<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_11_197205</id>
	<title>40 Years of Multics, 1969-2009</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1257967140000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>gribll writes <i>"October 2009 marked an important milestone in the history of computing. It was exactly <a href="http://www.cio.com.au/article/325323/cio\_blast\_from\_past\_40\_years\_multics\_1969-2009">40 years since the first Multics computer system was used at MIT</a>. The interview is with Multics co-developer, MIT Professor and Turing Award winner Fernando J. Corbato. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multics">Multics</a> (Multiplexed Information and Computing Service) is regarded as the foundation of modern time-sharing systems. Multics was the catalyst for the development of Unix and has been used as a model of operating system design since its release four decades ago. There is also a <a href="http://www.cio.com.au/slideshow/325629/slideshow-cio-blast-from-the-past-40-years-of-multics/">picture gallery of Multics history</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>gribll writes " October 2009 marked an important milestone in the history of computing .
It was exactly 40 years since the first Multics computer system was used at MIT .
The interview is with Multics co-developer , MIT Professor and Turing Award winner Fernando J. Corbato. Multics ( Multiplexed Information and Computing Service ) is regarded as the foundation of modern time-sharing systems .
Multics was the catalyst for the development of Unix and has been used as a model of operating system design since its release four decades ago .
There is also a picture gallery of Multics history .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>gribll writes "October 2009 marked an important milestone in the history of computing.
It was exactly 40 years since the first Multics computer system was used at MIT.
The interview is with Multics co-developer, MIT Professor and Turing Award winner Fernando J. Corbato. Multics (Multiplexed Information and Computing Service) is regarded as the foundation of modern time-sharing systems.
Multics was the catalyst for the development of Unix and has been used as a model of operating system design since its release four decades ago.
There is also a picture gallery of Multics history.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064352</id>
	<title>MULTICS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257107400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Multiple Useless Large Tables In Core Simultaneously.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Multiple Useless Large Tables In Core Simultaneously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Multiple Useless Large Tables In Core Simultaneously.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065420</id>
	<title>Real-Time, too!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257068760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger\_Needham" title="wikipedia.org">Roger Needham</a> [wikipedia.org] quipped, Multics was design for the real-time processes of geological processes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As Roger Needham [ wikipedia.org ] quipped , Multics was design for the real-time processes of geological processes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As Roger Needham [wikipedia.org] quipped, Multics was design for the real-time processes of geological processes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30077760</id>
	<title>Re:I was a Multics user and code developer</title>
	<author>Skjellifetti</author>
	<datestamp>1258059240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My first CS course in my freshman year (1977) was "Structured Programming in PL/I. The only thing I really remember was that the following was legal:<br> <br>

<tt>IF IF = THEN THEN THEN = ELSE; ELSE ELSE = IF;</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>My first CS course in my freshman year ( 1977 ) was " Structured Programming in PL/I .
The only thing I really remember was that the following was legal : IF IF = THEN THEN THEN = ELSE ; ELSE ELSE = IF ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My first CS course in my freshman year (1977) was "Structured Programming in PL/I.
The only thing I really remember was that the following was legal: 

IF IF = THEN THEN THEN = ELSE; ELSE ELSE = IF;</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30078548</id>
	<title>Re:I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>Darinbob</author>
	<datestamp>1258019040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The difference is partly the intended audience.  Unix was written for the authors' use and their colleagues.<br><br>Another big factor is that back then, short variable names were common, and often required.  Thus your typical 6 letter function and variable names (strcpy).  Sometimes it's worse, if your company has some naming conventions.  So programmers tended to think tersely.<br><br>Combine that with limited program file name lengths as well.  Each Unix command was a real file name, not just strings in a CLI parser.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The difference is partly the intended audience .
Unix was written for the authors ' use and their colleagues.Another big factor is that back then , short variable names were common , and often required .
Thus your typical 6 letter function and variable names ( strcpy ) .
Sometimes it 's worse , if your company has some naming conventions .
So programmers tended to think tersely.Combine that with limited program file name lengths as well .
Each Unix command was a real file name , not just strings in a CLI parser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The difference is partly the intended audience.
Unix was written for the authors' use and their colleagues.Another big factor is that back then, short variable names were common, and often required.
Thus your typical 6 letter function and variable names (strcpy).
Sometimes it's worse, if your company has some naming conventions.
So programmers tended to think tersely.Combine that with limited program file name lengths as well.
Each Unix command was a real file name, not just strings in a CLI parser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30071300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065954</id>
	<title>Multics, comp.risks, and NSA</title>
	<author>cpm99352</author>
	<datestamp>1257071820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm surprised to see the lack of comp.risks here in the comments.  Multics was a phenomenally well designed OS from a security perspective.  So much so that NSA recruiters at college took an interest in you if you had Multics experience...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised to see the lack of comp.risks here in the comments .
Multics was a phenomenally well designed OS from a security perspective .
So much so that NSA recruiters at college took an interest in you if you had Multics experience.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised to see the lack of comp.risks here in the comments.
Multics was a phenomenally well designed OS from a security perspective.
So much so that NSA recruiters at college took an interest in you if you had Multics experience...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064610</id>
	<title>Re:40 Years of Multics, 1969-2009</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1257108420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>KISS (Keep It Simple)</p></div><p>You'd think "Keep It Simple" would be abbreviated "KIS"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>KISS ( Keep It Simple ) You 'd think " Keep It Simple " would be abbreviated " KIS " ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>KISS (Keep It Simple)You'd think "Keep It Simple" would be abbreviated "KIS" ;)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067690</id>
	<title>Stupid Comment</title>
	<author>omb</author>
	<datestamp>1257080760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Corbato designed and taught the Architecture that underpinned the UNIX developers and Martin Richards (of Cambridge UK) later, in 1970, brought BCPL, evolving into B, C,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... (\_but\_ definitely not C++)<br><br>Professor Corbato got so many things right on the GE645 that he, Gordon Bell, Maurice Wilks and Tom Kilburn were the generation of \_REAL\_ uber-architects in the 60/70 s; with Gene Ahmdahl and Fred Brooks doing the engineering heavy lifting, Chris Streachy and and the MIT school (Marvin Minsky and many others) did the philosophy.<br><br>Without their contributions the Computer Industry would never have started</htmltext>
<tokenext>Corbato designed and taught the Architecture that underpinned the UNIX developers and Martin Richards ( of Cambridge UK ) later , in 1970 , brought BCPL , evolving into B , C , ... ( \ _but \ _ definitely not C + + ) Professor Corbato got so many things right on the GE645 that he , Gordon Bell , Maurice Wilks and Tom Kilburn were the generation of \ _REAL \ _ uber-architects in the 60/70 s ; with Gene Ahmdahl and Fred Brooks doing the engineering heavy lifting , Chris Streachy and and the MIT school ( Marvin Minsky and many others ) did the philosophy.Without their contributions the Computer Industry would never have started</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corbato designed and taught the Architecture that underpinned the UNIX developers and Martin Richards (of Cambridge UK) later, in 1970, brought BCPL, evolving into B, C, ... (\_but\_ definitely not C++)Professor Corbato got so many things right on the GE645 that he, Gordon Bell, Maurice Wilks and Tom Kilburn were the generation of \_REAL\_ uber-architects in the 60/70 s; with Gene Ahmdahl and Fred Brooks doing the engineering heavy lifting, Chris Streachy and and the MIT school (Marvin Minsky and many others) did the philosophy.Without their contributions the Computer Industry would never have started</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064746</id>
	<title>Re:40 Years of Multics, 1969-2009</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257108960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>KISS = Keep It Simple Stupid !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>KISS = Keep It Simple Stupid !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>KISS = Keep It Simple Stupid !</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065358</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, Multics and Sesame Street, both 40 years o</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1257068460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes... That is what a Coincidence is. When 2 things that seem to have a connection while they don't</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes... That is what a Coincidence is .
When 2 things that seem to have a connection while they do n't</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes... That is what a Coincidence is.
When 2 things that seem to have a connection while they don't</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064682</id>
	<title>"Bloated"?  Oh, FFS.</title>
	<author>jeffb (2.718)</author>
	<datestamp>1257108720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's true that Multics couldn't get out of its own way on a system with 64K of RAM, although it was technically supposed to run on that configuration.  To work well, it really wanted several hundred K of RAM.  Thank heavens we left it in the dustbin of history, replaced by the crisp, clean efficiency of Windows, or OS X, or Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's true that Multics could n't get out of its own way on a system with 64K of RAM , although it was technically supposed to run on that configuration .
To work well , it really wanted several hundred K of RAM .
Thank heavens we left it in the dustbin of history , replaced by the crisp , clean efficiency of Windows , or OS X , or Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's true that Multics couldn't get out of its own way on a system with 64K of RAM, although it was technically supposed to run on that configuration.
To work well, it really wanted several hundred K of RAM.
Thank heavens we left it in the dustbin of history, replaced by the crisp, clean efficiency of Windows, or OS X, or Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066912</id>
	<title>Re:I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>spitzak</author>
	<datestamp>1257075960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The ability to "copy" a file without having to worry about it's type put Unix way ahead. And real hierarchial directories with a sensible syntax without different rules for the levels! (something that Microsoft refuses to learn after decades...)</p><p>I was very impressed, having come from using VMS for about 2 years before I started on Unix (I was at Dec and they had a small VAX running BSD because they wanted to port a CLU compiler from it to VMS). This was 1982.</p><p>The commands were cryptically short, so I certainly immediatly added "alias" for everything to get the commands I was familiar with. However I disagree about help, the "man" pages were enormously more useful than anything VMS "help" ever coughed up. Also it was about 100 times easier to write working C programs (on VMS it was easier to translate C into BLISS than to try to get a C program to link).</p><p>I did like the VMS editor better. I'm not even sure what I edited with on the Unix machine, it may have been vi? Or even TECO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The ability to " copy " a file without having to worry about it 's type put Unix way ahead .
And real hierarchial directories with a sensible syntax without different rules for the levels !
( something that Microsoft refuses to learn after decades... ) I was very impressed , having come from using VMS for about 2 years before I started on Unix ( I was at Dec and they had a small VAX running BSD because they wanted to port a CLU compiler from it to VMS ) .
This was 1982.The commands were cryptically short , so I certainly immediatly added " alias " for everything to get the commands I was familiar with .
However I disagree about help , the " man " pages were enormously more useful than anything VMS " help " ever coughed up .
Also it was about 100 times easier to write working C programs ( on VMS it was easier to translate C into BLISS than to try to get a C program to link ) .I did like the VMS editor better .
I 'm not even sure what I edited with on the Unix machine , it may have been vi ?
Or even TECO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ability to "copy" a file without having to worry about it's type put Unix way ahead.
And real hierarchial directories with a sensible syntax without different rules for the levels!
(something that Microsoft refuses to learn after decades...)I was very impressed, having come from using VMS for about 2 years before I started on Unix (I was at Dec and they had a small VAX running BSD because they wanted to port a CLU compiler from it to VMS).
This was 1982.The commands were cryptically short, so I certainly immediatly added "alias" for everything to get the commands I was familiar with.
However I disagree about help, the "man" pages were enormously more useful than anything VMS "help" ever coughed up.
Also it was about 100 times easier to write working C programs (on VMS it was easier to translate C into BLISS than to try to get a C program to link).I did like the VMS editor better.
I'm not even sure what I edited with on the Unix machine, it may have been vi?
Or even TECO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30077208</id>
	<title>Multics the OS we loved to hate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258057320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used Multics in the eary 80s at the INRIA, it was incredibly slow... awfully complex, the documentation took severall large cabinets..<br>And compared to the Onyx (an early Z8000 based Unix machine) "unexiting"...</p><p>But I confess a strong nostalgy second only to "ernie covax" (4.0/4.1 Bsd) for the system, the greenberg emacs implementation was an work of art and using algol 68 an experience in alternate reality...</p><p>And looking backward, is was a "small" operating system "only 1,5 million lines" of PL/1 and 400K lines of assembly code" (vs about 40K for Unix V7) (of course this was before X11, wysiwyg editing etc...</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Here is to you Multics, cheers !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used Multics in the eary 80s at the INRIA , it was incredibly slow... awfully complex , the documentation took severall large cabinets..And compared to the Onyx ( an early Z8000 based Unix machine ) " unexiting " ...But I confess a strong nostalgy second only to " ernie covax " ( 4.0/4.1 Bsd ) for the system , the greenberg emacs implementation was an work of art and using algol 68 an experience in alternate reality...And looking backward , is was a " small " operating system " only 1,5 million lines " of PL/1 and 400K lines of assembly code " ( vs about 40K for Unix V7 ) ( of course this was before X11 , wysiwyg editing etc.. .     Here is to you Multics , cheers !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used Multics in the eary 80s at the INRIA, it was incredibly slow... awfully complex, the documentation took severall large cabinets..And compared to the Onyx (an early Z8000 based Unix machine) "unexiting"...But I confess a strong nostalgy second only to "ernie covax" (4.0/4.1 Bsd) for the system, the greenberg emacs implementation was an work of art and using algol 68 an experience in alternate reality...And looking backward, is was a "small" operating system "only 1,5 million lines" of PL/1 and 400K lines of assembly code" (vs about 40K for Unix V7) (of course this was before X11, wysiwyg editing etc...
    Here is to you Multics, cheers !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30069354</id>
	<title>Re:Favorite quote</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257096840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As Multics begat UNIX, PL/I lives on within the development community of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... SAS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As Multics begat UNIX , PL/I lives on within the development community of .... SAS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As Multics begat UNIX, PL/I lives on within the development community of .... SAS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064524</id>
	<title>Re:Um, wasn't bloated Multics the reason *WHY* . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257108000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That and they like what Multics offered but didn't have the hardware to support it.<br>Of course the Current version of Linux or BSD is probably more "bloated" then the last version of Multics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That and they like what Multics offered but did n't have the hardware to support it.Of course the Current version of Linux or BSD is probably more " bloated " then the last version of Multics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That and they like what Multics offered but didn't have the hardware to support it.Of course the Current version of Linux or BSD is probably more "bloated" then the last version of Multics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064594</id>
	<title>Security in hardware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257108360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I worked at the Pentagon (HQAF DSC) one of the machines I developed on was a Multics machine.  The really interesting part of the architecture to me was that it had, if I recall correctly, seven permission rings from ring 6 to ring 0 and each were implemented in hardware.  The OS ran on a separate processor cluster for each ring, and system level work (kernel mode) was done all in ring 0.</p><p>I enjoyed learning PL1, and found it to be an easy transition to go to Unix/C.  The multics box was a beast, and stuff ran like greased lightning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I worked at the Pentagon ( HQAF DSC ) one of the machines I developed on was a Multics machine .
The really interesting part of the architecture to me was that it had , if I recall correctly , seven permission rings from ring 6 to ring 0 and each were implemented in hardware .
The OS ran on a separate processor cluster for each ring , and system level work ( kernel mode ) was done all in ring 0.I enjoyed learning PL1 , and found it to be an easy transition to go to Unix/C .
The multics box was a beast , and stuff ran like greased lightning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I worked at the Pentagon (HQAF DSC) one of the machines I developed on was a Multics machine.
The really interesting part of the architecture to me was that it had, if I recall correctly, seven permission rings from ring 6 to ring 0 and each were implemented in hardware.
The OS ran on a separate processor cluster for each ring, and system level work (kernel mode) was done all in ring 0.I enjoyed learning PL1, and found it to be an easy transition to go to Unix/C.
The multics box was a beast, and stuff ran like greased lightning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360</id>
	<title>I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257107400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had to use it at a large energy company in Europe in the 1980s. It was actually a fantastic system.</p><p>Unlike VMS and IBM's mainframe OSes, it was actually pretty friendly to use. This attribute has clearly rubbed off on UNIX. While we'd spend months teaching some users how to use VMS, they'd get Multics within a few days.</p><p>The programming environment was also fantastic. It didn't support as many languages as VMS, nor did it have language interoperability that was as good, but it still supported more languages than you'd fine on typical UNIX systems of that era.</p><p>That said, it still was a beast compared to UNIX. UNIX was sly and sleek, and thus supported lower-end hardware better than Multics could. And UNIX was more portable, which eventually made it more widely available.</p><p>Still, I look upon my Multics days with a fondness I didn't find again until the early 2000s, when I was able to get a position administering a network of FreeBSD servers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had to use it at a large energy company in Europe in the 1980s .
It was actually a fantastic system.Unlike VMS and IBM 's mainframe OSes , it was actually pretty friendly to use .
This attribute has clearly rubbed off on UNIX .
While we 'd spend months teaching some users how to use VMS , they 'd get Multics within a few days.The programming environment was also fantastic .
It did n't support as many languages as VMS , nor did it have language interoperability that was as good , but it still supported more languages than you 'd fine on typical UNIX systems of that era.That said , it still was a beast compared to UNIX .
UNIX was sly and sleek , and thus supported lower-end hardware better than Multics could .
And UNIX was more portable , which eventually made it more widely available.Still , I look upon my Multics days with a fondness I did n't find again until the early 2000s , when I was able to get a position administering a network of FreeBSD servers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had to use it at a large energy company in Europe in the 1980s.
It was actually a fantastic system.Unlike VMS and IBM's mainframe OSes, it was actually pretty friendly to use.
This attribute has clearly rubbed off on UNIX.
While we'd spend months teaching some users how to use VMS, they'd get Multics within a few days.The programming environment was also fantastic.
It didn't support as many languages as VMS, nor did it have language interoperability that was as good, but it still supported more languages than you'd fine on typical UNIX systems of that era.That said, it still was a beast compared to UNIX.
UNIX was sly and sleek, and thus supported lower-end hardware better than Multics could.
And UNIX was more portable, which eventually made it more widely available.Still, I look upon my Multics days with a fondness I didn't find again until the early 2000s, when I was able to get a position administering a network of FreeBSD servers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064852</id>
	<title>"Cancel the call for the company nurse"</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1257066180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good thing they didn't call it Unics or it would've been the butt of jokes for decades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good thing they did n't call it Unics or it would 've been the butt of jokes for decades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good thing they didn't call it Unics or it would've been the butt of jokes for decades.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067804</id>
	<title>Re:I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>Darinbob</author>
	<datestamp>1257081480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmm, I always considered VMS to be more user friendly, at least to novices, than Unix.  Unix was full of cryptic shorthand commands. Ie, "help" vs "man -k", "search" vs "grep", "edit" vs "vi" or "ed" or "ex", etc.  DCL was very quick to pick up compared to Unix sh, even though sh had more power.<br><br>Essentially I think VMS had a shallow learning curve where Unix was pretty steep, but the shallow curve meant it took you longer to learn how to do really powerful things.  The result was that it was faster to become a functional user with VMS, but you got to be a power user more quickly with Unix.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm , I always considered VMS to be more user friendly , at least to novices , than Unix .
Unix was full of cryptic shorthand commands .
Ie , " help " vs " man -k " , " search " vs " grep " , " edit " vs " vi " or " ed " or " ex " , etc .
DCL was very quick to pick up compared to Unix sh , even though sh had more power.Essentially I think VMS had a shallow learning curve where Unix was pretty steep , but the shallow curve meant it took you longer to learn how to do really powerful things .
The result was that it was faster to become a functional user with VMS , but you got to be a power user more quickly with Unix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm, I always considered VMS to be more user friendly, at least to novices, than Unix.
Unix was full of cryptic shorthand commands.
Ie, "help" vs "man -k", "search" vs "grep", "edit" vs "vi" or "ed" or "ex", etc.
DCL was very quick to pick up compared to Unix sh, even though sh had more power.Essentially I think VMS had a shallow learning curve where Unix was pretty steep, but the shallow curve meant it took you longer to learn how to do really powerful things.
The result was that it was faster to become a functional user with VMS, but you got to be a power user more quickly with Unix.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064716</id>
	<title>Forty-year anniversaries -- what connection?</title>
	<author>zooblethorpe</author>
	<datestamp>1257108840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I've got to ask, does this have any synchronic significance with the recent 40-year anniversary of <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=sesame+street" title="google.com">Sesame Street</a> [google.com] recently splashed around Google's main page?</p><p>Hmm...  "This episode brought to you by the letters P, L, and I, and the number pi!"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Cheers,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I 've got to ask , does this have any synchronic significance with the recent 40-year anniversary of Sesame Street [ google.com ] recently splashed around Google 's main page ? Hmm... " This episode brought to you by the letters P , L , and I , and the number pi !
" : ) Cheers,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I've got to ask, does this have any synchronic significance with the recent 40-year anniversary of Sesame Street [google.com] recently splashed around Google's main page?Hmm...  "This episode brought to you by the letters P, L, and I, and the number pi!
" :)Cheers,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30068366</id>
	<title>Re:Remember punch cards</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257086280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is it me, or are the trolls getting more spammier of late?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it me , or are the trolls getting more spammier of late ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it me, or are the trolls getting more spammier of late?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064196</id>
	<title>Favorite quote</title>
	<author>alecto</author>
	<datestamp>1257106800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"In hindsight we might have picked a simpler language than PL/I, . .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>." Now <b>there's</b> an understatement!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" In hindsight we might have picked a simpler language than PL/I , .
. .
" Now there 's an understatement !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"In hindsight we might have picked a simpler language than PL/I, .
. .
" Now there's an understatement!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066574</id>
	<title>Re:If it was so good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257074160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People that used Multics "in the day" are ~50 - 60 years old now. Who wants a Multics emulator when you're too busy throwing rocks at kids and telling them to get off your lawn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People that used Multics " in the day " are ~ 50 - 60 years old now .
Who wants a Multics emulator when you 're too busy throwing rocks at kids and telling them to get off your lawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People that used Multics "in the day" are ~50 - 60 years old now.
Who wants a Multics emulator when you're too busy throwing rocks at kids and telling them to get off your lawn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065998</id>
	<title>Memories and Friends</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257071940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was first introduced to Multics in 1984 as a freshman at the University of Southwestern Louisiana (now University of Louisiana at Lafayette). I was lucky, I had a PC (a Kaypro 4) and a fancy new 1200 baud modem for dialing into the system. So I didn't have to wait in line in the terminal room for seat at one of the TVI terminals. With only experience with CP/M, Multics was a real eye-opener. It was an awesome system and had many features that I still miss today.</p><p>While there I was privledged to know a fine Multician, James Dugal. His name is sprinkled throughout Multics lore. I was proud to call him friend. He is missed.</p><p>Johnie Stafford</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was first introduced to Multics in 1984 as a freshman at the University of Southwestern Louisiana ( now University of Louisiana at Lafayette ) .
I was lucky , I had a PC ( a Kaypro 4 ) and a fancy new 1200 baud modem for dialing into the system .
So I did n't have to wait in line in the terminal room for seat at one of the TVI terminals .
With only experience with CP/M , Multics was a real eye-opener .
It was an awesome system and had many features that I still miss today.While there I was privledged to know a fine Multician , James Dugal .
His name is sprinkled throughout Multics lore .
I was proud to call him friend .
He is missed.Johnie Stafford</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was first introduced to Multics in 1984 as a freshman at the University of Southwestern Louisiana (now University of Louisiana at Lafayette).
I was lucky, I had a PC (a Kaypro 4) and a fancy new 1200 baud modem for dialing into the system.
So I didn't have to wait in line in the terminal room for seat at one of the TVI terminals.
With only experience with CP/M, Multics was a real eye-opener.
It was an awesome system and had many features that I still miss today.While there I was privledged to know a fine Multician, James Dugal.
His name is sprinkled throughout Multics lore.
I was proud to call him friend.
He is missed.Johnie Stafford</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070318</id>
	<title>Re:I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>Have Brain Will Rent</author>
	<datestamp>1258018320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>That said, it still was a beast compared to UNIX. UNIX was sly and sleek, and thus supported lower-end hardware better than Multics could. And UNIX was more portable, which eventually made it more widely available.</i> </p><p>

That's an understatement. In the early 70's I was running Unix on a PDP-11/34 with 28K of ram and a 5MB hard disk, eventually using it to run an Evans &amp; Sutherland PS1.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That said , it still was a beast compared to UNIX .
UNIX was sly and sleek , and thus supported lower-end hardware better than Multics could .
And UNIX was more portable , which eventually made it more widely available .
That 's an understatement .
In the early 70 's I was running Unix on a PDP-11/34 with 28K of ram and a 5MB hard disk , eventually using it to run an Evans &amp; Sutherland PS1 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> That said, it still was a beast compared to UNIX.
UNIX was sly and sleek, and thus supported lower-end hardware better than Multics could.
And UNIX was more portable, which eventually made it more widely available.
That's an understatement.
In the early 70's I was running Unix on a PDP-11/34 with 28K of ram and a 5MB hard disk, eventually using it to run an Evans &amp; Sutherland PS1.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067494</id>
	<title>Re:obKanye</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1257079440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is Slashdot in some kind of Internet time-warp where moderators are *just now* seeing this meme and, therefore, somehow think it's still funny?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Slashdot in some kind of Internet time-warp where moderators are * just now * seeing this meme and , therefore , somehow think it 's still funny ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Slashdot in some kind of Internet time-warp where moderators are *just now* seeing this meme and, therefore, somehow think it's still funny?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064480</id>
	<title>Hmm, Multics and Sesame Street, both 40 years old.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257107820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Coincidence ?   I think not!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Coincidence ?
I think not !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coincidence ?
I think not!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066098</id>
	<title>Re:Remember punch cards</title>
	<author>Tycho</author>
	<datestamp>1257072360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The last time I saw punch cards in use was in the late 1990's.  Granted this was more of a reuse, the "users" were my Geology professors.  A three or four inch tall stack of punch cards with thick straight lines from a marker on the edge of the stack worked well as a model for rock deformation when the stack was flexed.  Oh, you mean using punch cards in a computer, no, I've never seen that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The last time I saw punch cards in use was in the late 1990 's .
Granted this was more of a reuse , the " users " were my Geology professors .
A three or four inch tall stack of punch cards with thick straight lines from a marker on the edge of the stack worked well as a model for rock deformation when the stack was flexed .
Oh , you mean using punch cards in a computer , no , I 've never seen that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last time I saw punch cards in use was in the late 1990's.
Granted this was more of a reuse, the "users" were my Geology professors.
A three or four inch tall stack of punch cards with thick straight lines from a marker on the edge of the stack worked well as a model for rock deformation when the stack was flexed.
Oh, you mean using punch cards in a computer, no, I've never seen that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065524</id>
	<title>x86 segmentation and Multics</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1257069420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't forget the segmentation that was introduced with the 286's protected mode was influenced by Multics as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget the segmentation that was introduced with the 286 's protected mode was influenced by Multics as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget the segmentation that was introduced with the 286's protected mode was influenced by Multics as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064382</id>
	<title>If memory serves...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257107520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unix <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eunuch" title="wikipedia.org">(Eunuchs)</a> [wikipedia.org] is the castrated version of Multics.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix ( Eunuchs ) [ wikipedia.org ] is the castrated version of Multics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unix (Eunuchs) [wikipedia.org] is the castrated version of Multics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067086</id>
	<title>Domo Arigato</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257076860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dr. Corbato</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dr. Corbato</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dr. Corbato</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065632</id>
	<title>Re:obKanye</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1257070020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't get it. Kanye is probably the single lamest meme since the beginning of the Internet. And it's a even more lame media "scandal" that "nipplegate". By an order of a magnitude, at least.</p><p>Badger badger looks like deep Chinese philosophy, written in the words of Shakespeare, in comparison.</p><p>Can we get back to "In Soviet Russia, car is analogy of YOU" jokes, please?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't get it .
Kanye is probably the single lamest meme since the beginning of the Internet .
And it 's a even more lame media " scandal " that " nipplegate " .
By an order of a magnitude , at least.Badger badger looks like deep Chinese philosophy , written in the words of Shakespeare , in comparison.Can we get back to " In Soviet Russia , car is analogy of YOU " jokes , please ?
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't get it.
Kanye is probably the single lamest meme since the beginning of the Internet.
And it's a even more lame media "scandal" that "nipplegate".
By an order of a magnitude, at least.Badger badger looks like deep Chinese philosophy, written in the words of Shakespeare, in comparison.Can we get back to "In Soviet Russia, car is analogy of YOU" jokes, please?
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065478</id>
	<title>The Michigan Terminal System...</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1257069060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...came first.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...came first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...came first.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064812</id>
	<title>Lots of 1969 anniversaries</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1257066000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The moon landing, the Internet, Multics, and lots of other things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The moon landing , the Internet , Multics , and lots of other things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The moon landing, the Internet, Multics, and lots of other things.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064766</id>
	<title>Re:40 Years of Multics, 1969-2009</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257109020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You may want to keep in mind that the UNICS name (originally spelled that way) was chosen, indeed, because Ken Thompson figured he was neutering Multics. As such, your post is seriously a gross mischaracterisation. C and Unix were originally designed to be what worked at the time: nothing but pure klugetastic hacks. No one expected AT&amp;T to turn around and say "Hey, let's sell it!" when it became popular at Bell Labs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You may want to keep in mind that the UNICS name ( originally spelled that way ) was chosen , indeed , because Ken Thompson figured he was neutering Multics .
As such , your post is seriously a gross mischaracterisation .
C and Unix were originally designed to be what worked at the time : nothing but pure klugetastic hacks .
No one expected AT&amp;T to turn around and say " Hey , let 's sell it !
" when it became popular at Bell Labs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may want to keep in mind that the UNICS name (originally spelled that way) was chosen, indeed, because Ken Thompson figured he was neutering Multics.
As such, your post is seriously a gross mischaracterisation.
C and Unix were originally designed to be what worked at the time: nothing but pure klugetastic hacks.
No one expected AT&amp;T to turn around and say "Hey, let's sell it!
" when it became popular at Bell Labs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065032</id>
	<title>K.T</title>
	<author>MrKaos</author>
	<datestamp>1257067080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Later in his career <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken\_Thompson" title="wikipedia.org">Ken Thompson</a> [wikipedia.org] had corrective eye surgery, changed his name to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim\_Thayil" title="wikipedia.org">Kim Thayil</a> [wikipedia.org] and was the lead guitarist of Soundgarden...What an amazing talent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Later in his career Ken Thompson [ wikipedia.org ] had corrective eye surgery , changed his name to Kim Thayil [ wikipedia.org ] and was the lead guitarist of Soundgarden...What an amazing talent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Later in his career Ken Thompson [wikipedia.org] had corrective eye surgery, changed his name to Kim Thayil [wikipedia.org] and was the lead guitarist of Soundgarden...What an amazing talent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064620</id>
	<title>Slashdot is bad with anniversaries</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1257108420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>October 2009 marked an important milestone in the history of computing</p></div></blockquote><p>and they waited until november to tell you!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>October 2009 marked an important milestone in the history of computingand they waited until november to tell you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>October 2009 marked an important milestone in the history of computingand they waited until november to tell you!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064778</id>
	<title>Re:obKanye</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257109080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nah plan 9 kick unix ass</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah plan 9 kick unix ass</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah plan 9 kick unix ass</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065716</id>
	<title>Re:If it was so good</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1257070440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, for one theres little need and for another there is little interest. The source code for Multics wasn't released till 1992, by then it was clear that UNIX was the future, development basically stopped for Multics long before then and Linux was beginning its rise as an open source UNIX system. With no legacy software to drive a tricky system to emulate why do it? I mean, with game consoles there are the games, with PC things usually there are a few nifty pieces of software, with Multics just about everything was ported to UNIX.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , for one theres little need and for another there is little interest .
The source code for Multics was n't released till 1992 , by then it was clear that UNIX was the future , development basically stopped for Multics long before then and Linux was beginning its rise as an open source UNIX system .
With no legacy software to drive a tricky system to emulate why do it ?
I mean , with game consoles there are the games , with PC things usually there are a few nifty pieces of software , with Multics just about everything was ported to UNIX .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, for one theres little need and for another there is little interest.
The source code for Multics wasn't released till 1992, by then it was clear that UNIX was the future, development basically stopped for Multics long before then and Linux was beginning its rise as an open source UNIX system.
With no legacy software to drive a tricky system to emulate why do it?
I mean, with game consoles there are the games, with PC things usually there are a few nifty pieces of software, with Multics just about everything was ported to UNIX.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065522</id>
	<title>I was a Multics user and code developer</title>
	<author>nani popoki</author>
	<datestamp>1257069420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>in the 1970s.  I programmed in PL/1.  While the language was complex (being a synthesis of the most difficult-to-implement features from FORTRAN, COBOL and Algol), it certainly was a fine development environment *on Multics*.
<p>
I still miss the clean user interface (all command-line arguments meant the same thing, no matter which command was being executed) and fine documentation.  But the GE645 / Honeywell 6800 architecture was never well-enough documented to make emulation feasible.  And the descendants of Multics have implemented most of the features more-or-less.  The world has moved on.
</p><p>
I've moved on, too.  In 1978 I taught myself C; I've since learned and continue to program in C++, Java and Python, having discarded along the way Lisp, Pascal and Delphi.
</p><p>
And I use Windows mostly now.  But my memory tells me that Multics was often faster for routine things like searching the file system.  (Though the filesystem back then was only a few hundred MB.)  And the processor back then was good for about 1 MIPS.  Forget about color graphics.  Animation?  That was for cartoonists.
</p><p>
Anyway, this old-timer got a chuckle out of the article; thanks for posting the heads-up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in the 1970s .
I programmed in PL/1 .
While the language was complex ( being a synthesis of the most difficult-to-implement features from FORTRAN , COBOL and Algol ) , it certainly was a fine development environment * on Multics * .
I still miss the clean user interface ( all command-line arguments meant the same thing , no matter which command was being executed ) and fine documentation .
But the GE645 / Honeywell 6800 architecture was never well-enough documented to make emulation feasible .
And the descendants of Multics have implemented most of the features more-or-less .
The world has moved on .
I 've moved on , too .
In 1978 I taught myself C ; I 've since learned and continue to program in C + + , Java and Python , having discarded along the way Lisp , Pascal and Delphi .
And I use Windows mostly now .
But my memory tells me that Multics was often faster for routine things like searching the file system .
( Though the filesystem back then was only a few hundred MB .
) And the processor back then was good for about 1 MIPS .
Forget about color graphics .
Animation ? That was for cartoonists .
Anyway , this old-timer got a chuckle out of the article ; thanks for posting the heads-up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in the 1970s.
I programmed in PL/1.
While the language was complex (being a synthesis of the most difficult-to-implement features from FORTRAN, COBOL and Algol), it certainly was a fine development environment *on Multics*.
I still miss the clean user interface (all command-line arguments meant the same thing, no matter which command was being executed) and fine documentation.
But the GE645 / Honeywell 6800 architecture was never well-enough documented to make emulation feasible.
And the descendants of Multics have implemented most of the features more-or-less.
The world has moved on.
I've moved on, too.
In 1978 I taught myself C; I've since learned and continue to program in C++, Java and Python, having discarded along the way Lisp, Pascal and Delphi.
And I use Windows mostly now.
But my memory tells me that Multics was often faster for routine things like searching the file system.
(Though the filesystem back then was only a few hundred MB.
)  And the processor back then was good for about 1 MIPS.
Forget about color graphics.
Animation?  That was for cartoonists.
Anyway, this old-timer got a chuckle out of the article; thanks for posting the heads-up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30071300</id>
	<title>Re:I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>SonnyDog09</author>
	<datestamp>1258033800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Unix was full of cryptic shorthand commands. Ie, "help" vs "man -k", "search" vs "grep", "edit" vs "vi" or "ed" or "ex", etc.</p>  </div><p>I worked on multics systems for a few years back in the 80s. I loved the logical command names in multics. I hate the baby-talk nonsense that passes for command names in eunuchs. And the eunuchs think that they are *so cool* because they can use "grep" and "awk" like they are real words. If I want to display the contents of a file on a multics terminal, I type "show\_file baz.foo" or "sf baz.foo".  Even the abbreviations for commands make sense. Why the eunuchs think that the command "cat baz.foo" makes sense to perform this same function is something that I never got.

Get off my lawn!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix was full of cryptic shorthand commands .
Ie , " help " vs " man -k " , " search " vs " grep " , " edit " vs " vi " or " ed " or " ex " , etc .
I worked on multics systems for a few years back in the 80s .
I loved the logical command names in multics .
I hate the baby-talk nonsense that passes for command names in eunuchs .
And the eunuchs think that they are * so cool * because they can use " grep " and " awk " like they are real words .
If I want to display the contents of a file on a multics terminal , I type " show \ _file baz.foo " or " sf baz.foo " .
Even the abbreviations for commands make sense .
Why the eunuchs think that the command " cat baz.foo " makes sense to perform this same function is something that I never got .
Get off my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Unix was full of cryptic shorthand commands.
Ie, "help" vs "man -k", "search" vs "grep", "edit" vs "vi" or "ed" or "ex", etc.
I worked on multics systems for a few years back in the 80s.
I loved the logical command names in multics.
I hate the baby-talk nonsense that passes for command names in eunuchs.
And the eunuchs think that they are *so cool* because they can use "grep" and "awk" like they are real words.
If I want to display the contents of a file on a multics terminal, I type "show\_file baz.foo" or "sf baz.foo".
Even the abbreviations for commands make sense.
Why the eunuchs think that the command "cat baz.foo" makes sense to perform this same function is something that I never got.
Get off my lawn!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064558</id>
	<title>Re:Um, wasn't bloated Multics the reason *WHY* . .</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1257108120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bloat isn't really the right word.  Multics had a lot more features than UNIX, and some really nice ideas (like the fact that files and memory used the same interface), but it required very high-end hardware for the time.  It was a mainframe OS.  It would not run on a minicomputer and so UNIX was written to port a game from Multics to the spare minicomputer that Thompson and Richie had access to.  It turned out that UNIX, while inferior, was good enough for a lot of things, but saying Multics is bloated compared to UNIX is like saying Linux is bloated compared to MS DOS 3.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bloat is n't really the right word .
Multics had a lot more features than UNIX , and some really nice ideas ( like the fact that files and memory used the same interface ) , but it required very high-end hardware for the time .
It was a mainframe OS .
It would not run on a minicomputer and so UNIX was written to port a game from Multics to the spare minicomputer that Thompson and Richie had access to .
It turned out that UNIX , while inferior , was good enough for a lot of things , but saying Multics is bloated compared to UNIX is like saying Linux is bloated compared to MS DOS 3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bloat isn't really the right word.
Multics had a lot more features than UNIX, and some really nice ideas (like the fact that files and memory used the same interface), but it required very high-end hardware for the time.
It was a mainframe OS.
It would not run on a minicomputer and so UNIX was written to port a game from Multics to the spare minicomputer that Thompson and Richie had access to.
It turned out that UNIX, while inferior, was good enough for a lot of things, but saying Multics is bloated compared to UNIX is like saying Linux is bloated compared to MS DOS 3.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30069458</id>
	<title>GE-645</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257097920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was in the used computer business in the early 70s and bought the 645 that was at Bell Labs.  still have a bunch of circuit boards from it<br>I will be putting them up for sale soon....<br>Bill</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was in the used computer business in the early 70s and bought the 645 that was at Bell Labs .
still have a bunch of circuit boards from itI will be putting them up for sale soon....Bill</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was in the used computer business in the early 70s and bought the 645 that was at Bell Labs.
still have a bunch of circuit boards from itI will be putting them up for sale soon....Bill</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30069920</id>
	<title>cool story</title>
	<author>bluethundr</author>
	<datestamp>1257104040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>cool story, bro. full of WIN!!! but<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. needs to be moar facebookable these days. images don't show up anymore when posting linkages...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-(((</htmltext>
<tokenext>cool story , bro .
full of WIN ! ! !
but / .
needs to be moar facebookable these days .
images do n't show up anymore when posting linkages... : - ( ( (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cool story, bro.
full of WIN!!!
but /.
needs to be moar facebookable these days.
images don't show up anymore when posting linkages... :-(((</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066394</id>
	<title>Re:I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>raftpeople</author>
	<datestamp>1257073500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was wondering the same thing.  UNIX more friendly than VMS? Huh?  UNIX has some positive things going for it, but of all of the command line operating systems I've used, it's actually towards the bottom of user friendly-ness.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was wondering the same thing .
UNIX more friendly than VMS ?
Huh ? UNIX has some positive things going for it , but of all of the command line operating systems I 've used , it 's actually towards the bottom of user friendly-ness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was wondering the same thing.
UNIX more friendly than VMS?
Huh?  UNIX has some positive things going for it, but of all of the command line operating systems I've used, it's actually towards the bottom of user friendly-ness.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070100</id>
	<title>Re:I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>Anne Thwacks</author>
	<datestamp>1258058280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Multics was so fantastic that I was able to crash the whole system by declaring an array called "ARRAY" in Fortran, (reboot required) and numerous other
"obvious" blunders. (I am talking about 1972-4). A multi-user system that crashes because of accidental misuse of reserved words is not "user-friendly". I wrote my data capture programs in Basic, and heavy maths (wave equations) in Fortran - Multics certainly had inter-language support in the early 1970's - 20 years before the VAX and VMS.<p>
You are cxomparing Multics (1970 hardware and software) with Unix (1980 hardware and software) and VMS (1990 hardware and software) - these are cross generational comparisons. Try comparing Zyl with a Mercedes R class (obligatory Russian car analogy)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Multics was so fantastic that I was able to crash the whole system by declaring an array called " ARRAY " in Fortran , ( reboot required ) and numerous other " obvious " blunders .
( I am talking about 1972-4 ) .
A multi-user system that crashes because of accidental misuse of reserved words is not " user-friendly " .
I wrote my data capture programs in Basic , and heavy maths ( wave equations ) in Fortran - Multics certainly had inter-language support in the early 1970 's - 20 years before the VAX and VMS .
You are cxomparing Multics ( 1970 hardware and software ) with Unix ( 1980 hardware and software ) and VMS ( 1990 hardware and software ) - these are cross generational comparisons .
Try comparing Zyl with a Mercedes R class ( obligatory Russian car analogy )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Multics was so fantastic that I was able to crash the whole system by declaring an array called "ARRAY" in Fortran, (reboot required) and numerous other
"obvious" blunders.
(I am talking about 1972-4).
A multi-user system that crashes because of accidental misuse of reserved words is not "user-friendly".
I wrote my data capture programs in Basic, and heavy maths (wave equations) in Fortran - Multics certainly had inter-language support in the early 1970's - 20 years before the VAX and VMS.
You are cxomparing Multics (1970 hardware and software) with Unix (1980 hardware and software) and VMS (1990 hardware and software) - these are cross generational comparisons.
Try comparing Zyl with a Mercedes R class (obligatory Russian car analogy)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065984</id>
	<title>Re:40 Years of Multics, 1969-2009</title>
	<author>pregister</author>
	<datestamp>1257071940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe he just wanted to provide the Keep It Simple and was hoping you'd provide the Stupid?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe he just wanted to provide the Keep It Simple and was hoping you 'd provide the Stupid ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe he just wanted to provide the Keep It Simple and was hoping you'd provide the Stupid?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064926</id>
	<title>Re:40 Years of Multics, 1969-2009</title>
	<author>omar.sahal</author>
	<datestamp>1257066540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry I meant <br>
KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry I meant KISS ( Keep It Simple Stupid )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry I meant 
KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065822</id>
	<title>Re:Um, wasn't bloated Multics the reason *WHY* . .</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1257070980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Of course the Current version of Linux or BSD is probably more "bloated" then the last version of Multics.</p></div><p>Sure, trade in a 40 year old operating system for two 20s, just because its a little bloated after giving you the best years of its life...  Does this tty driver make my kernel look fat?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course the Current version of Linux or BSD is probably more " bloated " then the last version of Multics.Sure , trade in a 40 year old operating system for two 20s , just because its a little bloated after giving you the best years of its life... Does this tty driver make my kernel look fat ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course the Current version of Linux or BSD is probably more "bloated" then the last version of Multics.Sure, trade in a 40 year old operating system for two 20s, just because its a little bloated after giving you the best years of its life...  Does this tty driver make my kernel look fat?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064884</id>
	<title>First introduction to viruses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257066360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The implementation we used (SWURCC, England. 1978 - ?) had a "cookie monster" program. Briefly, this was a process that wandered randomly around the logged in users, occasionally taking control of their VDU and sending the message "I wanna cookie" It would only give you your screen back once the user typed "cookie". Swearing at it got you disconnected.
<p>
I have a feeling that this "feature" got removed very soon after it snarfed the Computer Unit Director's screen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The implementation we used ( SWURCC , England .
1978 - ?
) had a " cookie monster " program .
Briefly , this was a process that wandered randomly around the logged in users , occasionally taking control of their VDU and sending the message " I wan na cookie " It would only give you your screen back once the user typed " cookie " .
Swearing at it got you disconnected .
I have a feeling that this " feature " got removed very soon after it snarfed the Computer Unit Director 's screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The implementation we used (SWURCC, England.
1978 - ?
) had a "cookie monster" program.
Briefly, this was a process that wandered randomly around the logged in users, occasionally taking control of their VDU and sending the message "I wanna cookie" It would only give you your screen back once the user typed "cookie".
Swearing at it got you disconnected.
I have a feeling that this "feature" got removed very soon after it snarfed the Computer Unit Director's screen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066118</id>
	<title>Re:I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>joebagodonuts</author>
	<datestamp>1257072420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>VMS isn't "friendly to use"? Really? I guess maybe it isn't if English isn't your first language, but what could be more friendly than DCL?<br>If I need help, I type "help". If I need to copy a file, the command is "copy". If I want to rename a file, guess what the command is? You guessed it - "rename"<br><br>Plus, the uptime is tremendous, which is a VERY friendly attribute.</htmltext>
<tokenext>VMS is n't " friendly to use " ?
Really ? I guess maybe it is n't if English is n't your first language , but what could be more friendly than DCL ? If I need help , I type " help " .
If I need to copy a file , the command is " copy " .
If I want to rename a file , guess what the command is ?
You guessed it - " rename " Plus , the uptime is tremendous , which is a VERY friendly attribute .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>VMS isn't "friendly to use"?
Really? I guess maybe it isn't if English isn't your first language, but what could be more friendly than DCL?If I need help, I type "help".
If I need to copy a file, the command is "copy".
If I want to rename a file, guess what the command is?
You guessed it - "rename"Plus, the uptime is tremendous, which is a VERY friendly attribute.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064996</id>
	<title>What was Multics used for?</title>
	<author>wandazulu</author>
	<datestamp>1257066900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember reading that Multics was going to be the OS used to provide computing-as-utility; everyone was just going to be able to use it. Did this plan ever pan out (was Tymnet and Telenet Multics-based?) Who, then, were the Multics customers and what, if anything, spawned from it (other than Unix and VisiCalc, as mentioned in TFA)?<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember reading that Multics was going to be the OS used to provide computing-as-utility ; everyone was just going to be able to use it .
Did this plan ever pan out ( was Tymnet and Telenet Multics-based ?
) Who , then , were the Multics customers and what , if anything , spawned from it ( other than Unix and VisiCalc , as mentioned in TFA ) ?
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember reading that Multics was going to be the OS used to provide computing-as-utility; everyone was just going to be able to use it.
Did this plan ever pan out (was Tymnet and Telenet Multics-based?
) Who, then, were the Multics customers and what, if anything, spawned from it (other than Unix and VisiCalc, as mentioned in TFA)?
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064216</id>
	<title>Remember punch cards</title>
	<author>jessica77</author>
	<datestamp>1257106860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a fellow in my office who cannot seem to stop talking about punch cards, he also has a dilbert cartoon for it. Life has changed so much with the advent of computers, especially the desktop PC's / MACs</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a fellow in my office who can not seem to stop talking about punch cards , he also has a dilbert cartoon for it .
Life has changed so much with the advent of computers , especially the desktop PC 's / MACs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a fellow in my office who cannot seem to stop talking about punch cards, he also has a dilbert cartoon for it.
Life has changed so much with the advent of computers, especially the desktop PC's / MACs</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067904</id>
	<title>Re:Um, wasn't bloated Multics the reason *WHY* . .</title>
	<author>Darinbob</author>
	<datestamp>1257082320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Linux and BSD are positively bloated compared to the first Unix systems.  It first ran on a computer with only 64K after all.  Unix wouldn't have survived if it had stuck to the first few versions, it would be far too limiting.  What made it succeed, as opposed to its contemporaries, was that it was relatively portable and could migrate to better computers when they came along, and it was relatively open (for the time) so that others could grow and adapt it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux and BSD are positively bloated compared to the first Unix systems .
It first ran on a computer with only 64K after all .
Unix would n't have survived if it had stuck to the first few versions , it would be far too limiting .
What made it succeed , as opposed to its contemporaries , was that it was relatively portable and could migrate to better computers when they came along , and it was relatively open ( for the time ) so that others could grow and adapt it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux and BSD are positively bloated compared to the first Unix systems.
It first ran on a computer with only 64K after all.
Unix wouldn't have survived if it had stuck to the first few versions, it would be far too limiting.
What made it succeed, as opposed to its contemporaries, was that it was relatively portable and could migrate to better computers when they came along, and it was relatively open (for the time) so that others could grow and adapt it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064558</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064364</id>
	<title>Um, wasn't bloated Multics the reason *WHY* . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257107460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> . . . Thompson and Richie decided to start a less ambitious project, called Unix?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
Thompson and Richie decided to start a less ambitious project , called Unix ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> .
. .
Thompson and Richie decided to start a less ambitious project, called Unix?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064242</id>
	<title>obligatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257106920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But can it run Vista?</htmltext>
<tokenext>But can it run Vista ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But can it run Vista?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070238</id>
	<title>Re:obKanye</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258017360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The media "scandal" is because Kanye West is</p><p>
&nbsp; (A) a dumb black guy (and the talking heads love to hate on dumb black guys)</p><p>
&nbsp; (B) a cheap excuse for a story on a slow news day, and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</p><p>
&nbsp; (C) once criticized George W. Bush, saying he didn't care about black people. Of course he didn't, but not for any specific racist reason -- he just didn't care about anybody but himself.</p><p>((C) was important because many of the aforementioned talking heads had HUUUUUUGE mancrushes on GWB, often involving lovingly detailed descriptions of flightsuit crotch bulges. Said criticism caused these corners of the media landscape to squawk in fury, and they immediately had it in for Kanye, and they began watching him obsessively so that they could ridicule him just as soon as he said something stupid. Which was bound to happen, see (A) again.)</p><p>
&nbsp; The willingness of the media to obsessively stalk certain "celebrities" to launch a "scandal" at first opportunity, while ignoring similar faults in others, is a good way to spot the <i>actual</i> bias in the media. Notice who gets a pass for saying or doing stupid things, and who gets a four-day frenzy of outrage and ridicule.<br>Some of this is political bias, but most of it is a social-class bias.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The media " scandal " is because Kanye West is   ( A ) a dumb black guy ( and the talking heads love to hate on dumb black guys )   ( B ) a cheap excuse for a story on a slow news day , and . .   ( C ) once criticized George W. Bush , saying he did n't care about black people .
Of course he did n't , but not for any specific racist reason -- he just did n't care about anybody but himself .
( ( C ) was important because many of the aforementioned talking heads had HUUUUUUGE mancrushes on GWB , often involving lovingly detailed descriptions of flightsuit crotch bulges .
Said criticism caused these corners of the media landscape to squawk in fury , and they immediately had it in for Kanye , and they began watching him obsessively so that they could ridicule him just as soon as he said something stupid .
Which was bound to happen , see ( A ) again .
)   The willingness of the media to obsessively stalk certain " celebrities " to launch a " scandal " at first opportunity , while ignoring similar faults in others , is a good way to spot the actual bias in the media .
Notice who gets a pass for saying or doing stupid things , and who gets a four-day frenzy of outrage and ridicule.Some of this is political bias , but most of it is a social-class bias .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The media "scandal" is because Kanye West is
  (A) a dumb black guy (and the talking heads love to hate on dumb black guys)
  (B) a cheap excuse for a story on a slow news day, and ..
  (C) once criticized George W. Bush, saying he didn't care about black people.
Of course he didn't, but not for any specific racist reason -- he just didn't care about anybody but himself.
((C) was important because many of the aforementioned talking heads had HUUUUUUGE mancrushes on GWB, often involving lovingly detailed descriptions of flightsuit crotch bulges.
Said criticism caused these corners of the media landscape to squawk in fury, and they immediately had it in for Kanye, and they began watching him obsessively so that they could ridicule him just as soon as he said something stupid.
Which was bound to happen, see (A) again.
)
  The willingness of the media to obsessively stalk certain "celebrities" to launch a "scandal" at first opportunity, while ignoring similar faults in others, is a good way to spot the actual bias in the media.
Notice who gets a pass for saying or doing stupid things, and who gets a four-day frenzy of outrage and ridicule.Some of this is political bias, but most of it is a social-class bias.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070400</id>
	<title>Re:obKanye</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258019640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Preemptive multitasking fuck yeah</htmltext>
<tokenext>Preemptive multitasking fuck yeah</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Preemptive multitasking fuck yeah</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065062</id>
	<title>Can you</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1257067200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can you really rate it as 40 years, since the last operational site was shut down in 2000? Shouldn't the timer stop when it dies, like with people? Do you give Columbus's age as over 500 years?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you really rate it as 40 years , since the last operational site was shut down in 2000 ?
Should n't the timer stop when it dies , like with people ?
Do you give Columbus 's age as over 500 years ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you really rate it as 40 years, since the last operational site was shut down in 2000?
Shouldn't the timer stop when it dies, like with people?
Do you give Columbus's age as over 500 years?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308</id>
	<title>obKanye</title>
	<author>Fortunato\_NC</author>
	<datestamp>1257107220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey Multics, I'm really happy for ya, and imma let you finish, but UNIX is the best multiuser operating system of ALL TIME. OF. ALL. TIME.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey Multics , I 'm really happy for ya , and imma let you finish , but UNIX is the best multiuser operating system of ALL TIME .
OF. ALL .
TIME .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey Multics, I'm really happy for ya, and imma let you finish, but UNIX is the best multiuser operating system of ALL TIME.
OF. ALL.
TIME.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066836</id>
	<title>I think this is irony, but I'll still share...</title>
	<author>stakovahflow</author>
	<datestamp>1257075660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/06/07/1619231/Unix-Turns-40?from=rss" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/06/07/1619231/Unix-Turns-40?from=rss</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //tech.slashdot.org/story/09/06/07/1619231/Unix-Turns-40 ? from = rss [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/06/07/1619231/Unix-Turns-40?from=rss [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070414</id>
	<title>Re:I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>putaro</author>
	<datestamp>1258019880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Damned Command Language?  I remember when they added that to RSTS/E.  I hated it.  Overly verbose but you could abbreviate it by just typing the first few characters of the command so it wound up being completely cryptic in practice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Damned Command Language ?
I remember when they added that to RSTS/E .
I hated it .
Overly verbose but you could abbreviate it by just typing the first few characters of the command so it wound up being completely cryptic in practice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Damned Command Language?
I remember when they added that to RSTS/E.
I hated it.
Overly verbose but you could abbreviate it by just typing the first few characters of the command so it wound up being completely cryptic in practice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064494</id>
	<title>40 Years of Multics, 1969-2009</title>
	<author>omar.sahal</author>
	<datestamp>1257107880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Multics was very influential, it provided Ken Thompson an example of what not to do. In other words, stick closely to the KISS (Keep It Simple) principle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Multics was very influential , it provided Ken Thompson an example of what not to do .
In other words , stick closely to the KISS ( Keep It Simple ) principle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Multics was very influential, it provided Ken Thompson an example of what not to do.
In other words, stick closely to the KISS (Keep It Simple) principle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067506</id>
	<title>Re:obKanye</title>
	<author>R3d M3rcury</author>
	<datestamp>1257079620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bah.  Unix is just Multics with the balls cut off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bah .
Unix is just Multics with the balls cut off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bah.
Unix is just Multics with the balls cut off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070330</id>
	<title>Re:I wish it never died!</title>
	<author>crunzh</author>
	<datestamp>1258018560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would you list uptime?

I dont care if my system is rebooted everynight, as long as its up when I need it to be up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you list uptime ?
I dont care if my system is rebooted everynight , as long as its up when I need it to be up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you list uptime?
I dont care if my system is rebooted everynight, as long as its up when I need it to be up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066118</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066406</id>
	<title>Re:First introduction to viruses</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1257073560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember seeing that in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113243/" title="imdb.com">the documentary</a> [imdb.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember seeing that in the documentary [ imdb.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember seeing that in the documentary [imdb.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30068444</id>
	<title>Re:If it was so good</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1257086880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Were there any games for it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Were there any games for it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Were there any games for it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066878</id>
	<title>Antithesis</title>
	<author>Dynamoo</author>
	<datestamp>1257075900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In some ways, Unix is very like Multics. In some other ways, Unix is the complete Antithesis of Multics. Unix copied some of what was good, left out most of what was bad, and left some of the really cool features to be forgotten. In other words, Multics made Unix the shape it is.. and that of course influenced everything down through Linux, Mach, the iPhone, Android etc etc.
<p>
Like many other posters, I too was a Multician at university. It rocked. But I prefer my nice GUI and not having to share my processor with others!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In some ways , Unix is very like Multics .
In some other ways , Unix is the complete Antithesis of Multics .
Unix copied some of what was good , left out most of what was bad , and left some of the really cool features to be forgotten .
In other words , Multics made Unix the shape it is.. and that of course influenced everything down through Linux , Mach , the iPhone , Android etc etc .
Like many other posters , I too was a Multician at university .
It rocked .
But I prefer my nice GUI and not having to share my processor with others !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In some ways, Unix is very like Multics.
In some other ways, Unix is the complete Antithesis of Multics.
Unix copied some of what was good, left out most of what was bad, and left some of the really cool features to be forgotten.
In other words, Multics made Unix the shape it is.. and that of course influenced everything down through Linux, Mach, the iPhone, Android etc etc.
Like many other posters, I too was a Multician at university.
It rocked.
But I prefer my nice GUI and not having to share my processor with others!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065528</id>
	<title>Multic? More like your tic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257069480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>WTF is a multic?</htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF is a multic ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF is a multic?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30068322</id>
	<title>Re:I was a Multics user and code developer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257085980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Discarding Lisp to use C++, Java and Python?  Madness.   Do you also throw out tactical nukes to use arrows, muskets and machine guns?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Discarding Lisp to use C + + , Java and Python ?
Madness. Do you also throw out tactical nukes to use arrows , muskets and machine guns ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Discarding Lisp to use C++, Java and Python?
Madness.   Do you also throw out tactical nukes to use arrows, muskets and machine guns?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064830</id>
	<title>If it was so good</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1257066060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it was so good, then why aren't there any emulators for it? Nearly every other old system has emulators, but not Multics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it was so good , then why are n't there any emulators for it ?
Nearly every other old system has emulators , but not Multics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it was so good, then why aren't there any emulators for it?
Nearly every other old system has emulators, but not Multics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30068366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30077760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30078548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30071300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30069354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30068444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30068322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_11_197205_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064620
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065358
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30068444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065716
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30068366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065032
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064610
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064926
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064746
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064766
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065420
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30077760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30068322
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064812
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066406
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30069354
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064364
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064682
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064558
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064524
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064852
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065632
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067690
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30064360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30067804
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30071300
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30078548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066118
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30070414
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066394
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30066912
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_11_197205.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_11_197205.30065524
</commentlist>
</conversation>
