dont hear music that deserves to be heard on the radio or on popular websites!</p><p>Capitalism: Deciding who deserves what really isnt my thing... see... its about supply and demand...</p><p>Academic: But who decides whats in demand!?! Certainly it cannot be the uneducated "masses", they... just aren't qualified!</p><p>Capitalism: No no... its about what many individuals, smart or otherwise, want based on need or dozens of different other factors.</p><p>Academic: Preposterous! How could they possibly know what they want or need if they havent been exposed to it?!? Foolish Capitalism!</p><p>Capitalism: Well, there are a lot of musicians out there and only so many different ways to get them heard, and, well, there are people out there who spend their lives learning what people like and dislike, and even they arent always right... so the best at determining who does best succeeds...</p><p>Academic: Rubbish! What we really need, is for the qualified, with a broad base of tastes to make an application for people to give them a view of all the music that is out there!</p><p>Capitalism: I guess you can try, no one can stop you, but you might not succeed.</p><p>Academic: Your so short sighted. I don't need to worry about succeeding, I receive public money to pursue my higher realm of thinking.</p><p>Capitalism: Right on... so I guess you will compete and regardless if your product sucks, you dont have to worry about it because your really just spending someone elses money.</p><p>Academic: Its progress my dear boy. Progress.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Capitalism : Hello there Academic .
How are you ? Academic : Hi... what they heck are you ?
You look so strange to me...Capitalism : I 'm Capitalism .
Oh , I 'm really not all that strange , but I might be a little complicated to understand.Academic : Complicated ! ? !
I am the master of complicated , I am an Academic for crying out loud.Capitalism : Ok then .
Let me try to explain myself .
I am a system that provides stuff via supply and demand.Academic : Nonsense !
I dont hear music that deserves to be heard on the radio or on popular websites ! Capitalism : Deciding who deserves what really isnt my thing... see... its about supply and demand...Academic : But who decides whats in demand ! ? !
Certainly it can not be the uneducated " masses " , they... just are n't qualified ! Capitalism : No no... its about what many individuals , smart or otherwise , want based on need or dozens of different other factors.Academic : Preposterous !
How could they possibly know what they want or need if they havent been exposed to it ? ! ?
Foolish Capitalism ! Capitalism : Well , there are a lot of musicians out there and only so many different ways to get them heard , and , well , there are people out there who spend their lives learning what people like and dislike , and even they arent always right... so the best at determining who does best succeeds...Academic : Rubbish !
What we really need , is for the qualified , with a broad base of tastes to make an application for people to give them a view of all the music that is out there ! Capitalism : I guess you can try , no one can stop you , but you might not succeed.Academic : Your so short sighted .
I do n't need to worry about succeeding , I receive public money to pursue my higher realm of thinking.Capitalism : Right on... so I guess you will compete and regardless if your product sucks , you dont have to worry about it because your really just spending someone elses money.Academic : Its progress my dear boy .
Progress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Capitalism: Hello there Academic.
How are you?Academic: Hi... what they heck are you?
You look so strange to me...Capitalism: I'm Capitalism.
Oh, I'm really not all that strange, but I might be a little complicated to understand.Academic: Complicated!?!
I am the master of complicated, I am an Academic for crying out loud.Capitalism: Ok then.
Let me try to explain myself.
I am a system that provides stuff via supply and demand.Academic: Nonsense!
I dont hear music that deserves to be heard on the radio or on popular websites!Capitalism: Deciding who deserves what really isnt my thing... see... its about supply and demand...Academic: But who decides whats in demand!?!
Certainly it cannot be the uneducated "masses", they... just aren't qualified!Capitalism: No no... its about what many individuals, smart or otherwise, want based on need or dozens of different other factors.Academic: Preposterous!
How could they possibly know what they want or need if they havent been exposed to it?!?
Foolish Capitalism!Capitalism: Well, there are a lot of musicians out there and only so many different ways to get them heard, and, well, there are people out there who spend their lives learning what people like and dislike, and even they arent always right... so the best at determining who does best succeeds...Academic: Rubbish!
What we really need, is for the qualified, with a broad base of tastes to make an application for people to give them a view of all the music that is out there!Capitalism: I guess you can try, no one can stop you, but you might not succeed.Academic: Your so short sighted.
I don't need to worry about succeeding, I receive public money to pursue my higher realm of thinking.Capitalism: Right on... so I guess you will compete and regardless if your product sucks, you dont have to worry about it because your really just spending someone elses money.Academic: Its progress my dear boy.
Progress.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002376</id>
	<title>Genius doesn't work for me either</title>
	<author>bugs2squash</author>
	<datestamp>1257432480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are four in my household. I'll use itunes to make up a CD for a long car journey with the kids or a playlist for my wife to work out to. Then there's the music I like to listen to. I'm sure it believes I'm schizophrenic and if it were a real genius it would be giving me psychiatric advice by now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are four in my household .
I 'll use itunes to make up a CD for a long car journey with the kids or a playlist for my wife to work out to .
Then there 's the music I like to listen to .
I 'm sure it believes I 'm schizophrenic and if it were a real genius it would be giving me psychiatric advice by now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are four in my household.
I'll use itunes to make up a CD for a long car journey with the kids or a playlist for my wife to work out to.
Then there's the music I like to listen to.
I'm sure it believes I'm schizophrenic and if it were a real genius it would be giving me psychiatric advice by now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001194</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Urza9814</author>
	<datestamp>1257422340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they play a local show and people like to hear them, they'll get requested and more people will hear them.</p> </div><p>That's seriously how you think it works? People just get gig after gig and work their way up and eventually [major label] just starts throwing money and contracts at them?</p><p>Where you live, who you know, and how much free time and money you have matters a \_lot\_ more than how good you are. Sure, talent can eventually get you there too, but for most bands it doesn't. Your options are either to have some contacts that can get you in front of someone important quickly, or to have a shitload of money so you can do nothing but tour for a while. Because even a really good band will likely take a couple years to start getting enough money to live off of from their music - if they ever do.</p><p>Besides, record labels aren't interested in signing good bands, and they aren't interested in signing lots of bands. They're interested in signing as few bands as possible while pushing out as many of those records as possible. And they'll spend billions of dollars getting airtime and advertising to do that. Popular music is not what people like, popular music is what the record companies pay to have on every radio station, in every movie and TV show, every commercial...everywhere. I can't remember the last time I actually listened to music on the radio - or met anyone else who did. Yet somehow that still defines what is popular.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they play a local show and people like to hear them , they 'll get requested and more people will hear them .
That 's seriously how you think it works ?
People just get gig after gig and work their way up and eventually [ major label ] just starts throwing money and contracts at them ? Where you live , who you know , and how much free time and money you have matters a \ _lot \ _ more than how good you are .
Sure , talent can eventually get you there too , but for most bands it does n't .
Your options are either to have some contacts that can get you in front of someone important quickly , or to have a shitload of money so you can do nothing but tour for a while .
Because even a really good band will likely take a couple years to start getting enough money to live off of from their music - if they ever do.Besides , record labels are n't interested in signing good bands , and they are n't interested in signing lots of bands .
They 're interested in signing as few bands as possible while pushing out as many of those records as possible .
And they 'll spend billions of dollars getting airtime and advertising to do that .
Popular music is not what people like , popular music is what the record companies pay to have on every radio station , in every movie and TV show , every commercial...everywhere .
I ca n't remember the last time I actually listened to music on the radio - or met anyone else who did .
Yet somehow that still defines what is popular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they play a local show and people like to hear them, they'll get requested and more people will hear them.
That's seriously how you think it works?
People just get gig after gig and work their way up and eventually [major label] just starts throwing money and contracts at them?Where you live, who you know, and how much free time and money you have matters a \_lot\_ more than how good you are.
Sure, talent can eventually get you there too, but for most bands it doesn't.
Your options are either to have some contacts that can get you in front of someone important quickly, or to have a shitload of money so you can do nothing but tour for a while.
Because even a really good band will likely take a couple years to start getting enough money to live off of from their music - if they ever do.Besides, record labels aren't interested in signing good bands, and they aren't interested in signing lots of bands.
They're interested in signing as few bands as possible while pushing out as many of those records as possible.
And they'll spend billions of dollars getting airtime and advertising to do that.
Popular music is not what people like, popular music is what the record companies pay to have on every radio station, in every movie and TV show, every commercial...everywhere.
I can't remember the last time I actually listened to music on the radio - or met anyone else who did.
Yet somehow that still defines what is popular.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30005962</id>
	<title>Zune Smart DJ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257525120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd like to see a test of Zune's Smart DJ. It seems like it works wonderfully. Unlike Genius it can handle music the Marketplace knows nothing about. I downloaded a fresh J-Pop release that the servers could have no information on, ran Smart DJ on it, and got a playlist full of music that matched not only genre but also generally fit the beat and tempo of the originally selected song. It seems more Pandora-like than Amazon-Recommendation-like. Smart DJ also doesn't need to do any long analysis of your library.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to see a test of Zune 's Smart DJ .
It seems like it works wonderfully .
Unlike Genius it can handle music the Marketplace knows nothing about .
I downloaded a fresh J-Pop release that the servers could have no information on , ran Smart DJ on it , and got a playlist full of music that matched not only genre but also generally fit the beat and tempo of the originally selected song .
It seems more Pandora-like than Amazon-Recommendation-like .
Smart DJ also does n't need to do any long analysis of your library .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to see a test of Zune's Smart DJ.
It seems like it works wonderfully.
Unlike Genius it can handle music the Marketplace knows nothing about.
I downloaded a fresh J-Pop release that the servers could have no information on, ran Smart DJ on it, and got a playlist full of music that matched not only genre but also generally fit the beat and tempo of the originally selected song.
It seems more Pandora-like than Amazon-Recommendation-like.
Smart DJ also doesn't need to do any long analysis of your library.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001512</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1257424320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>3) Listen to any *new* track and figure out if it is like those popular tracks.</i></p><p><i>The idea is to promote good bands that would have been popular except for the fact that they are not already popular and hence might go unnoticed.</i> </p><p>In this scheme, the no-name band that is most successful in cloning the big-band sound will score the highest.</p><p>You might as well be hosting the Fat Elvis competition at the state fair grounds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3 ) Listen to any * new * track and figure out if it is like those popular tracks.The idea is to promote good bands that would have been popular except for the fact that they are not already popular and hence might go unnoticed .
In this scheme , the no-name band that is most successful in cloning the big-band sound will score the highest.You might as well be hosting the Fat Elvis competition at the state fair grounds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3) Listen to any *new* track and figure out if it is like those popular tracks.The idea is to promote good bands that would have been popular except for the fact that they are not already popular and hence might go unnoticed.
In this scheme, the no-name band that is most successful in cloning the big-band sound will score the highest.You might as well be hosting the Fat Elvis competition at the state fair grounds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001100</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257421860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least a portion of marketability in music must come from the perception that many people like it.  There's an awful lot of uninventive fluff on the airwaves and there have been some extraodinarily popular songs that most would agree are very bad.  Macarena and Ice Ice Baby come immediately to mind...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least a portion of marketability in music must come from the perception that many people like it .
There 's an awful lot of uninventive fluff on the airwaves and there have been some extraodinarily popular songs that most would agree are very bad .
Macarena and Ice Ice Baby come immediately to mind.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least a portion of marketability in music must come from the perception that many people like it.
There's an awful lot of uninventive fluff on the airwaves and there have been some extraodinarily popular songs that most would agree are very bad.
Macarena and Ice Ice Baby come immediately to mind...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000974</id>
	<title>Re:Sponsored herd-it advertisment?</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1257421380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is much more likely that the submitter is affiliated with the facebook game (and thought that 'slashdot' was a convenient label to apply to people coming from...slashdot), or that the submitter signed up for the slashdot refcode in order to get whatever points may (or may not) be involved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is much more likely that the submitter is affiliated with the facebook game ( and thought that 'slashdot ' was a convenient label to apply to people coming from...slashdot ) , or that the submitter signed up for the slashdot refcode in order to get whatever points may ( or may not ) be involved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is much more likely that the submitter is affiliated with the facebook game (and thought that 'slashdot' was a convenient label to apply to people coming from...slashdot), or that the submitter signed up for the slashdot refcode in order to get whatever points may (or may not) be involved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001268</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257422700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's two flaws in your argument.  The first is the idea that exposure has no training effect on a listener's likes and dislikes.  I don't have any data on this but I'd bet that's untrue.  The second flaw is assuming that unpopular bands are unpopular because they are essentially inferior products in the eyes of the market.  This might be true in an efficient market but if the market itself is dominated by a few small outlets (Clearchannel Communications for instance) popularity doesn't indicate a better product or user preference so much as it indicates monopoly power over the industry.  Microsoft and McDonalds would be similar examples that spring to mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's two flaws in your argument .
The first is the idea that exposure has no training effect on a listener 's likes and dislikes .
I do n't have any data on this but I 'd bet that 's untrue .
The second flaw is assuming that unpopular bands are unpopular because they are essentially inferior products in the eyes of the market .
This might be true in an efficient market but if the market itself is dominated by a few small outlets ( Clearchannel Communications for instance ) popularity does n't indicate a better product or user preference so much as it indicates monopoly power over the industry .
Microsoft and McDonalds would be similar examples that spring to mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's two flaws in your argument.
The first is the idea that exposure has no training effect on a listener's likes and dislikes.
I don't have any data on this but I'd bet that's untrue.
The second flaw is assuming that unpopular bands are unpopular because they are essentially inferior products in the eyes of the market.
This might be true in an efficient market but if the market itself is dominated by a few small outlets (Clearchannel Communications for instance) popularity doesn't indicate a better product or user preference so much as it indicates monopoly power over the industry.
Microsoft and McDonalds would be similar examples that spring to mind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001230</id>
	<title>Re:It's time to put it to a vote:</title>
	<author>FroBugg</author>
	<datestamp>1257422520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Setting aside the obvious joke, the "wisdom of crowds" has actually been proven to be useful in certain situations.</p><p>If you ask, say, a single person how many jelly beans are in a jar, he may or may not come close. If you ask several hundred people how many are in a given jar and then average their responses, the result tends to be surprisingly accurate.</p><p>The problem is that this is limited to situations requiring little to no topic-specific knowledge. Asking a large crowd of random people what the GDP of China is will be a waste of time. It's a technique that requires you to be asking the right questions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Setting aside the obvious joke , the " wisdom of crowds " has actually been proven to be useful in certain situations.If you ask , say , a single person how many jelly beans are in a jar , he may or may not come close .
If you ask several hundred people how many are in a given jar and then average their responses , the result tends to be surprisingly accurate.The problem is that this is limited to situations requiring little to no topic-specific knowledge .
Asking a large crowd of random people what the GDP of China is will be a waste of time .
It 's a technique that requires you to be asking the right questions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Setting aside the obvious joke, the "wisdom of crowds" has actually been proven to be useful in certain situations.If you ask, say, a single person how many jelly beans are in a jar, he may or may not come close.
If you ask several hundred people how many are in a given jar and then average their responses, the result tends to be surprisingly accurate.The problem is that this is limited to situations requiring little to no topic-specific knowledge.
Asking a large crowd of random people what the GDP of China is will be a waste of time.
It's a technique that requires you to be asking the right questions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000988</id>
	<title>This is so true.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257421440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really enjoy classical guitar music. Apple's genius selection for the type of music I enjoy is so bad I just turned it off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really enjoy classical guitar music .
Apple 's genius selection for the type of music I enjoy is so bad I just turned it off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really enjoy classical guitar music.
Apple's genius selection for the type of music I enjoy is so bad I just turned it off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001244</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>0100010001010011</author>
	<datestamp>1257422580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Throwing Timmy's garage band</p></div><p>Timmay, timmay timmay TIMMAY TIMMAY timmay.</p><p>Timamy,</p><p>Timmay.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Throwing Timmy 's garage bandTimmay , timmay timmay TIMMAY TIMMAY timmay.Timamy,Timmay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Throwing Timmy's garage bandTimmay, timmay timmay TIMMAY TIMMAY timmay.Timamy,Timmay.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001156</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Vahokif</author>
	<datestamp>1257422160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The thing is that most pop superstars aren't actually very talented. People who write just as entertaining or better music generally don't make it because of pure bad luck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is that most pop superstars are n't actually very talented .
People who write just as entertaining or better music generally do n't make it because of pure bad luck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is that most pop superstars aren't actually very talented.
People who write just as entertaining or better music generally don't make it because of pure bad luck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001746</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>johnlcallaway</author>
	<datestamp>1257426360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thank you!!!
<br> <br>
While I have no doubt a computer program could figure out that I like certain tempos and time signatures and musical patterns, none of it says whether it is any good.
<br> <br>
What I don't understand is the concept that it has to be 'fair'.  There are thousands of wonderful singers, songwriters, musicians,and drummers out there. I can listen all day to great music, who cares if some unknown in Gary Indiana is better and is being ignored. Tell him to get off his fat ass and work to get noticed like everyone else has had to. Times are changing, and myspace, facebook. blogs in general, and other Internet features make it simple to get your work out there and link to albums on Amazon if someone wants to buy it. Tell these kids to stop whining because no one knows about it. As the parent said, if it is any good<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... they will. When it hits critical mass, it will start being recommended.
<br> <br>If these kids would stop listening to their mother and boyfriend/girlfriend's opinions, maybe reality would set in and they would find out they are just as mediocre as everyone else is.
<br> <br>
Kids these days<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... expect everything to be handed to them.  And GET OFF MY LAWN!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you ! ! !
While I have no doubt a computer program could figure out that I like certain tempos and time signatures and musical patterns , none of it says whether it is any good .
What I do n't understand is the concept that it has to be 'fair' .
There are thousands of wonderful singers , songwriters , musicians,and drummers out there .
I can listen all day to great music , who cares if some unknown in Gary Indiana is better and is being ignored .
Tell him to get off his fat ass and work to get noticed like everyone else has had to .
Times are changing , and myspace , facebook .
blogs in general , and other Internet features make it simple to get your work out there and link to albums on Amazon if someone wants to buy it .
Tell these kids to stop whining because no one knows about it .
As the parent said , if it is any good ... they will .
When it hits critical mass , it will start being recommended .
If these kids would stop listening to their mother and boyfriend/girlfriend 's opinions , maybe reality would set in and they would find out they are just as mediocre as everyone else is .
Kids these days ... expect everything to be handed to them .
And GET OFF MY LAWN ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you!!!
While I have no doubt a computer program could figure out that I like certain tempos and time signatures and musical patterns, none of it says whether it is any good.
What I don't understand is the concept that it has to be 'fair'.
There are thousands of wonderful singers, songwriters, musicians,and drummers out there.
I can listen all day to great music, who cares if some unknown in Gary Indiana is better and is being ignored.
Tell him to get off his fat ass and work to get noticed like everyone else has had to.
Times are changing, and myspace, facebook.
blogs in general, and other Internet features make it simple to get your work out there and link to albums on Amazon if someone wants to buy it.
Tell these kids to stop whining because no one knows about it.
As the parent said, if it is any good ... they will.
When it hits critical mass, it will start being recommended.
If these kids would stop listening to their mother and boyfriend/girlfriend's opinions, maybe reality would set in and they would find out they are just as mediocre as everyone else is.
Kids these days ... expect everything to be handed to them.
And GET OFF MY LAWN!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002540</id>
	<title>Let me get this straight...</title>
	<author>Minwee</author>
	<datestamp>1257434340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're using <em>people who play Facebook games</em> to train their systems to be smarter?
</p><p>The mind wobbles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're using people who play Facebook games to train their systems to be smarter ?
The mind wobbles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're using people who play Facebook games to train their systems to be smarter?
The mind wobbles.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001496</id>
	<title>Re:The Academic meets Capitalism</title>
	<author>dlwire</author>
	<datestamp>1257424200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Academic: My product is aimed at the people who aren't into the banal garbage that ends up on the radio. While my target audience is smaller I hope to address a hole left by your model.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Academic : My product is aimed at the people who are n't into the banal garbage that ends up on the radio .
While my target audience is smaller I hope to address a hole left by your model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Academic: My product is aimed at the people who aren't into the banal garbage that ends up on the radio.
While my target audience is smaller I hope to address a hole left by your model.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30004448</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone actually use "Genius"?</title>
	<author>dimeglio</author>
	<datestamp>1257511620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny but I've usually been quite pleased with the Genious selection. I'm more inclined to try Genious just because it makes it easier to put a list together. I can always manually 'improve' the list if a few songs don't fit. I'm not expecting perfection and neither should you. Although it would be interesting to see more obscure songs be suggested. Algorithms have to be based on something and that something contains some level of bias.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny but I 've usually been quite pleased with the Genious selection .
I 'm more inclined to try Genious just because it makes it easier to put a list together .
I can always manually 'improve ' the list if a few songs do n't fit .
I 'm not expecting perfection and neither should you .
Although it would be interesting to see more obscure songs be suggested .
Algorithms have to be based on something and that something contains some level of bias .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny but I've usually been quite pleased with the Genious selection.
I'm more inclined to try Genious just because it makes it easier to put a list together.
I can always manually 'improve' the list if a few songs don't fit.
I'm not expecting perfection and neither should you.
Although it would be interesting to see more obscure songs be suggested.
Algorithms have to be based on something and that something contains some level of bias.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001504</id>
	<title>Re:The Academic meets Capitalism</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1257424260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That was remarkably insightful.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That was remarkably insightful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was remarkably insightful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001776</id>
	<title>Re:The Academic meets Capitalism</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1257426540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting theory, but I'd pay for a system that introduces me to songs I haven't heard before that I might like.  I don't care if it's popular (or good) if I like it, I like it.   For instance, <a href="http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&amp;rls=en&amp;q=celine+dion+arrogant+worms&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;oe=UTF-8" title="google.com">this</a> [google.com] is in my "a" playlist at the moment.  Right next to "Waking up in Vegas" which was a top 40 hit not too long ago.</p><p>Such a service actually fits <em>within</em> capitalism, if enough people are interested.  I have to agree that Genius just doesn't seem to do that for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting theory , but I 'd pay for a system that introduces me to songs I have n't heard before that I might like .
I do n't care if it 's popular ( or good ) if I like it , I like it .
For instance , this [ google.com ] is in my " a " playlist at the moment .
Right next to " Waking up in Vegas " which was a top 40 hit not too long ago.Such a service actually fits within capitalism , if enough people are interested .
I have to agree that Genius just does n't seem to do that for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting theory, but I'd pay for a system that introduces me to songs I haven't heard before that I might like.
I don't care if it's popular (or good) if I like it, I like it.
For instance, this [google.com] is in my "a" playlist at the moment.
Right next to "Waking up in Vegas" which was a top 40 hit not too long ago.Such a service actually fits within capitalism, if enough people are interested.
I have to agree that Genius just doesn't seem to do that for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001848</id>
	<title>Re:The Academic meets Capitalism</title>
	<author>Vitriol+Angst</author>
	<datestamp>1257427200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You make a compelling argument Mr. Capitalism,<br>I'd just like to say;</p><p>Pat Boone<br>Grateful Dead (I think their following enjoys the flashbacks, and so the love of their music is more of a trigger -- if you never got stoned to the Grateful Dead, then you probably don't get the attraction to this elevator music).<br>Jimmy Buffet (yes, I said it. God save us all from the popularity of Margarittaville and listening to another aging drunk doing his white man's overbite to this moldy oldy).</p><p>&gt;&gt; And even more, economic go-to people who bring in the bucks:<br>Dane Cook<br>Blue Collar Comedy Tour,<br>Gallagher,<br>Carrot Top</p><p>&gt;&gt; I think I'm going to try out this heuristic algorithm that the Academics dream up. They aren't grading it on correct use of English, after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You make a compelling argument Mr. Capitalism,I 'd just like to say ; Pat BooneGrateful Dead ( I think their following enjoys the flashbacks , and so the love of their music is more of a trigger -- if you never got stoned to the Grateful Dead , then you probably do n't get the attraction to this elevator music ) .Jimmy Buffet ( yes , I said it .
God save us all from the popularity of Margarittaville and listening to another aging drunk doing his white man 's overbite to this moldy oldy ) . &gt; &gt; And even more , economic go-to people who bring in the bucks : Dane CookBlue Collar Comedy Tour,Gallagher,Carrot Top &gt; &gt; I think I 'm going to try out this heuristic algorithm that the Academics dream up .
They are n't grading it on correct use of English , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You make a compelling argument Mr. Capitalism,I'd just like to say;Pat BooneGrateful Dead (I think their following enjoys the flashbacks, and so the love of their music is more of a trigger -- if you never got stoned to the Grateful Dead, then you probably don't get the attraction to this elevator music).Jimmy Buffet (yes, I said it.
God save us all from the popularity of Margarittaville and listening to another aging drunk doing his white man's overbite to this moldy oldy).&gt;&gt; And even more, economic go-to people who bring in the bucks:Dane CookBlue Collar Comedy Tour,Gallagher,Carrot Top&gt;&gt; I think I'm going to try out this heuristic algorithm that the Academics dream up.
They aren't grading it on correct use of English, after all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001906</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257427620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Popularity does not equate to quality. Very high quality will be popular and very low quality will be unpopular. Anything in between is as much about social interaction as it is about actual quality music.</p><p>Study:<br>http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/311/5762/854</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Popularity does not equate to quality .
Very high quality will be popular and very low quality will be unpopular .
Anything in between is as much about social interaction as it is about actual quality music.Study : http : //www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/311/5762/854</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Popularity does not equate to quality.
Very high quality will be popular and very low quality will be unpopular.
Anything in between is as much about social interaction as it is about actual quality music.Study:http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/311/5762/854</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002238</id>
	<title>Re:The Academic meets Capitalism</title>
	<author>kklein</author>
	<datestamp>1257431400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Academics drive Capitalism. High-level research is not done by corporations (anymore--there used to be places like HP that did, but Carly, being an ignorant capitalist, killed that off). Publicly-funded research is what hands ideas to the private sector. Sometimes academic research just breaks off and becomes private (Google).

</p><p>The point of making products/ideas without competitive accountability is to explore the possibilities that lie beyond what pays out in the short term. The slow death of American academia is ultimately what is going to kill off the economy as well. It just takes time for the consequences to trickle into the private sector.

</p><p>Nothing worthwhile, nothing, from the last century, was made by the private sector alone. Nothing. I don't care what technological innovation you think of; if we dig back through the history of that thing, we're going to find taxpayer-funded academic research.

</p><p>I don't want to live in your ideal society, and I don't actually think you would like it, either. The last time we tried it your way, it was affectionately known as the Dark Ages. You may think you'd be a knight or a nobleman, but I think it's a lot more likely that you, me, and everyone we know, would be serfs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Academics drive Capitalism .
High-level research is not done by corporations ( anymore--there used to be places like HP that did , but Carly , being an ignorant capitalist , killed that off ) .
Publicly-funded research is what hands ideas to the private sector .
Sometimes academic research just breaks off and becomes private ( Google ) .
The point of making products/ideas without competitive accountability is to explore the possibilities that lie beyond what pays out in the short term .
The slow death of American academia is ultimately what is going to kill off the economy as well .
It just takes time for the consequences to trickle into the private sector .
Nothing worthwhile , nothing , from the last century , was made by the private sector alone .
Nothing. I do n't care what technological innovation you think of ; if we dig back through the history of that thing , we 're going to find taxpayer-funded academic research .
I do n't want to live in your ideal society , and I do n't actually think you would like it , either .
The last time we tried it your way , it was affectionately known as the Dark Ages .
You may think you 'd be a knight or a nobleman , but I think it 's a lot more likely that you , me , and everyone we know , would be serfs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Academics drive Capitalism.
High-level research is not done by corporations (anymore--there used to be places like HP that did, but Carly, being an ignorant capitalist, killed that off).
Publicly-funded research is what hands ideas to the private sector.
Sometimes academic research just breaks off and becomes private (Google).
The point of making products/ideas without competitive accountability is to explore the possibilities that lie beyond what pays out in the short term.
The slow death of American academia is ultimately what is going to kill off the economy as well.
It just takes time for the consequences to trickle into the private sector.
Nothing worthwhile, nothing, from the last century, was made by the private sector alone.
Nothing. I don't care what technological innovation you think of; if we dig back through the history of that thing, we're going to find taxpayer-funded academic research.
I don't want to live in your ideal society, and I don't actually think you would like it, either.
The last time we tried it your way, it was affectionately known as the Dark Ages.
You may think you'd be a knight or a nobleman, but I think it's a lot more likely that you, me, and everyone we know, would be serfs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30004204</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>thijsh</author>
	<datestamp>1257507360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The idea is to promote good bands that would have been popular except for the fact that they are not already popular and hence might go unnoticed.</p></div><p>How long will it take until 'they' (MAFIAA) game this system by producing tracks that the trick the AI into 'liking' the new artists they are plugging and recommending it to all users?<br> <br>
This will add a whole new depth of meaning to <b>artificially popular music</b> (like the 'top' often already is). After a while all the top items will sound exactly the same (just like the top google results sometimes were until google corrected the pagerank algorithm). Since this is probably much more complex than pagerank the resitance of the AI against these kind of tricks will probably be lagging years behind and the recommendations will always suck...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The idea is to promote good bands that would have been popular except for the fact that they are not already popular and hence might go unnoticed.How long will it take until 'they ' ( MAFIAA ) game this system by producing tracks that the trick the AI into 'liking ' the new artists they are plugging and recommending it to all users ?
This will add a whole new depth of meaning to artificially popular music ( like the 'top ' often already is ) .
After a while all the top items will sound exactly the same ( just like the top google results sometimes were until google corrected the pagerank algorithm ) .
Since this is probably much more complex than pagerank the resitance of the AI against these kind of tricks will probably be lagging years behind and the recommendations will always suck.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The idea is to promote good bands that would have been popular except for the fact that they are not already popular and hence might go unnoticed.How long will it take until 'they' (MAFIAA) game this system by producing tracks that the trick the AI into 'liking' the new artists they are plugging and recommending it to all users?
This will add a whole new depth of meaning to artificially popular music (like the 'top' often already is).
After a while all the top items will sound exactly the same (just like the top google results sometimes were until google corrected the pagerank algorithm).
Since this is probably much more complex than pagerank the resitance of the AI against these kind of tricks will probably be lagging years behind and the recommendations will always suck...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30003950</id>
	<title>Next stop: JPop</title>
	<author>GrubLord</author>
	<datestamp>1257502800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just wait 'til they get these things recommending foreign music.

I can't say whether that's good or bad, really. On the one hand, I don't want to hear any more Daler Mehndi than I have to... but on the other hand, I would've liked to have been recommended Coeur de Pirate a long time ago.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wait 'til they get these things recommending foreign music .
I ca n't say whether that 's good or bad , really .
On the one hand , I do n't want to hear any more Daler Mehndi than I have to... but on the other hand , I would 've liked to have been recommended Coeur de Pirate a long time ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wait 'til they get these things recommending foreign music.
I can't say whether that's good or bad, really.
On the one hand, I don't want to hear any more Daler Mehndi than I have to... but on the other hand, I would've liked to have been recommended Coeur de Pirate a long time ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002328</id>
	<title>Re:It's time to put it to a vote:</title>
	<author>Twinbee</author>
	<datestamp>1257432060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the jelly beans, do they take the arithmetic average or the geometric average? It would be interesting to see which comes closer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the jelly beans , do they take the arithmetic average or the geometric average ?
It would be interesting to see which comes closer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the jelly beans, do they take the arithmetic average or the geometric average?
It would be interesting to see which comes closer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001230</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001140</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257422040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is actually not the case. The music industry is shockingly good at picking songs the masses will like -- but their false negative rate is unknown. Stuff they say will sell likely will (especially because of the massive marketing $ spent on it), but stuff they say won't...who knows?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is actually not the case .
The music industry is shockingly good at picking songs the masses will like -- but their false negative rate is unknown .
Stuff they say will sell likely will ( especially because of the massive marketing $ spent on it ) , but stuff they say wo n't...who knows ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is actually not the case.
The music industry is shockingly good at picking songs the masses will like -- but their false negative rate is unknown.
Stuff they say will sell likely will (especially because of the massive marketing $ spent on it), but stuff they say won't...who knows?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30010586</id>
	<title>There used to be an awesome way to sample music...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257506400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back in the days of Napster and others of it's ilk, I could log in, select a random sampling of tracks from bands I'd never heard of, listen to them, and then go hunt down the band if I liked what I heard.</p><p>About 80\% of my music listening, other than classical, was discovered that way.   I might have 10-15 "established" bands in my playlist now.  The rest are all indie or self-published.</p><p>Sadly, there's still no "legal" way to do that kind of random sampling anymore.</p><p>Napster, Grokster, mp3.com,  others...   have all come and gone.</p><p>Now I'm stuck with using<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... well.  never mind what I'm using now.  I'm not going to violate rule #1.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in the days of Napster and others of it 's ilk , I could log in , select a random sampling of tracks from bands I 'd never heard of , listen to them , and then go hunt down the band if I liked what I heard.About 80 \ % of my music listening , other than classical , was discovered that way .
I might have 10-15 " established " bands in my playlist now .
The rest are all indie or self-published.Sadly , there 's still no " legal " way to do that kind of random sampling anymore.Napster , Grokster , mp3.com , others... have all come and gone.Now I 'm stuck with using ... well. never mind what I 'm using now .
I 'm not going to violate rule # 1 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in the days of Napster and others of it's ilk, I could log in, select a random sampling of tracks from bands I'd never heard of, listen to them, and then go hunt down the band if I liked what I heard.About 80\% of my music listening, other than classical, was discovered that way.
I might have 10-15 "established" bands in my playlist now.
The rest are all indie or self-published.Sadly, there's still no "legal" way to do that kind of random sampling anymore.Napster, Grokster, mp3.com,  others...   have all come and gone.Now I'm stuck with using ... well.  never mind what I'm using now.
I'm not going to violate rule #1.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30003436</id>
	<title>Meaningful data first play, bs on repeats</title>
	<author>sstair</author>
	<datestamp>1257449940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they ask you the question, "What color is this song?", and you answer "Green", but most of the other players answer "Black"..then they ask you that same question again...what are you going to answer THIS time?

If they had more than 20 questions to cycle through, they might get useful data.  As it is, I think it is just a cleverly designed advertisement for Frank Zappa.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they ask you the question , " What color is this song ?
" , and you answer " Green " , but most of the other players answer " Black " ..then they ask you that same question again...what are you going to answer THIS time ?
If they had more than 20 questions to cycle through , they might get useful data .
As it is , I think it is just a cleverly designed advertisement for Frank Zappa .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they ask you the question, "What color is this song?
", and you answer "Green", but most of the other players answer "Black"..then they ask you that same question again...what are you going to answer THIS time?
If they had more than 20 questions to cycle through, they might get useful data.
As it is, I think it is just a cleverly designed advertisement for Frank Zappa.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30012540</id>
	<title>Won't work for long</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257530760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because once this shit gets 4chan'd, the shit hits the fan and you got crap data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because once this shit gets 4chan 'd , the shit hits the fan and you got crap data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because once this shit gets 4chan'd, the shit hits the fan and you got crap data.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000854</id>
	<title>So, not at all?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257420780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's well known that radio suffers from a popularity bias, where the most popular songs receive an inordinate amount of exposure. In Apple's music recommender system, iTunes' Genius, this bias is magnified. An underground artist will never be recommended in a playlist due to insufficient data.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>Their experiments show that automatic recommendations work at least as well as Genius for recommending undiscovered music</p></div></blockquote><p>So, not really so much at all...?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's well known that radio suffers from a popularity bias , where the most popular songs receive an inordinate amount of exposure .
In Apple 's music recommender system , iTunes ' Genius , this bias is magnified .
An underground artist will never be recommended in a playlist due to insufficient data .
...Their experiments show that automatic recommendations work at least as well as Genius for recommending undiscovered musicSo , not really so much at all... ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's well known that radio suffers from a popularity bias, where the most popular songs receive an inordinate amount of exposure.
In Apple's music recommender system, iTunes' Genius, this bias is magnified.
An underground artist will never be recommended in a playlist due to insufficient data.
...Their experiments show that automatic recommendations work at least as well as Genius for recommending undiscovered musicSo, not really so much at all...?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002016</id>
	<title>High Fidelity</title>
	<author>lyinhart</author>
	<datestamp>1257428880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>10 minutes with someone who works in an independent record store will help you find better music than any algorithm (or any Top 40/Adult Contemporary radio station for that matter). That is, if you can find someone friendly in one of these stores...<br> <br>

Paraphrased from actual conversation in an indie record store:<br>
Record store owner: "Why do people keep coming back here?"<br>
Employee: "Well, it's not friendliness..."<br>
Owner: "WHAT?! I'm the most f***ing friendly guy there is!</htmltext>
<tokenext>10 minutes with someone who works in an independent record store will help you find better music than any algorithm ( or any Top 40/Adult Contemporary radio station for that matter ) .
That is , if you can find someone friendly in one of these stores.. . Paraphrased from actual conversation in an indie record store : Record store owner : " Why do people keep coming back here ?
" Employee : " Well , it 's not friendliness... " Owner : " WHAT ? !
I 'm the most f * * * ing friendly guy there is !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10 minutes with someone who works in an independent record store will help you find better music than any algorithm (or any Top 40/Adult Contemporary radio station for that matter).
That is, if you can find someone friendly in one of these stores... 

Paraphrased from actual conversation in an indie record store:
Record store owner: "Why do people keep coming back here?
"
Employee: "Well, it's not friendliness..."
Owner: "WHAT?!
I'm the most f***ing friendly guy there is!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001110</id>
	<title>Re:They should go through my collection...</title>
	<author>SlashdotOgre</author>
	<datestamp>1257421920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually I've found last.fm's recommendation system works extremely well; so well in fact that I constantly have a tab open to it when I'm browsing music stores like eMusic (eventually I want to write a little app for this purpose using last.fm's API, but I digress).  For those unaware, last.fm users submit what they're listening to through automated plugins (and the supported apps list is huge and very platform independent, I personally use both Amarok 1.4 and MPD); one of the things last.fm does with this music is identifies your "neighbors" (people with similar lastes, i.e. 8 of our top 10 artists are identical).  I've found that one of the best ways to find new music is by browsing what my neighbors are listening to and checking out any of their top bands that I'm not familiar with.  They also list related artists by correlating this information (e.g. the majority of users who have Band A as a favorite artist also like Band B).  Another useful feature is being able to check what an artists most played songs are (great for when it's an artist you never heard of).  With that said, I'm definitely interested in seeing what recommendations come from this UCSD team (and not just because I'm an alumnae) as I'm always interested in finding new artists, especially smaller and local ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I 've found last.fm 's recommendation system works extremely well ; so well in fact that I constantly have a tab open to it when I 'm browsing music stores like eMusic ( eventually I want to write a little app for this purpose using last.fm 's API , but I digress ) .
For those unaware , last.fm users submit what they 're listening to through automated plugins ( and the supported apps list is huge and very platform independent , I personally use both Amarok 1.4 and MPD ) ; one of the things last.fm does with this music is identifies your " neighbors " ( people with similar lastes , i.e .
8 of our top 10 artists are identical ) .
I 've found that one of the best ways to find new music is by browsing what my neighbors are listening to and checking out any of their top bands that I 'm not familiar with .
They also list related artists by correlating this information ( e.g .
the majority of users who have Band A as a favorite artist also like Band B ) .
Another useful feature is being able to check what an artists most played songs are ( great for when it 's an artist you never heard of ) .
With that said , I 'm definitely interested in seeing what recommendations come from this UCSD team ( and not just because I 'm an alumnae ) as I 'm always interested in finding new artists , especially smaller and local ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I've found last.fm's recommendation system works extremely well; so well in fact that I constantly have a tab open to it when I'm browsing music stores like eMusic (eventually I want to write a little app for this purpose using last.fm's API, but I digress).
For those unaware, last.fm users submit what they're listening to through automated plugins (and the supported apps list is huge and very platform independent, I personally use both Amarok 1.4 and MPD); one of the things last.fm does with this music is identifies your "neighbors" (people with similar lastes, i.e.
8 of our top 10 artists are identical).
I've found that one of the best ways to find new music is by browsing what my neighbors are listening to and checking out any of their top bands that I'm not familiar with.
They also list related artists by correlating this information (e.g.
the majority of users who have Band A as a favorite artist also like Band B).
Another useful feature is being able to check what an artists most played songs are (great for when it's an artist you never heard of).
With that said, I'm definitely interested in seeing what recommendations come from this UCSD team (and not just because I'm an alumnae) as I'm always interested in finding new artists, especially smaller and local ones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000698</id>
	<title>Wow.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257420000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey! I never had first post!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey !
I never had first post !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey!
I never had first post!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000876</id>
	<title>Re:It's time to put it to a vote:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257420840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anybody who thinks 'the wisdom of the crowds' could be used for anything useful should be thoroughly modded down.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anybody who thinks 'the wisdom of the crowds ' could be used for anything useful should be thoroughly modded down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anybody who thinks 'the wisdom of the crowds' could be used for anything useful should be thoroughly modded down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001028</id>
	<title>Just tried this out</title>
	<author>Idimmu Xul</author>
	<datestamp>1257421620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first track that played was a System of a Down tune. Which is about as pop as it gets. The ones after didn't get much better. If they really want to use this to push less played songs which have potential, they should actually better get some.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first track that played was a System of a Down tune .
Which is about as pop as it gets .
The ones after did n't get much better .
If they really want to use this to push less played songs which have potential , they should actually better get some .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first track that played was a System of a Down tune.
Which is about as pop as it gets.
The ones after didn't get much better.
If they really want to use this to push less played songs which have potential, they should actually better get some.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001872</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone actually use "Genius"?</title>
	<author>Rib Feast</author>
	<datestamp>1257427380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The biggest problem is that Apple is probably the closest internet-based distribution system to the record labels of old. Perhaps this is an "appeal to the masses" approach or to get onside with the labels.</p><p>The downside of this is that a collaborative filter based on genre and sales will never go deep. I doubt they'd ever use pearson's correlation coefficient seriously enough to offset the "this is the new hit everyone listens to so you should too".</p><p>I guess it comes down to musical integrity to the extent of ignoring trends to deliver truly accurate results... or hit 90\% of the market with a simple solution that probably makes them more money and makes the record labels easier to deal with.</p><p>Glad to see they're thinking different and aren't just playing to the status quo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The biggest problem is that Apple is probably the closest internet-based distribution system to the record labels of old .
Perhaps this is an " appeal to the masses " approach or to get onside with the labels.The downside of this is that a collaborative filter based on genre and sales will never go deep .
I doubt they 'd ever use pearson 's correlation coefficient seriously enough to offset the " this is the new hit everyone listens to so you should too " .I guess it comes down to musical integrity to the extent of ignoring trends to deliver truly accurate results... or hit 90 \ % of the market with a simple solution that probably makes them more money and makes the record labels easier to deal with.Glad to see they 're thinking different and are n't just playing to the status quo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The biggest problem is that Apple is probably the closest internet-based distribution system to the record labels of old.
Perhaps this is an "appeal to the masses" approach or to get onside with the labels.The downside of this is that a collaborative filter based on genre and sales will never go deep.
I doubt they'd ever use pearson's correlation coefficient seriously enough to offset the "this is the new hit everyone listens to so you should too".I guess it comes down to musical integrity to the extent of ignoring trends to deliver truly accurate results... or hit 90\% of the market with a simple solution that probably makes them more money and makes the record labels easier to deal with.Glad to see they're thinking different and aren't just playing to the status quo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002436</id>
	<title>Doesn't work for me</title>
	<author>rwa2</author>
	<datestamp>1257433260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've played with Pandora radio a bit before, but it doesn't tend to work for my taste in music.  I like songs with funny lyrics... Monty Python, King Missile, Nellie McKay...  the algorithms that focus strictly on musical styles generate pretty hilarious results, but not what I'm looking for<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p><p>I've been pretty happy with some of the dj internet radio stations, though, like somafm.com and some of the ones on di.fm .  Before I found some of those stations, I didn't really think there was much of any music that I liked.  Certainly not on broadcast or satellite radio.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've played with Pandora radio a bit before , but it does n't tend to work for my taste in music .
I like songs with funny lyrics... Monty Python , King Missile , Nellie McKay... the algorithms that focus strictly on musical styles generate pretty hilarious results , but not what I 'm looking for : PI 've been pretty happy with some of the dj internet radio stations , though , like somafm.com and some of the ones on di.fm .
Before I found some of those stations , I did n't really think there was much of any music that I liked .
Certainly not on broadcast or satellite radio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've played with Pandora radio a bit before, but it doesn't tend to work for my taste in music.
I like songs with funny lyrics... Monty Python, King Missile, Nellie McKay...  the algorithms that focus strictly on musical styles generate pretty hilarious results, but not what I'm looking for :PI've been pretty happy with some of the dj internet radio stations, though, like somafm.com and some of the ones on di.fm .
Before I found some of those stations, I didn't really think there was much of any music that I liked.
Certainly not on broadcast or satellite radio.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948</id>
	<title>Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1257421200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When are people going to realize that unpopular music is unpopular for a reason.  Sure the music execs try to push their own artists more than others, and they try to target the largest cross section of the population as possible, but why wouldn't they?</p><p>Trying to bring 'unpopular' must to the masses because that will suddenly make it popular is stupid.  Music becomes popular because someone hears it and likes it, not just because they hear it.</p><p>Throwing Timmy's garage band onto every radio station in the world during prime time isn't going to change the fact that Timmy's garage band sucks and very few people want to hear it.</p><p>Yes, there are people who don't have the same tastes as the general public, that is a small portion of the public, nothing you do is going to change that.  There will always be a bell curve.  Stop with this crap of think just because you like some indie band that no one has heard of that everyone else will.</p><p>If the general public likes them they will become popular.  If they play a local show and people like to hear them, they'll get requested and more people will hear them.  Then more places will request them, and rinse, repeat, until they will become popular.</p><p>Unknown bands are unknown because they are interesting or 'good' to a small number of people, not because of some silly idea that they got shafted by a playlist generator.  The playlist generator is simply following trends that it learns from people.  It doesn't actually analyze the music to find the algorithm that makes it 'good music'.   It says 'People that listen to this song also like this song, add it to the list', rinse, repeat, playlist generated.  It doesn't say 'hey, no one listens to this song, lets throw it in and then everyone will like it!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When are people going to realize that unpopular music is unpopular for a reason .
Sure the music execs try to push their own artists more than others , and they try to target the largest cross section of the population as possible , but why would n't they ? Trying to bring 'unpopular ' must to the masses because that will suddenly make it popular is stupid .
Music becomes popular because someone hears it and likes it , not just because they hear it.Throwing Timmy 's garage band onto every radio station in the world during prime time is n't going to change the fact that Timmy 's garage band sucks and very few people want to hear it.Yes , there are people who do n't have the same tastes as the general public , that is a small portion of the public , nothing you do is going to change that .
There will always be a bell curve .
Stop with this crap of think just because you like some indie band that no one has heard of that everyone else will.If the general public likes them they will become popular .
If they play a local show and people like to hear them , they 'll get requested and more people will hear them .
Then more places will request them , and rinse , repeat , until they will become popular.Unknown bands are unknown because they are interesting or 'good ' to a small number of people , not because of some silly idea that they got shafted by a playlist generator .
The playlist generator is simply following trends that it learns from people .
It does n't actually analyze the music to find the algorithm that makes it 'good music' .
It says 'People that listen to this song also like this song , add it to the list ' , rinse , repeat , playlist generated .
It does n't say 'hey , no one listens to this song , lets throw it in and then everyone will like it ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When are people going to realize that unpopular music is unpopular for a reason.
Sure the music execs try to push their own artists more than others, and they try to target the largest cross section of the population as possible, but why wouldn't they?Trying to bring 'unpopular' must to the masses because that will suddenly make it popular is stupid.
Music becomes popular because someone hears it and likes it, not just because they hear it.Throwing Timmy's garage band onto every radio station in the world during prime time isn't going to change the fact that Timmy's garage band sucks and very few people want to hear it.Yes, there are people who don't have the same tastes as the general public, that is a small portion of the public, nothing you do is going to change that.
There will always be a bell curve.
Stop with this crap of think just because you like some indie band that no one has heard of that everyone else will.If the general public likes them they will become popular.
If they play a local show and people like to hear them, they'll get requested and more people will hear them.
Then more places will request them, and rinse, repeat, until they will become popular.Unknown bands are unknown because they are interesting or 'good' to a small number of people, not because of some silly idea that they got shafted by a playlist generator.
The playlist generator is simply following trends that it learns from people.
It doesn't actually analyze the music to find the algorithm that makes it 'good music'.
It says 'People that listen to this song also like this song, add it to the list', rinse, repeat, playlist generated.
It doesn't say 'hey, no one listens to this song, lets throw it in and then everyone will like it!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000742</id>
	<title>They should go through my collection...</title>
	<author>Drongo14</author>
	<datestamp>1257420180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Best thing for them to do would be to crawl last.fm. Some pretty esotheric musical tastes there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Best thing for them to do would be to crawl last.fm .
Some pretty esotheric musical tastes there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Best thing for them to do would be to crawl last.fm.
Some pretty esotheric musical tastes there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000892</id>
	<title>Sponsored herd-it advertisment?</title>
	<author>Eudial</author>
	<datestamp>1257420900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article links to apps.facebook.com/herd-it/?<b>refcode=slashdot</b></p><p>So I'm thinking this is payed advertisement disguised as an article. That's just low.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article links to apps.facebook.com/herd-it/ ? refcode = slashdotSo I 'm thinking this is payed advertisement disguised as an article .
That 's just low .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article links to apps.facebook.com/herd-it/?refcode=slashdotSo I'm thinking this is payed advertisement disguised as an article.
That's just low.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30003044</id>
	<title>Re:It's time to put it to a vote:</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1257442740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have to replace it with something.</p><p>How about "wisdom of the dumb, panicky, dangerous animals."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to replace it with something.How about " wisdom of the dumb , panicky , dangerous animals .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to replace it with something.How about "wisdom of the dumb, panicky, dangerous animals.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30003020</id>
	<title>Re:Last.fm</title>
	<author>4D6963</author>
	<datestamp>1257442020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well somehow I feel that I must be an oddball in the specificity of my tastes, but while my best neighbours listen to a lot of things that I also listen to, the rest of what they listen to I already know and dislike. So in my case it's like the neighbour system can only identify the overlap, but can't find anyone who listens to things I may like but don't know yet. Although I suspect that due to the specificity of my tastes, there's perhaps no such thing as someone who likes what I like and likes what I will like. I can't even find anyone who likes the two main genres of music I like at the same time!

</p><p>Likewise, most of the suggestions I get are for things I already know but don't like. I think the thing is that it assumes that if you like something in a genre then you'll like mostly anything in the close vicinity, whereas in my case while what I like fits in relatively small areas, what I dislike shares the same area. So it keeps suggesting me things in that same area not knowing I already dislike that. Not only that but since that's a fairly small area I know pretty much all that's worthy of being known there already and could use some suggestions as to what explore next that is in a neighbouring area.

</p><p>This being said, an artist's neighbours is much better defined, but you'd expect that to be more straightforward to determine and reliable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well somehow I feel that I must be an oddball in the specificity of my tastes , but while my best neighbours listen to a lot of things that I also listen to , the rest of what they listen to I already know and dislike .
So in my case it 's like the neighbour system can only identify the overlap , but ca n't find anyone who listens to things I may like but do n't know yet .
Although I suspect that due to the specificity of my tastes , there 's perhaps no such thing as someone who likes what I like and likes what I will like .
I ca n't even find anyone who likes the two main genres of music I like at the same time !
Likewise , most of the suggestions I get are for things I already know but do n't like .
I think the thing is that it assumes that if you like something in a genre then you 'll like mostly anything in the close vicinity , whereas in my case while what I like fits in relatively small areas , what I dislike shares the same area .
So it keeps suggesting me things in that same area not knowing I already dislike that .
Not only that but since that 's a fairly small area I know pretty much all that 's worthy of being known there already and could use some suggestions as to what explore next that is in a neighbouring area .
This being said , an artist 's neighbours is much better defined , but you 'd expect that to be more straightforward to determine and reliable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well somehow I feel that I must be an oddball in the specificity of my tastes, but while my best neighbours listen to a lot of things that I also listen to, the rest of what they listen to I already know and dislike.
So in my case it's like the neighbour system can only identify the overlap, but can't find anyone who listens to things I may like but don't know yet.
Although I suspect that due to the specificity of my tastes, there's perhaps no such thing as someone who likes what I like and likes what I will like.
I can't even find anyone who likes the two main genres of music I like at the same time!
Likewise, most of the suggestions I get are for things I already know but don't like.
I think the thing is that it assumes that if you like something in a genre then you'll like mostly anything in the close vicinity, whereas in my case while what I like fits in relatively small areas, what I dislike shares the same area.
So it keeps suggesting me things in that same area not knowing I already dislike that.
Not only that but since that's a fairly small area I know pretty much all that's worthy of being known there already and could use some suggestions as to what explore next that is in a neighbouring area.
This being said, an artist's neighbours is much better defined, but you'd expect that to be more straightforward to determine and reliable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002488</id>
	<title>Re:The Academic meets Capitalism</title>
	<author>antirelic</author>
	<datestamp>1257433740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>KKline, you must be an academic... I can tell by your sense of humor and your sense of irony.</p><p>The post is not saying academics dont contribute.... Its the shmarmy belief that they "know better than everyone else", even when it comes to things that are subjective (which is really a large part of the free market). The Academic fantasizes about the Technocrat that will eventually lead us all into utopia by prescribing us "plebes" the perfect formula to live our lives, which of course, has lead to the greatest calamities in human history (see China, Russia, and a slew of other communist experiments in the 20th century).</p><p>You say I'd lead us into the dark ages, but I say you would lead us into the Gulags of Siberia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>KKline , you must be an academic... I can tell by your sense of humor and your sense of irony.The post is not saying academics dont contribute.... Its the shmarmy belief that they " know better than everyone else " , even when it comes to things that are subjective ( which is really a large part of the free market ) .
The Academic fantasizes about the Technocrat that will eventually lead us all into utopia by prescribing us " plebes " the perfect formula to live our lives , which of course , has lead to the greatest calamities in human history ( see China , Russia , and a slew of other communist experiments in the 20th century ) .You say I 'd lead us into the dark ages , but I say you would lead us into the Gulags of Siberia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>KKline, you must be an academic... I can tell by your sense of humor and your sense of irony.The post is not saying academics dont contribute.... Its the shmarmy belief that they "know better than everyone else", even when it comes to things that are subjective (which is really a large part of the free market).
The Academic fantasizes about the Technocrat that will eventually lead us all into utopia by prescribing us "plebes" the perfect formula to live our lives, which of course, has lead to the greatest calamities in human history (see China, Russia, and a slew of other communist experiments in the 20th century).You say I'd lead us into the dark ages, but I say you would lead us into the Gulags of Siberia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30091524</id>
	<title>Re:Bias exists for a reason</title>
	<author>aftk2</author>
	<datestamp>1258105260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Speaking as someone who saw them open for U2 several years ago, I'd say this is because their quality has improved.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking as someone who saw them open for U2 several years ago , I 'd say this is because their quality has improved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking as someone who saw them open for U2 several years ago, I'd say this is because their quality has improved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002920</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone actually use "Genius"?</title>
	<author>LordRobin</author>
	<datestamp>1257440100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, actually, yes.  I use Genius.  A lot.</p><p>Look, it's not perfect, but for folks like me, who don't have either the time or the desire to craft a playlist for each mood I may happen to be in, it's a godsend.  Before Genius came along, my options were either to listen to a specific album or artist, or shuffle the whole damn iPod.  I'd do that occasionally, but the end result was heavy on Beatles and J-Pop.  I obvious like both genres, or my iPod wouldn't be full of the stuff, but sometimes I'm just not in the mood for either.  The Genius playlists do a decent job of segregating my collection into various flavors of rock, J-Pop, and anime soundtracks.</p><p>It's just a matter of convenience for this casual listener.  I can understand why a more hardcore music collector (like say, someone who has 300+GB of music) might not find Genius sufficient.  But then, I find it hard to believe such a collector would be satisfied with any automated playlist generator.</p><p>------RM</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , actually , yes .
I use Genius .
A lot.Look , it 's not perfect , but for folks like me , who do n't have either the time or the desire to craft a playlist for each mood I may happen to be in , it 's a godsend .
Before Genius came along , my options were either to listen to a specific album or artist , or shuffle the whole damn iPod .
I 'd do that occasionally , but the end result was heavy on Beatles and J-Pop .
I obvious like both genres , or my iPod would n't be full of the stuff , but sometimes I 'm just not in the mood for either .
The Genius playlists do a decent job of segregating my collection into various flavors of rock , J-Pop , and anime soundtracks.It 's just a matter of convenience for this casual listener .
I can understand why a more hardcore music collector ( like say , someone who has 300 + GB of music ) might not find Genius sufficient .
But then , I find it hard to believe such a collector would be satisfied with any automated playlist generator.------RM</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, actually, yes.
I use Genius.
A lot.Look, it's not perfect, but for folks like me, who don't have either the time or the desire to craft a playlist for each mood I may happen to be in, it's a godsend.
Before Genius came along, my options were either to listen to a specific album or artist, or shuffle the whole damn iPod.
I'd do that occasionally, but the end result was heavy on Beatles and J-Pop.
I obvious like both genres, or my iPod wouldn't be full of the stuff, but sometimes I'm just not in the mood for either.
The Genius playlists do a decent job of segregating my collection into various flavors of rock, J-Pop, and anime soundtracks.It's just a matter of convenience for this casual listener.
I can understand why a more hardcore music collector (like say, someone who has 300+GB of music) might not find Genius sufficient.
But then, I find it hard to believe such a collector would be satisfied with any automated playlist generator.------RM</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000704</id>
	<title>It's time to put it to a vote:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257420000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stop using the imbecilic term "wisdom of the crowds": aye or nay?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop using the imbecilic term " wisdom of the crowds " : aye or nay ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop using the imbecilic term "wisdom of the crowds": aye or nay?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002304</id>
	<title>Genius doesn't work for me</title>
	<author>Ralph Spoilsport</author>
	<datestamp>1257431880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>at least 1 out of 5 times it says "sorry - can't make a list for you" - basically syin I listen to music that is too obscure for them or isn't in iTMS or whatever they use to catalogue stuff.
<p>
I disabled Genius and just leave it on Random play. I have 35,654 songs, so I basically listen to the best radio station and rarely hear repeated.
</p><p>
Heck, if I live to be 90, I'll probably only hear each song 7 or 8 more times anyway...
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>at least 1 out of 5 times it says " sorry - ca n't make a list for you " - basically syin I listen to music that is too obscure for them or is n't in iTMS or whatever they use to catalogue stuff .
I disabled Genius and just leave it on Random play .
I have 35,654 songs , so I basically listen to the best radio station and rarely hear repeated .
Heck , if I live to be 90 , I 'll probably only hear each song 7 or 8 more times anyway.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>at least 1 out of 5 times it says "sorry - can't make a list for you" - basically syin I listen to music that is too obscure for them or isn't in iTMS or whatever they use to catalogue stuff.
I disabled Genius and just leave it on Random play.
I have 35,654 songs, so I basically listen to the best radio station and rarely hear repeated.
Heck, if I live to be 90, I'll probably only hear each song 7 or 8 more times anyway...
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30005602</id>
	<title>Wisdom of crowds?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257522720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't that how we keep winding up having to choose between two douchebags for President every 4 years?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that how we keep winding up having to choose between two douchebags for President every 4 years ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that how we keep winding up having to choose between two douchebags for President every 4 years?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30006324</id>
	<title>Re:It's time to put it to a vote:</title>
	<author>Lemmy Caution</author>
	<datestamp>1257527520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the problem were accuracy in some objective sense, I would agree with you. But this application is about training a system to match human consensus on the perception of music - the "wisdom of the crowds" is the target, not just the source. It risks "scientizing" popular taste, to make it look like the different categories, genres, and features that people hear are "real" parts of the music. But taken more narrowly, this approach is appropriate for this problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the problem were accuracy in some objective sense , I would agree with you .
But this application is about training a system to match human consensus on the perception of music - the " wisdom of the crowds " is the target , not just the source .
It risks " scientizing " popular taste , to make it look like the different categories , genres , and features that people hear are " real " parts of the music .
But taken more narrowly , this approach is appropriate for this problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the problem were accuracy in some objective sense, I would agree with you.
But this application is about training a system to match human consensus on the perception of music - the "wisdom of the crowds" is the target, not just the source.
It risks "scientizing" popular taste, to make it look like the different categories, genres, and features that people hear are "real" parts of the music.
But taken more narrowly, this approach is appropriate for this problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000876</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30006046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30006324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30005368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30003020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30003044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30004204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30004448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30006186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30005492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30091524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_05_227236_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000876
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001230
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002328
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30006324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30005368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30003044
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002238
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001776
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30003020
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000698
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30005492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001454
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001028
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30004448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002920
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002376
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30006186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001196
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30091524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30006046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001092
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30004204
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30001512
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002242
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30002540
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000988
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_05_227236.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_05_227236.30000974
</commentlist>
</conversation>
