<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_13_199249</id>
	<title>Nvidia's RealityServer to Offer Ubiquitous 3D Images</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1258105620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>WesternActor writes <i>"ExtremeTech has an interview with a couple of the folks behind <a href="http://www.extremetech.com/print\_article2/0,1217,a\%253D245901,00.asp">Nvidia's new RealityServer platform</a>, which purports to make photorealistic 3D images available to anyone on any computing platform, even things like smartphones.  The idea is that all the rendering happens 'in the cloud,' which allows for a much wider distribution of high-quality images.  RealityServer isn't released until November 30, but it looks like it could be interesting.  The article has photos and a video that show it in action."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>WesternActor writes " ExtremeTech has an interview with a couple of the folks behind Nvidia 's new RealityServer platform , which purports to make photorealistic 3D images available to anyone on any computing platform , even things like smartphones .
The idea is that all the rendering happens 'in the cloud, ' which allows for a much wider distribution of high-quality images .
RealityServer is n't released until November 30 , but it looks like it could be interesting .
The article has photos and a video that show it in action .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WesternActor writes "ExtremeTech has an interview with a couple of the folks behind Nvidia's new RealityServer platform, which purports to make photorealistic 3D images available to anyone on any computing platform, even things like smartphones.
The idea is that all the rendering happens 'in the cloud,' which allows for a much wider distribution of high-quality images.
RealityServer isn't released until November 30, but it looks like it could be interesting.
The article has photos and a video that show it in action.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093758</id>
	<title>Re:It takes chutzpah to use the term "RealityServe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258119480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any "new" technology that is marketed with the phrase "cloud computing" is starting to get a really bad reputation with software developers.</p><p>The "cloud" is the sort of idea that managers and other fucking morons like that think is totally great, but those of us who actually have to work with such systems know how shitty most of them are.</p><p>"Cloud computing" is this year's version last year's "web services", "SOA" and "SaaS". So many bold claims, but in the end nothing but a steaming pile of fecal matter pushed by the peckers in marketing.</p><p>I wonder what next year's stupidity is going to be. I wonder what radical claims the marketing fools will make, only to find out that what they propose is stupid, costly and inefficient. There's just so much anticipation!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any " new " technology that is marketed with the phrase " cloud computing " is starting to get a really bad reputation with software developers.The " cloud " is the sort of idea that managers and other fucking morons like that think is totally great , but those of us who actually have to work with such systems know how shitty most of them are .
" Cloud computing " is this year 's version last year 's " web services " , " SOA " and " SaaS " .
So many bold claims , but in the end nothing but a steaming pile of fecal matter pushed by the peckers in marketing.I wonder what next year 's stupidity is going to be .
I wonder what radical claims the marketing fools will make , only to find out that what they propose is stupid , costly and inefficient .
There 's just so much anticipation !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any "new" technology that is marketed with the phrase "cloud computing" is starting to get a really bad reputation with software developers.The "cloud" is the sort of idea that managers and other fucking morons like that think is totally great, but those of us who actually have to work with such systems know how shitty most of them are.
"Cloud computing" is this year's version last year's "web services", "SOA" and "SaaS".
So many bold claims, but in the end nothing but a steaming pile of fecal matter pushed by the peckers in marketing.I wonder what next year's stupidity is going to be.
I wonder what radical claims the marketing fools will make, only to find out that what they propose is stupid, costly and inefficient.
There's just so much anticipation!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092982</id>
	<title>Re:Stop saying "cloud"</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1258113720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, and it's not real-time at all. IT will *at least* have the lag of one ping roundtrip. Then add some ms of rendering time and input/ouput on the device to it. On a mobile phone that can mean 1.5 seconds(!) in delay. Or ever more.</p><p>It's real-time, when it does not sound weird anymore, when I press a key in a music game, to hear the sound.<br>That's below 10 ms for me. But something around 50ms TOTAL for the average Joe.</p><p>Oh, and don't even <em>think</em> about winning a game against someone with real real-time rendering.</p><p>In Internet speak this project is a... LAG FAIL!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , and it 's not real-time at all .
IT will * at least * have the lag of one ping roundtrip .
Then add some ms of rendering time and input/ouput on the device to it .
On a mobile phone that can mean 1.5 seconds ( !
) in delay .
Or ever more.It 's real-time , when it does not sound weird anymore , when I press a key in a music game , to hear the sound.That 's below 10 ms for me .
But something around 50ms TOTAL for the average Joe.Oh , and do n't even think about winning a game against someone with real real-time rendering.In Internet speak this project is a... LAG FAIL !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, and it's not real-time at all.
IT will *at least* have the lag of one ping roundtrip.
Then add some ms of rendering time and input/ouput on the device to it.
On a mobile phone that can mean 1.5 seconds(!
) in delay.
Or ever more.It's real-time, when it does not sound weird anymore, when I press a key in a music game, to hear the sound.That's below 10 ms for me.
But something around 50ms TOTAL for the average Joe.Oh, and don't even think about winning a game against someone with real real-time rendering.In Internet speak this project is a... LAG FAIL!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092874</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>JobyOne</author>
	<datestamp>1258113000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How big is your screen?</p><p>That's the real question here. "Photorealistic" (a meaningless term in the context of transferring image data) on a smartphone screen is a whole lot smaller than on my full 1920x1280 desktop monitor.</p><p>"Photorealistic" will only ever be as high resolution as the screen you view it on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How big is your screen ? That 's the real question here .
" Photorealistic " ( a meaningless term in the context of transferring image data ) on a smartphone screen is a whole lot smaller than on my full 1920x1280 desktop monitor .
" Photorealistic " will only ever be as high resolution as the screen you view it on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How big is your screen?That's the real question here.
"Photorealistic" (a meaningless term in the context of transferring image data) on a smartphone screen is a whole lot smaller than on my full 1920x1280 desktop monitor.
"Photorealistic" will only ever be as high resolution as the screen you view it on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092590</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1258111140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>how am I ever going to push 30 Photorealistic Frames through the internet - I can hardly get 5 Mb/s from my ISP.</i></p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I'm far from being a computer programmer/expert.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; But say you have a display at, for argument's sake, 1280x1024 pixels at 32 bits per pixel. That's 41.9 million bits per frame. Call it 42 Mbits. You want to do that at 30 frames per second?  You're up to 1.26 Gb/s. Now please raise your hands who has a 2GBs internet connection? OK there will be some compression, and algorithms that mean you don't have to send the WHOLE screen every frame, but still...</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I don't think this is meant to be used for games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how am I ever going to push 30 Photorealistic Frames through the internet - I can hardly get 5 Mb/s from my ISP .
      I 'm far from being a computer programmer/expert .
      But say you have a display at , for argument 's sake , 1280x1024 pixels at 32 bits per pixel .
That 's 41.9 million bits per frame .
Call it 42 Mbits .
You want to do that at 30 frames per second ?
You 're up to 1.26 Gb/s .
Now please raise your hands who has a 2GBs internet connection ?
OK there will be some compression , and algorithms that mean you do n't have to send the WHOLE screen every frame , but still.. .       I do n't think this is meant to be used for games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how am I ever going to push 30 Photorealistic Frames through the internet - I can hardly get 5 Mb/s from my ISP.
      I'm far from being a computer programmer/expert.
      But say you have a display at, for argument's sake, 1280x1024 pixels at 32 bits per pixel.
That's 41.9 million bits per frame.
Call it 42 Mbits.
You want to do that at 30 frames per second?
You're up to 1.26 Gb/s.
Now please raise your hands who has a 2GBs internet connection?
OK there will be some compression, and algorithms that mean you don't have to send the WHOLE screen every frame, but still...
      I don't think this is meant to be used for games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093126</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1258114800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, no one could ever get you 30 frames a second, that's why we can't watch tv shows and movies online~</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , no one could ever get you 30 frames a second , that 's why we ca n't watch tv shows and movies online ~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, no one could ever get you 30 frames a second, that's why we can't watch tv shows and movies online~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092430</id>
	<title>Photo-realistic on smart phones!</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1258110060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That low-resolution BlackBerry in your pocket will suddenly be capable of producing high resolution images?</p><p>Uh-huh.</p><p>Nvidia also claims that simply by wiring money into their account, they can make you lose weight by doing nothing at all!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That low-resolution BlackBerry in your pocket will suddenly be capable of producing high resolution images ? Uh-huh.Nvidia also claims that simply by wiring money into their account , they can make you lose weight by doing nothing at all !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That low-resolution BlackBerry in your pocket will suddenly be capable of producing high resolution images?Uh-huh.Nvidia also claims that simply by wiring money into their account, they can make you lose weight by doing nothing at all!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093056</id>
	<title>Re:It takes chutzpah to use the term "RealityServe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258114260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd like to see a 3D of <a href="http://lianashevchenko.wordpress.com/" title="wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">this</a> [wordpress.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to see a 3D of this [ wordpress.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to see a 3D of this [wordpress.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092672</id>
	<title>lack of control</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1258111680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That depends on which side you are on.</p><p>For the people hosting ( or governments that want to butt in ) there is plenty of control.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That depends on which side you are on.For the people hosting ( or governments that want to butt in ) there is plenty of control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That depends on which side you are on.For the people hosting ( or governments that want to butt in ) there is plenty of control.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092284</id>
	<title>It takes chutzpah to use the term "RealityServer"</title>
	<author>jeffb (2.718)</author>
	<datestamp>1258109340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...for demoware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...for demoware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...for demoware.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092506</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>lhoguin</author>
	<datestamp>1258110600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many applications do not need 30 fps, though. For example, an house architect software would be able to use this for rendering various shots of the designed house.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many applications do not need 30 fps , though .
For example , an house architect software would be able to use this for rendering various shots of the designed house .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many applications do not need 30 fps, though.
For example, an house architect software would be able to use this for rendering various shots of the designed house.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30096304</id>
	<title>Re:It takes chutzpah to use the term "RealityServe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258199820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...for demoware.</p></div><p>"RealityServer will be available starting November 30, 2009"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...for demoware .
" RealityServer will be available starting November 30 , 2009 "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...for demoware.
"RealityServer will be available starting November 30, 2009"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093198</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>ChrisMaple</author>
	<datestamp>1258115220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>RTFS</p></div></blockquote><p>
RTFA. Animation of a dress worn by a model of a size specified by the user is given as an example.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>RTFS RTFA .
Animation of a dress worn by a model of a size specified by the user is given as an example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RTFS
RTFA.
Animation of a dress worn by a model of a size specified by the user is given as an example.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092424</id>
	<title>Heh... I got more 'Reality' than I can handle...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258110060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about some 'surrealism' here ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about some 'surrealism ' here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about some 'surrealism' here ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092502</id>
	<title>Does it serve up glasses too?</title>
	<author>Tiger4</author>
	<datestamp>1258110540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>3D images need three 3D glasses and rendering too don't they?  Or is this just a photorealistic 2D image of a solid model?  Or something else altogether?

And high quality images are usually pretty large files.  Does it render extra bandwidth to carry the file across to my smart phone?</htmltext>
<tokenext>3D images need three 3D glasses and rendering too do n't they ?
Or is this just a photorealistic 2D image of a solid model ?
Or something else altogether ?
And high quality images are usually pretty large files .
Does it render extra bandwidth to carry the file across to my smart phone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3D images need three 3D glasses and rendering too don't they?
Or is this just a photorealistic 2D image of a solid model?
Or something else altogether?
And high quality images are usually pretty large files.
Does it render extra bandwidth to carry the file across to my smart phone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093138</id>
	<title>The article kinda misses the point</title>
	<author>fontkick</author>
	<datestamp>1258114920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While the comments here are mostly negative, I can say this is a big leap ahead for rendering technology mainly because the rendering is occuring at the hardware level, rendered on the Nvidia processors on a video card, instead of the CPU via software rendering. They are calling this iray and it's developed by mental images, not nvidia. While video cards are currently great at rendering games in real time, they require a tremendous amount of shader programming and only do this sort of rendering within the context of a game, instead of within a CAD application. They are also limited in their ability to render GI, area (soft) shadows and refraction/caustics. By passing the rendering from a CAD app to iray and onto the videocard hardware, you have access to 200 parallel processors, instead of the 2, 4, or 6 processors on the CPU. So in theory a 3dsmax/Maya scene that takes you 5 hours (300 minutes) to render on a dual core CPU will only take 3 minutes with your videocard's processors. With the use of reality server (and enough multiple nvidia cards all rendering the same frame), the 3 minutes drops down to 3 seconds. Personally I'd settle for the 3 minutes and I'd be damned happy about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While the comments here are mostly negative , I can say this is a big leap ahead for rendering technology mainly because the rendering is occuring at the hardware level , rendered on the Nvidia processors on a video card , instead of the CPU via software rendering .
They are calling this iray and it 's developed by mental images , not nvidia .
While video cards are currently great at rendering games in real time , they require a tremendous amount of shader programming and only do this sort of rendering within the context of a game , instead of within a CAD application .
They are also limited in their ability to render GI , area ( soft ) shadows and refraction/caustics .
By passing the rendering from a CAD app to iray and onto the videocard hardware , you have access to 200 parallel processors , instead of the 2 , 4 , or 6 processors on the CPU .
So in theory a 3dsmax/Maya scene that takes you 5 hours ( 300 minutes ) to render on a dual core CPU will only take 3 minutes with your videocard 's processors .
With the use of reality server ( and enough multiple nvidia cards all rendering the same frame ) , the 3 minutes drops down to 3 seconds .
Personally I 'd settle for the 3 minutes and I 'd be damned happy about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the comments here are mostly negative, I can say this is a big leap ahead for rendering technology mainly because the rendering is occuring at the hardware level, rendered on the Nvidia processors on a video card, instead of the CPU via software rendering.
They are calling this iray and it's developed by mental images, not nvidia.
While video cards are currently great at rendering games in real time, they require a tremendous amount of shader programming and only do this sort of rendering within the context of a game, instead of within a CAD application.
They are also limited in their ability to render GI, area (soft) shadows and refraction/caustics.
By passing the rendering from a CAD app to iray and onto the videocard hardware, you have access to 200 parallel processors, instead of the 2, 4, or 6 processors on the CPU.
So in theory a 3dsmax/Maya scene that takes you 5 hours (300 minutes) to render on a dual core CPU will only take 3 minutes with your videocard's processors.
With the use of reality server (and enough multiple nvidia cards all rendering the same frame), the 3 minutes drops down to 3 seconds.
Personally I'd settle for the 3 minutes and I'd be damned happy about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093258</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258115700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually you dont send 30 frames per sec. You will more likely send maybe one that acts as a keyframe and 29 times the difference to the next frame, which is much less data than a whole picture. Thats how<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mpeg and the likes work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually you dont send 30 frames per sec .
You will more likely send maybe one that acts as a keyframe and 29 times the difference to the next frame , which is much less data than a whole picture .
Thats how .mpeg and the likes work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually you dont send 30 frames per sec.
You will more likely send maybe one that acts as a keyframe and 29 times the difference to the next frame, which is much less data than a whole picture.
Thats how .mpeg and the likes work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093752</id>
	<title>SGI?!</title>
	<author>sp1nm0nkey</author>
	<datestamp>1258119420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I smell an SGI naming convention, i.e. RealityEngine</htmltext>
<tokenext>I smell an SGI naming convention , i.e .
RealityEngine</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I smell an SGI naming convention, i.e.
RealityEngine</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092534</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>VeNoM0619</author>
	<datestamp>1258110780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>RTFS<p><div class="quote"><p>which purports to make photorealistic 3D <b>images</b> available to anyone on any computing platform, even things like smartphones. The idea is that all the rendering happens 'in the cloud,' which allows for a much wider distribution of high-quality <b>images</b>. RealityServer isn't released until November 30, but it looks like it could be interesting. The article has <b>photos</b></p> </div><p>Notice there is no emphasis on video or animation. This is for 3d images only. Or were you seriously hoping to play 3d realistic games on your phone?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>RTFSwhich purports to make photorealistic 3D images available to anyone on any computing platform , even things like smartphones .
The idea is that all the rendering happens 'in the cloud, ' which allows for a much wider distribution of high-quality images .
RealityServer is n't released until November 30 , but it looks like it could be interesting .
The article has photos Notice there is no emphasis on video or animation .
This is for 3d images only .
Or were you seriously hoping to play 3d realistic games on your phone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RTFSwhich purports to make photorealistic 3D images available to anyone on any computing platform, even things like smartphones.
The idea is that all the rendering happens 'in the cloud,' which allows for a much wider distribution of high-quality images.
RealityServer isn't released until November 30, but it looks like it could be interesting.
The article has photos Notice there is no emphasis on video or animation.
This is for 3d images only.
Or were you seriously hoping to play 3d realistic games on your phone?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30094638</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>physburn</author>
	<datestamp>1258128540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The reality engine isn't for real time gaming, its for artists, game and CAD
designers to see the scenes rendered in near real time. It makes a lot
of sense to the render on a remote server, most of time the artists computer
will be just a user interface for modelling using very little CPU, only on the
few rendering occassion will you need the vast ammout of CPU power
that the remote render farm, can provide. Nvidia and Mental image have
picked a great application for the cloud here. Even cleverer for Nvidia is
decided to let 3d parties buy and host the render engines. No doubt the
market will vastly overestimate the need for these engine, making
Nvidia a lot of Telsa GPU sales, and a many cheap resources for
rendering. I'm not sure what the payment system for using the render
farms will be, it will probably vary from provider to provider, and settle
down as cheap once there are enough render farms available.
<p>
Nvidia where also clever in buying Mental Ray, since there render
plug-in, fits most of the industries main 3d packages, like Maya,
3D studio and Autocad, the reality engine farms will already be
useable on most of the common software.
</p><p>
---
</p><p>
<a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/blogs/Ray\%20Tracing/feed.html" title="feeddistiller.com">Ray Tracing</a> [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ <a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/" title="feeddistiller.com">Feed Distiller</a> [feeddistiller.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reality engine is n't for real time gaming , its for artists , game and CAD designers to see the scenes rendered in near real time .
It makes a lot of sense to the render on a remote server , most of time the artists computer will be just a user interface for modelling using very little CPU , only on the few rendering occassion will you need the vast ammout of CPU power that the remote render farm , can provide .
Nvidia and Mental image have picked a great application for the cloud here .
Even cleverer for Nvidia is decided to let 3d parties buy and host the render engines .
No doubt the market will vastly overestimate the need for these engine , making Nvidia a lot of Telsa GPU sales , and a many cheap resources for rendering .
I 'm not sure what the payment system for using the render farms will be , it will probably vary from provider to provider , and settle down as cheap once there are enough render farms available .
Nvidia where also clever in buying Mental Ray , since there render plug-in , fits most of the industries main 3d packages , like Maya , 3D studio and Autocad , the reality engine farms will already be useable on most of the common software .
--- Ray Tracing [ feeddistiller.com ] Feed @ Feed Distiller [ feeddistiller.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reality engine isn't for real time gaming, its for artists, game and CAD
designers to see the scenes rendered in near real time.
It makes a lot
of sense to the render on a remote server, most of time the artists computer
will be just a user interface for modelling using very little CPU, only on the
few rendering occassion will you need the vast ammout of CPU power
that the remote render farm, can provide.
Nvidia and Mental image have
picked a great application for the cloud here.
Even cleverer for Nvidia is
decided to let 3d parties buy and host the render engines.
No doubt the
market will vastly overestimate the need for these engine, making
Nvidia a lot of Telsa GPU sales, and a many cheap resources for
rendering.
I'm not sure what the payment system for using the render
farms will be, it will probably vary from provider to provider, and settle
down as cheap once there are enough render farms available.
Nvidia where also clever in buying Mental Ray, since there render
plug-in, fits most of the industries main 3d packages, like Maya,
3D studio and Autocad, the reality engine farms will already be
useable on most of the common software.
---

Ray Tracing [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092446</id>
	<title>Re:Stop saying "cloud"</title>
	<author>Spad</author>
	<datestamp>1258110240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shhhhh! You'll ruin the scam (of convincing uninformed people that an old idea is a new idea by renaming it).</p><p>Thin client -&gt; fat client -&gt; thin client -&gt; fat client. *yawn*</p><p>Every time, this happens; things move away from the client for "performance" and "flexibility" and "scalability" reasons and then everyone realises it's a pain because of the lack of control or reliability and by that point the client hardware's moved on to the point where it can do the job better anyway so everyone moves back to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shhhhh !
You 'll ruin the scam ( of convincing uninformed people that an old idea is a new idea by renaming it ) .Thin client - &gt; fat client - &gt; thin client - &gt; fat client .
* yawn * Every time , this happens ; things move away from the client for " performance " and " flexibility " and " scalability " reasons and then everyone realises it 's a pain because of the lack of control or reliability and by that point the client hardware 's moved on to the point where it can do the job better anyway so everyone moves back to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shhhhh!
You'll ruin the scam (of convincing uninformed people that an old idea is a new idea by renaming it).Thin client -&gt; fat client -&gt; thin client -&gt; fat client.
*yawn*Every time, this happens; things move away from the client for "performance" and "flexibility" and "scalability" reasons and then everyone realises it's a pain because of the lack of control or reliability and by that point the client hardware's moved on to the point where it can do the job better anyway so everyone moves back to it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092500</id>
	<title>Paranoid I am</title>
	<author>Wardish</author>
	<datestamp>1258110540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A few security questions</p><p>Any attempt at encryption?</p><p>Considering that pretty much all internet traffic is copied, how hard would it be to watch someone's screen?</p><p>Is this processing limited to extreme graphics or is that spreadsheet being watched.</p><p>Yes there are plenty more, but enough for now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A few security questionsAny attempt at encryption ? Considering that pretty much all internet traffic is copied , how hard would it be to watch someone 's screen ? Is this processing limited to extreme graphics or is that spreadsheet being watched.Yes there are plenty more , but enough for now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A few security questionsAny attempt at encryption?Considering that pretty much all internet traffic is copied, how hard would it be to watch someone's screen?Is this processing limited to extreme graphics or is that spreadsheet being watched.Yes there are plenty more, but enough for now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092436</id>
	<title>Where have we seen this before?</title>
	<author>tds67</author>
	<datestamp>1258110180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds like a redistribution of bit wealth to me.  Those who can't afford the hardware shouldn't make the rest of us do their work.  Get a job.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like a redistribution of bit wealth to me .
Those who ca n't afford the hardware should n't make the rest of us do their work .
Get a job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like a redistribution of bit wealth to me.
Those who can't afford the hardware shouldn't make the rest of us do their work.
Get a job.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092294</id>
	<title>fp!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258109340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>:O</htmltext>
<tokenext>: O</tokentext>
<sentencetext>:O</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388</id>
	<title>Stop saying "cloud"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258109880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTFA:</p><blockquote><div><p> By moving ray tracing and many other high power graphics algorithms off the client and into the cloud, lightweight-computing platforms like netbooks and smartphones can display photorealistic images in real time.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Why not just say:</p><blockquote><div><p> By moving ray tracing and many other high power graphics algorithms off the client and <b>onto nvidia's servers</b>, lightweight-computing platforms like netbooks and smartphones can display photorealistic images in real time.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I guess it's just not as cool...</p><p>I wonder if this would work for cooking?</p><blockquote><div><p> By moving cutting, peeling, baking, frying and many other food preparation techniques off the dining room table and <b>into the food cloud</b> (kitchen), lightweight-eating platforms like TV trays and paper plates can be used to eat off of in real time.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA : By moving ray tracing and many other high power graphics algorithms off the client and into the cloud , lightweight-computing platforms like netbooks and smartphones can display photorealistic images in real time .
Why not just say : By moving ray tracing and many other high power graphics algorithms off the client and onto nvidia 's servers , lightweight-computing platforms like netbooks and smartphones can display photorealistic images in real time .
I guess it 's just not as cool...I wonder if this would work for cooking ?
By moving cutting , peeling , baking , frying and many other food preparation techniques off the dining room table and into the food cloud ( kitchen ) , lightweight-eating platforms like TV trays and paper plates can be used to eat off of in real time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA: By moving ray tracing and many other high power graphics algorithms off the client and into the cloud, lightweight-computing platforms like netbooks and smartphones can display photorealistic images in real time.
Why not just say: By moving ray tracing and many other high power graphics algorithms off the client and onto nvidia's servers, lightweight-computing platforms like netbooks and smartphones can display photorealistic images in real time.
I guess it's just not as cool...I wonder if this would work for cooking?
By moving cutting, peeling, baking, frying and many other food preparation techniques off the dining room table and into the food cloud (kitchen), lightweight-eating platforms like TV trays and paper plates can be used to eat off of in real time.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092888</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258113060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Forget the data transfers, they'll increase, it's the latency that's the problem. Games using this technology will be almost useless, especially action games. Currently you get practically 0ms latency when you interact with a game, which is what makes it seem fast. If it's a multiplayer game then the only latency you get are from other people, and if they appear to go left 50ms later than when they pressed the button to go left it doesn't make a difference for you, since you don't know when they pressed the button. If you get 50ms latency on your own controls, then it's really really visible, since we have great motion vision... like T-Rexes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Forget the data transfers , they 'll increase , it 's the latency that 's the problem .
Games using this technology will be almost useless , especially action games .
Currently you get practically 0ms latency when you interact with a game , which is what makes it seem fast .
If it 's a multiplayer game then the only latency you get are from other people , and if they appear to go left 50ms later than when they pressed the button to go left it does n't make a difference for you , since you do n't know when they pressed the button .
If you get 50ms latency on your own controls , then it 's really really visible , since we have great motion vision... like T-Rexes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forget the data transfers, they'll increase, it's the latency that's the problem.
Games using this technology will be almost useless, especially action games.
Currently you get practically 0ms latency when you interact with a game, which is what makes it seem fast.
If it's a multiplayer game then the only latency you get are from other people, and if they appear to go left 50ms later than when they pressed the button to go left it doesn't make a difference for you, since you don't know when they pressed the button.
If you get 50ms latency on your own controls, then it's really really visible, since we have great motion vision... like T-Rexes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093310</id>
	<title>Re:Stop saying "cloud"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258116120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My kitchen sometimes resembles a cloud when I allow my high powered processor to over-render my inputs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My kitchen sometimes resembles a cloud when I allow my high powered processor to over-render my inputs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My kitchen sometimes resembles a cloud when I allow my high powered processor to over-render my inputs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30094608</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>KibibyteBrain</author>
	<datestamp>1258128000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because it would be cloud based, they could merely send the finished rasterized frames for cellphones(very little bandwidth), or preprocessed data for desktops/notebooks/things with a GPU which it could then assemble. The whole problem is usually when you do something like this you need to download much more data than you actually need to your machine to view only one small subset of that information. Now, it can send you only the data you need, or all of the data in progressive chunks that you can start to view in full [apparent] quality right away, vs. having to wait to download all the information to have your own machine start assembling it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because it would be cloud based , they could merely send the finished rasterized frames for cellphones ( very little bandwidth ) , or preprocessed data for desktops/notebooks/things with a GPU which it could then assemble .
The whole problem is usually when you do something like this you need to download much more data than you actually need to your machine to view only one small subset of that information .
Now , it can send you only the data you need , or all of the data in progressive chunks that you can start to view in full [ apparent ] quality right away , vs. having to wait to download all the information to have your own machine start assembling it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because it would be cloud based, they could merely send the finished rasterized frames for cellphones(very little bandwidth), or preprocessed data for desktops/notebooks/things with a GPU which it could then assemble.
The whole problem is usually when you do something like this you need to download much more data than you actually need to your machine to view only one small subset of that information.
Now, it can send you only the data you need, or all of the data in progressive chunks that you can start to view in full [apparent] quality right away, vs. having to wait to download all the information to have your own machine start assembling it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093134</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1258114860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With this technique, it might be possible with a 4g connection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With this technique , it might be possible with a 4g connection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With this technique, it might be possible with a 4g connection.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093306</id>
	<title>Games make no sense...</title>
	<author>GameMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1258116060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wanna know what playing games on a system like this would be like?  Go to your favorite video streaming site and change the player settings (if you can) to 0 caching.  The end result is, approximately, what you'd get here.  The internet is a very unstable place.  The only reason online games work is that programmers have gotten really good at developing latency hiding tricks which all stop working when the video rendering is done by the server.  And, don't think this will just effect fps games.  Just because it doesn't make or break a game like WOW doesn't mean you'd want the stuttering game-play you'd have to put up with.  As far as I can see, the only kind of game this would be useful for it photo-realistic checkers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wan na know what playing games on a system like this would be like ?
Go to your favorite video streaming site and change the player settings ( if you can ) to 0 caching .
The end result is , approximately , what you 'd get here .
The internet is a very unstable place .
The only reason online games work is that programmers have gotten really good at developing latency hiding tricks which all stop working when the video rendering is done by the server .
And , do n't think this will just effect fps games .
Just because it does n't make or break a game like WOW does n't mean you 'd want the stuttering game-play you 'd have to put up with .
As far as I can see , the only kind of game this would be useful for it photo-realistic checkers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wanna know what playing games on a system like this would be like?
Go to your favorite video streaming site and change the player settings (if you can) to 0 caching.
The end result is, approximately, what you'd get here.
The internet is a very unstable place.
The only reason online games work is that programmers have gotten really good at developing latency hiding tricks which all stop working when the video rendering is done by the server.
And, don't think this will just effect fps games.
Just because it doesn't make or break a game like WOW doesn't mean you'd want the stuttering game-play you'd have to put up with.
As far as I can see, the only kind of game this would be useful for it photo-realistic checkers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30096294</id>
	<title>The real cloud, desktop cloud is there idling</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258199520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>World's second most popular desktop OS comes with a technology that would allow a real desktop cloud to do similar things but the company has to sell hardware, faster hardware every year to stay alive.</p><p>So, XGrid technology stays exclusive to pro apps like Final Cut Pro.</p><p>Just imagine using pool of CPUs of all<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Mac (Mobile Me) owners to do similar things. Of course, it would mean that cheap "Macbook" (non pro) owner having access to some amazing CPU power meaning he won't upgrade to latest "Macbook Pro". This is a company who deliberately put Intel junk GPU instead of similar priced Nvidia integrated GPU just to force the owners to upgrade needlessly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>World 's second most popular desktop OS comes with a technology that would allow a real desktop cloud to do similar things but the company has to sell hardware , faster hardware every year to stay alive.So , XGrid technology stays exclusive to pro apps like Final Cut Pro.Just imagine using pool of CPUs of all .Mac ( Mobile Me ) owners to do similar things .
Of course , it would mean that cheap " Macbook " ( non pro ) owner having access to some amazing CPU power meaning he wo n't upgrade to latest " Macbook Pro " .
This is a company who deliberately put Intel junk GPU instead of similar priced Nvidia integrated GPU just to force the owners to upgrade needlessly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>World's second most popular desktop OS comes with a technology that would allow a real desktop cloud to do similar things but the company has to sell hardware, faster hardware every year to stay alive.So, XGrid technology stays exclusive to pro apps like Final Cut Pro.Just imagine using pool of CPUs of all .Mac (Mobile Me) owners to do similar things.
Of course, it would mean that cheap "Macbook" (non pro) owner having access to some amazing CPU power meaning he won't upgrade to latest "Macbook Pro".
This is a company who deliberately put Intel junk GPU instead of similar priced Nvidia integrated GPU just to force the owners to upgrade needlessly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092386</id>
	<title>Uh oh...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258109820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Somebody tell 4Chan's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/hr/ department, quick!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Somebody tell 4Chan 's /hr/ department , quick !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somebody tell 4Chan's /hr/ department, quick!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092466</id>
	<title>Re:What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258110360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Compression. You know, MPEG-4 AVC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Compression .
You know , MPEG-4 AVC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compression.
You know, MPEG-4 AVC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093248</id>
	<title>GAHHHH!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258115640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not happening in a fucking cloud, it's happening on a server!<br>Oh, well that's a good idea, I guess.  It was, when they came up with it about 30 years ago!  Do these morons what an X SERVER IS?<br>Of course they do, they're just smarmy used car salesmen, telling you that this special car they have for you is the only one with the "wheel" they just invented.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not happening in a fucking cloud , it 's happening on a server ! Oh , well that 's a good idea , I guess .
It was , when they came up with it about 30 years ago !
Do these morons what an X SERVER IS ? Of course they do , they 're just smarmy used car salesmen , telling you that this special car they have for you is the only one with the " wheel " they just invented .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not happening in a fucking cloud, it's happening on a server!Oh, well that's a good idea, I guess.
It was, when they came up with it about 30 years ago!
Do these morons what an X SERVER IS?Of course they do, they're just smarmy used car salesmen, telling you that this special car they have for you is the only one with the "wheel" they just invented.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30095192</id>
	<title>If you own the symbolset, you own the mindshare</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1258135920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IBM tried it when they went to OS/2.  Suddenly a hard drive was a "Fixed disk" and a motherboard was a "Planar board".
</p><p>It's a sad game but it's the only one there is.  It's fun to watch megacorporations fight to the death over ownership of a word.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IBM tried it when they went to OS/2 .
Suddenly a hard drive was a " Fixed disk " and a motherboard was a " Planar board " .
It 's a sad game but it 's the only one there is .
It 's fun to watch megacorporations fight to the death over ownership of a word .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IBM tried it when they went to OS/2.
Suddenly a hard drive was a "Fixed disk" and a motherboard was a "Planar board".
It's a sad game but it's the only one there is.
It's fun to watch megacorporations fight to the death over ownership of a word.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366</id>
	<title>What about Data Transfer</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1258109700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aren't Photo-Realistic Images pretty big in size? If I want to get 30 Frames per second, how am I ever going to push 30 Photorealistic Frames through the internet - I can hardly get 5 Mb/s from my ISP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are n't Photo-Realistic Images pretty big in size ?
If I want to get 30 Frames per second , how am I ever going to push 30 Photorealistic Frames through the internet - I can hardly get 5 Mb/s from my ISP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aren't Photo-Realistic Images pretty big in size?
If I want to get 30 Frames per second, how am I ever going to push 30 Photorealistic Frames through the internet - I can hardly get 5 Mb/s from my ISP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30094638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30096304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30095192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093758
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30096294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_13_199249_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30094608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_199249.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093306
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_199249.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092446
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092672
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30095192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30096294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_199249.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093138
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_199249.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_199249.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_199249.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092386
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_199249.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092590
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30094638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30094608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092534
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093134
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_13_199249.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30092284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30096304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_13_199249.30093056
</commentlist>
</conversation>
