<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_21_0158213</id>
	<title>Bing Censoring All Simplified Chinese Language Queries</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1258798080000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>boggis writes <i>"<a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/nicholasdkristof/index.html">Nicholas Kristof</a>, a New York Times journalist, is <a href="http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/boycott-microsoft-bing/">calling for a boycott of Microsoft's Bing</a>. They have censored search requests at the request of the Chinese Government (like <a href="https://tech.slashdot.org/story/06/01/25/0432239/Google-Agrees-to-Censor-Results-in-China">certain</a> <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/06/06/16/1550221/Yahoo-China-has-the-Worst-Filtering-Policy">others</a>). The difference is that Bing has censored all searches done anywhere in simplified Chinese characters (the characters used in mainland China). This means that a Chinese speaker searching for Tiananmen anywhere in the world now gets the impression that it is just <a href="http://images.google.com.au/images?rlz=1C1CHMB\_en-GBAU309AU309&amp;sourceid=chrome&amp;q=tiananmen+square&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;ei=h\_wGS6viNozm7APUgryJDw&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=image\_result\_group&amp;ct=title&amp;resnum=4&amp;ved=0CCEQsAQwAw">a lovely place to visit</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>boggis writes " Nicholas Kristof , a New York Times journalist , is calling for a boycott of Microsoft 's Bing .
They have censored search requests at the request of the Chinese Government ( like certain others ) .
The difference is that Bing has censored all searches done anywhere in simplified Chinese characters ( the characters used in mainland China ) .
This means that a Chinese speaker searching for Tiananmen anywhere in the world now gets the impression that it is just a lovely place to visit .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>boggis writes "Nicholas Kristof, a New York Times journalist, is calling for a boycott of Microsoft's Bing.
They have censored search requests at the request of the Chinese Government (like certain others).
The difference is that Bing has censored all searches done anywhere in simplified Chinese characters (the characters used in mainland China).
This means that a Chinese speaker searching for Tiananmen anywhere in the world now gets the impression that it is just a lovely place to visit.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>h4rm0ny</author>
	<datestamp>1258803840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>well if their goal was to differentiate from google, i guess "don't be evil" is a good place to stand apart.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Google also censor results in China. Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing. The difference is merely one of implementation. Google has done it by censoring the results in their country-specific site. Bing have done it by censoring results when you search using a language form popular in mainland China. It's hard to say conclusively which is least effective. With Google you can search via one of their international sites to get around it. With Bing you can enter search terms in a different language such as English. Both are, of course, subject to the Great Firewall of China interfering when you follow results to places like Wikipedia etc. which is not the fault of either Google or Bing.
<br> <br>
So in summary, Google innovates and Microsoft copies. Not much change there, but unfortunately they have both sold out to the Chinese government. Neither is clean.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>well if their goal was to differentiate from google , i guess " do n't be evil " is a good place to stand apart .
Google also censor results in China .
Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing .
The difference is merely one of implementation .
Google has done it by censoring the results in their country-specific site .
Bing have done it by censoring results when you search using a language form popular in mainland China .
It 's hard to say conclusively which is least effective .
With Google you can search via one of their international sites to get around it .
With Bing you can enter search terms in a different language such as English .
Both are , of course , subject to the Great Firewall of China interfering when you follow results to places like Wikipedia etc .
which is not the fault of either Google or Bing .
So in summary , Google innovates and Microsoft copies .
Not much change there , but unfortunately they have both sold out to the Chinese government .
Neither is clean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well if their goal was to differentiate from google, i guess "don't be evil" is a good place to stand apart.
Google also censor results in China.
Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing.
The difference is merely one of implementation.
Google has done it by censoring the results in their country-specific site.
Bing have done it by censoring results when you search using a language form popular in mainland China.
It's hard to say conclusively which is least effective.
With Google you can search via one of their international sites to get around it.
With Bing you can enter search terms in a different language such as English.
Both are, of course, subject to the Great Firewall of China interfering when you follow results to places like Wikipedia etc.
which is not the fault of either Google or Bing.
So in summary, Google innovates and Microsoft copies.
Not much change there, but unfortunately they have both sold out to the Chinese government.
Neither is clean.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186968</id>
	<title>I'd join the boycott of Bing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258835640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd join the boycott of Bing, but I never used it to begin with.  Is there something else of Microsoft's I can boycott?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd join the boycott of Bing , but I never used it to begin with .
Is there something else of Microsoft 's I can boycott ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd join the boycott of Bing, but I never used it to begin with.
Is there something else of Microsoft's I can boycott?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183502</id>
	<title>Re:The NYT reporter misses the forest for the tree</title>
	<author>justinlee37</author>
	<datestamp>1258809720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That isn't what <a href="http://search.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1452342&amp;cid=30183396" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">this</a> [slashdot.org] commenter had to say.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is n't what this [ slashdot.org ] commenter had to say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That isn't what this [slashdot.org] commenter had to say.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183314</id>
	<title>Facts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258805580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tiananmen actually is a rather lovely place to visit...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tiananmen actually is a rather lovely place to visit.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tiananmen actually is a rather lovely place to visit...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183778</id>
	<title>"uncensorable" websites, routers, etc ??</title>
	<author>h00manist</author>
	<datestamp>1258814280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>it seems that most companies now, at the request of various governments, copyright groups, spy groups, "security" policies, police, pro-paranoia parents groups, etc are working on many ways to censor everything.  and in many cases, succeeding to a good extent, as a result of the work done. in the US, it's mostly corporations using lawyers- but it works. what happened to the "uncensorable" internet?  where are the projects to make communication "uncensorable" again?  perhaps these belong more properly in the political-technical-legal area, and not possible in the purely technical area.</htmltext>
<tokenext>it seems that most companies now , at the request of various governments , copyright groups , spy groups , " security " policies , police , pro-paranoia parents groups , etc are working on many ways to censor everything .
and in many cases , succeeding to a good extent , as a result of the work done .
in the US , it 's mostly corporations using lawyers- but it works .
what happened to the " uncensorable " internet ?
where are the projects to make communication " uncensorable " again ?
perhaps these belong more properly in the political-technical-legal area , and not possible in the purely technical area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it seems that most companies now, at the request of various governments, copyright groups, spy groups, "security" policies, police, pro-paranoia parents groups, etc are working on many ways to censor everything.
and in many cases, succeeding to a good extent, as a result of the work done.
in the US, it's mostly corporations using lawyers- but it works.
what happened to the "uncensorable" internet?
where are the projects to make communication "uncensorable" again?
perhaps these belong more properly in the political-technical-legal area, and not possible in the purely technical area.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183714</id>
	<title>And who are we to say no?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258813380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And exactly who are we to say no to the new rulers of the economic world?  Oh that's right, we still got some pride, honor, and values left from WWII<br>But yeah, no, we must obey to the Chinese overlords.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And exactly who are we to say no to the new rulers of the economic world ?
Oh that 's right , we still got some pride , honor , and values left from WWIIBut yeah , no , we must obey to the Chinese overlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And exactly who are we to say no to the new rulers of the economic world?
Oh that's right, we still got some pride, honor, and values left from WWIIBut yeah, no, we must obey to the Chinese overlords.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183220</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258803960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>well if their goal was to differentiate from google, i guess "don't be evil" is a good place to stand apart.</p></div><p>Google also censors in China. I can't tell which of the two solutions I think is worse, so giving Google a free pass and only going after Bing the way this journalist does seems unsubstantiated. It is an easier target though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>well if their goal was to differentiate from google , i guess " do n't be evil " is a good place to stand apart.Google also censors in China .
I ca n't tell which of the two solutions I think is worse , so giving Google a free pass and only going after Bing the way this journalist does seems unsubstantiated .
It is an easier target though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well if their goal was to differentiate from google, i guess "don't be evil" is a good place to stand apart.Google also censors in China.
I can't tell which of the two solutions I think is worse, so giving Google a free pass and only going after Bing the way this journalist does seems unsubstantiated.
It is an easier target though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156</id>
	<title>The NYT reporter misses the forest for the trees.</title>
	<author>reporter</author>
	<datestamp>1258802940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The reporter at  the "New York Times" completely misses the big picture.  If Bing is censoring only simplified Chinese queries, then anyone in mainland China can do a search in any other language and obtain the full uncensored results.
<p>
In other words, Microsoft has cleverly created a big hole (in its agreement with Beijing) that allows uncensored information to flood into China.  The only catch is that the query must be in some language (e. g., English) that is not simplied Chinese.
</p><p>
By contrast, Google censors everything in China, regardless of the language used for the query.
</p><p>
Besides, Microsoft's scheme will encourage ordinary Chinese to learn a foreign language:  English., Japanese, etc.  Doing so is always positive as many Western languages means many channels by which foreign ideas can enter China, thus modernizing it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reporter at the " New York Times " completely misses the big picture .
If Bing is censoring only simplified Chinese queries , then anyone in mainland China can do a search in any other language and obtain the full uncensored results .
In other words , Microsoft has cleverly created a big hole ( in its agreement with Beijing ) that allows uncensored information to flood into China .
The only catch is that the query must be in some language ( e. g. , English ) that is not simplied Chinese .
By contrast , Google censors everything in China , regardless of the language used for the query .
Besides , Microsoft 's scheme will encourage ordinary Chinese to learn a foreign language : English. , Japanese , etc .
Doing so is always positive as many Western languages means many channels by which foreign ideas can enter China , thus modernizing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reporter at  the "New York Times" completely misses the big picture.
If Bing is censoring only simplified Chinese queries, then anyone in mainland China can do a search in any other language and obtain the full uncensored results.
In other words, Microsoft has cleverly created a big hole (in its agreement with Beijing) that allows uncensored information to flood into China.
The only catch is that the query must be in some language (e. g., English) that is not simplied Chinese.
By contrast, Google censors everything in China, regardless of the language used for the query.
Besides, Microsoft's scheme will encourage ordinary Chinese to learn a foreign language:  English., Japanese, etc.
Doing so is always positive as many Western languages means many channels by which foreign ideas can enter China, thus modernizing it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30205002</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>hrimhari</author>
	<datestamp>1259008380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You really don't see a difference? I see Google first refusing to censor, then abiding to China's government after being threatened out of the country. But they censor "precisely" what was asked: searches in China. It may be a lucky implementation coincidence, but that's the fact in question. Google censors in China only because they couldn't get a better compromise.</p><p>Then I see Bing censoring not only searches in China but everywhere in the world. As far as I know, nobody asked Bing to do that. It may be an unhappy implementation coincidence, but that's the fact in question. Bing censors everywhere, and they could have gotten a better compromise if they tried.</p><p>You're right, neither is clean, but I still see a difference and I find it to be non negligible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You really do n't see a difference ?
I see Google first refusing to censor , then abiding to China 's government after being threatened out of the country .
But they censor " precisely " what was asked : searches in China .
It may be a lucky implementation coincidence , but that 's the fact in question .
Google censors in China only because they could n't get a better compromise.Then I see Bing censoring not only searches in China but everywhere in the world .
As far as I know , nobody asked Bing to do that .
It may be an unhappy implementation coincidence , but that 's the fact in question .
Bing censors everywhere , and they could have gotten a better compromise if they tried.You 're right , neither is clean , but I still see a difference and I find it to be non negligible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You really don't see a difference?
I see Google first refusing to censor, then abiding to China's government after being threatened out of the country.
But they censor "precisely" what was asked: searches in China.
It may be a lucky implementation coincidence, but that's the fact in question.
Google censors in China only because they couldn't get a better compromise.Then I see Bing censoring not only searches in China but everywhere in the world.
As far as I know, nobody asked Bing to do that.
It may be an unhappy implementation coincidence, but that's the fact in question.
Bing censors everywhere, and they could have gotten a better compromise if they tried.You're right, neither is clean, but I still see a difference and I find it to be non negligible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183948</id>
	<title>Best /. quote ever</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1258816500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>We Americans by nature are assholes, so we may as well do something productive with it.</i></p><p>Yes, let's put the "fun" back in "dysfunctional".<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We Americans by nature are assholes , so we may as well do something productive with it.Yes , let 's put the " fun " back in " dysfunctional " .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We Americans by nature are assholes, so we may as well do something productive with it.Yes, let's put the "fun" back in "dysfunctional".
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184388</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258820340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>
Google also censor results in China. Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing.</p></div><p>Yeah, they all do.  The interesting change here is that they are censoring based on language, not based on where you're searching from.  See:
<br> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet\_censorship\_in\_the\_People's\_Republic\_of\_China" title="wikipedia.org">Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China</a> [wikipedia.org]
</p><p>List of what they're censoring here: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_words\_censored\_by\_search\_engines\_in\_the\_People's\_Republic\_of\_China" title="wikipedia.org">List of words censored by search engines in the People's Republic of China</a> [wikipedia.org] (including, almost as interesting, some comments on words not blocked)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>...So in summary, Google innovates and Microsoft copies. Not much change there, but unfortunately they have both sold out to the Chinese government. Neither is clean.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google also censor results in China .
Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing.Yeah , they all do .
The interesting change here is that they are censoring based on language , not based on where you 're searching from .
See : Internet censorship in the People 's Republic of China [ wikipedia.org ] List of what they 're censoring here : List of words censored by search engines in the People 's Republic of China [ wikipedia.org ] ( including , almost as interesting , some comments on words not blocked ) ...So in summary , Google innovates and Microsoft copies .
Not much change there , but unfortunately they have both sold out to the Chinese government .
Neither is clean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Google also censor results in China.
Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing.Yeah, they all do.
The interesting change here is that they are censoring based on language, not based on where you're searching from.
See:
 Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China [wikipedia.org]
List of what they're censoring here: List of words censored by search engines in the People's Republic of China [wikipedia.org] (including, almost as interesting, some comments on words not blocked)...So in summary, Google innovates and Microsoft copies.
Not much change there, but unfortunately they have both sold out to the Chinese government.
Neither is clean.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183132</id>
	<title>not really</title>
	<author>siddesu</author>
	<datestamp>1258802460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>DNRTFA, but I just did a search in Simplified Chinse for Tiananmen, and the first couple of hits referenced the massacre. Links to Wikipedia and bloggers discussing the events also popped up. I am not in China, FWIW.</htmltext>
<tokenext>DNRTFA , but I just did a search in Simplified Chinse for Tiananmen , and the first couple of hits referenced the massacre .
Links to Wikipedia and bloggers discussing the events also popped up .
I am not in China , FWIW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DNRTFA, but I just did a search in Simplified Chinse for Tiananmen, and the first couple of hits referenced the massacre.
Links to Wikipedia and bloggers discussing the events also popped up.
I am not in China, FWIW.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183214</id>
	<title>Lets google in simplefied chinese....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258803840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's see how google does in simplified chinese:<br>http://images.google.com/images?q=\%E5\%A4\%A9\%E5\%AE\%89\%E9\%97\%A8\%E5\%B9\%BF\%E5\%9C\%BA<br>look quite different from<br>http://images.google.com/images?q=tiananmen+square</p><p>The evil bastards at bing also censored google ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's see how google does in simplified chinese : http : //images.google.com/images ? q = \ % E5 \ % A4 \ % A9 \ % E5 \ % AE \ % 89 \ % E9 \ % 97 \ % A8 \ % E5 \ % B9 \ % BF \ % E5 \ % 9C \ % BAlook quite different fromhttp : //images.google.com/images ? q = tiananmen + squareThe evil bastards at bing also censored google ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's see how google does in simplified chinese:http://images.google.com/images?q=\%E5\%A4\%A9\%E5\%AE\%89\%E9\%97\%A8\%E5\%B9\%BF\%E5\%9C\%BAlook quite different fromhttp://images.google.com/images?q=tiananmen+squareThe evil bastards at bing also censored google ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183986</id>
	<title>Re:Evil, No Clueless, NO  BOTH</title>
	<author>omb</author>
	<datestamp>1258816920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After a VERY few searches it is Obvious that Bing is a very poor search engine, Not even on a par with what Altavista was.<br><br>Now, M$&amp;#160;EVIL (TM),<br><br>implemented cluelessly. As soon as their grip in American Corporates is broken they are in for a very hard time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After a VERY few searches it is Obvious that Bing is a very poor search engine , Not even on a par with what Altavista was.Now , M $   EVIL ( TM ) ,implemented cluelessly .
As soon as their grip in American Corporates is broken they are in for a very hard time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After a VERY few searches it is Obvious that Bing is a very poor search engine, Not even on a par with what Altavista was.Now, M$ EVIL (TM),implemented cluelessly.
As soon as their grip in American Corporates is broken they are in for a very hard time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183500</id>
	<title>Re:The NYT reporter misses the forest for the tree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258809660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>By contrast, Google censors everything in China, regardless of the language used for the query.</p> </div><p>Untrue.  google.cn censors every language.  google.com is not blocked in china but still shows unfiltered results.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>By contrast , Google censors everything in China , regardless of the language used for the query .
Untrue. google.cn censors every language .
google.com is not blocked in china but still shows unfiltered results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By contrast, Google censors everything in China, regardless of the language used for the query.
Untrue.  google.cn censors every language.
google.com is not blocked in china but still shows unfiltered results.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30216202</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259088780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>weird... try misspelling it "Tiannamen" and suddenly all kinds of supposedly censored content shows up on google.cn:<br>http://www.google.cn/search?hl=zh-CN&amp;source=hp&amp;q=Tiannamen+square+protest&amp;btnG=Google+\%E6\%90\%9C\%E7\%B4\%A2&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=</p><p>However, click on the spelling correction, and it all goes away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>weird... try misspelling it " Tiannamen " and suddenly all kinds of supposedly censored content shows up on google.cn : http : //www.google.cn/search ? hl = zh-CN&amp;source = hp&amp;q = Tiannamen + square + protest&amp;btnG = Google + \ % E6 \ % 90 \ % 9C \ % E7 \ % B4 \ % A2&amp;aq = f&amp;oq = However , click on the spelling correction , and it all goes away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>weird... try misspelling it "Tiannamen" and suddenly all kinds of supposedly censored content shows up on google.cn:http://www.google.cn/search?hl=zh-CN&amp;source=hp&amp;q=Tiannamen+square+protest&amp;btnG=Google+\%E6\%90\%9C\%E7\%B4\%A2&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=However, click on the spelling correction, and it all goes away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183598</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1258811160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;Google has done it by censoring the results in their country-specific site. Bing have done it by censoring results when you search using a language form popular in mainland China.<br>&gt;&gt;&gt;</p><p>The Microsoft solution strikes me as the quick-and-dirty solution, while the Google method shows more advanced programming.</p><p>And for those that say, "Google shouldn't censor results," then you are naive.  If Google did not censor, then Chinese government would block them completely and MS would quickly obtain a virtual monopoly over 1.3-billion-person market.  I don't think any of us want to see that happen (again).  Google is smart to take whatever market they can get in China, and as they gain influence, pressure the Chinese government (the way they pressure the US and EU) to do things the google way (open).</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; Google has done it by censoring the results in their country-specific site .
Bing have done it by censoring results when you search using a language form popular in mainland China. &gt; &gt; &gt; The Microsoft solution strikes me as the quick-and-dirty solution , while the Google method shows more advanced programming.And for those that say , " Google should n't censor results , " then you are naive .
If Google did not censor , then Chinese government would block them completely and MS would quickly obtain a virtual monopoly over 1.3-billion-person market .
I do n't think any of us want to see that happen ( again ) .
Google is smart to take whatever market they can get in China , and as they gain influence , pressure the Chinese government ( the way they pressure the US and EU ) to do things the google way ( open ) .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt;Google has done it by censoring the results in their country-specific site.
Bing have done it by censoring results when you search using a language form popular in mainland China.&gt;&gt;&gt;The Microsoft solution strikes me as the quick-and-dirty solution, while the Google method shows more advanced programming.And for those that say, "Google shouldn't censor results," then you are naive.
If Google did not censor, then Chinese government would block them completely and MS would quickly obtain a virtual monopoly over 1.3-billion-person market.
I don't think any of us want to see that happen (again).
Google is smart to take whatever market they can get in China, and as they gain influence, pressure the Chinese government (the way they pressure the US and EU) to do things the google way (open).
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183242</id>
	<title>Google in simplified chinese...</title>
	<author>TheLuggs</author>
	<datestamp>1258804380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>if you google in simplified chineseyou get:
<a href="http://images.google.com/images?q=\%E5\%A4\%A9\%E5\%AE\%89\%E9\%97\%A8\%E5\%B9\%BF\%E5\%9C\%BA" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://images.google.com/images?q=\%E5\%A4\%A9\%E5\%AE\%89\%E9\%97\%A8\%E5\%B9\%BF\%E5\%9C\%BA</a> [google.com]
which looks quite different from <a href="http://images.google.com/images?q=tiananmen+square" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://images.google.com/images?q=tiananmen+square</a> [google.com]

the evil bastards at microsoft are censoring google....</htmltext>
<tokenext>if you google in simplified chineseyou get : http : //images.google.com/images ? q = \ % E5 \ % A4 \ % A9 \ % E5 \ % AE \ % 89 \ % E9 \ % 97 \ % A8 \ % E5 \ % B9 \ % BF \ % E5 \ % 9C \ % BA [ google.com ] which looks quite different from http : //images.google.com/images ? q = tiananmen + square [ google.com ] the evil bastards at microsoft are censoring google... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if you google in simplified chineseyou get:
http://images.google.com/images?q=\%E5\%A4\%A9\%E5\%AE\%89\%E9\%97\%A8\%E5\%B9\%BF\%E5\%9C\%BA [google.com]
which looks quite different from http://images.google.com/images?q=tiananmen+square [google.com]

the evil bastards at microsoft are censoring google....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186760</id>
	<title>Newspeak</title>
	<author>Jeremy Erwin</author>
	<datestamp>1258834320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want the truth, you'll just have to put away your toy symbology, and learn a proper <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional\_Chinese\_characters" title="wikipedia.org">character set</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want the truth , you 'll just have to put away your toy symbology , and learn a proper character set [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want the truth, you'll just have to put away your toy symbology, and learn a proper character set [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183814</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>sharperguy</author>
	<datestamp>1258814760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.google.cn/search?hl=zh-CN&amp;source=hp&amp;q=tankman&amp;btnG=Google+\%E6\%90\%9C\%E7\%B4\%A2&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=" title="google.cn" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.cn/search?hl=zh-CN&amp;source=hp&amp;q=tankman&amp;btnG=Google+\%E6\%90\%9C\%E7\%B4\%A2&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=</a> [google.cn]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.google.cn/search ? hl = zh-CN&amp;source = hp&amp;q = tankman&amp;btnG = Google + \ % E6 \ % 90 \ % 9C \ % E7 \ % B4 \ % A2&amp;aq = f&amp;oq = [ google.cn ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.google.cn/search?hl=zh-CN&amp;source=hp&amp;q=tankman&amp;btnG=Google+\%E6\%90\%9C\%E7\%B4\%A2&amp;aq=f&amp;oq= [google.cn]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183532</id>
	<title>Re:Chinese</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1258810140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This means that Bing censors at the request of the American government.</p><p>THIS MEANS THAT.... Bing does not stand up for freedom of information. This means.... The millions that fought and died in all of our key American wars, have died for nothing! This means that Microsoft has benefited from their sacrafices, and stands on their dead bodies with greed, and no appreciation at all.</p><p>FUCK YOU corporate America for selling us out for slave wages, censorship, and greed at the cost of our American ideals.</p><p>Google, you're just as lame for backing down to China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This means that Bing censors at the request of the American government.THIS MEANS THAT.... Bing does not stand up for freedom of information .
This means.... The millions that fought and died in all of our key American wars , have died for nothing !
This means that Microsoft has benefited from their sacrafices , and stands on their dead bodies with greed , and no appreciation at all.FUCK YOU corporate America for selling us out for slave wages , censorship , and greed at the cost of our American ideals.Google , you 're just as lame for backing down to China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This means that Bing censors at the request of the American government.THIS MEANS THAT.... Bing does not stand up for freedom of information.
This means.... The millions that fought and died in all of our key American wars, have died for nothing!
This means that Microsoft has benefited from their sacrafices, and stands on their dead bodies with greed, and no appreciation at all.FUCK YOU corporate America for selling us out for slave wages, censorship, and greed at the cost of our American ideals.Google, you're just as lame for backing down to China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184386</id>
	<title>Re:For Freedom Day</title>
	<author>smoker2</author>
	<datestamp>1258820340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hitler had a similar idea. How about you do what you do, and let other nations do what they do. Mind your own damn business. You can't even live up to your ludicrous dreams at home let alone have the moral authority to impose your ideas on others. WE ARE NOT INTERESTED !<br> <br>You loudly proclaim the right of others to do and think as they wish, but only as long as they coincide with your own narrow views. Can you not see the hypocrisy ?<br> <br>The litany of hypocritical acts committed by the USA grows ever longer.<ul>
<li>We have 1000s of nukes, but you can't develop them</li><li>Global War on Terror - except you've forgotten the Taliban, Contra, IRA, et al</li><li>OMG the planet's going to be under water - but we reserve the right to buy the biggest most energy inefficient TVs and cars money can buy</li><li>People should not be oppressed by the govt. - but the DHS, TSA, CIA, NSA, FBI can monitor, arrest and hold without charge, censor, and "disappear" at will.</li><li>Torture is illegal - except when it suits us.</li><li>Aggressive acts by foreign powers are not to be tolerated - but we can get involved in Vietnam, Korea, Africa, Iraq</li><li>You should have the right to use a piece of equipment you own in any way you choose - DMCA</li><li>You stand for Free Trade and capitalism - except when it doesn't suit you, and conflicts with your business ideals</li><li>ETC.</li></ul><p>This <a href="http://www.headru.sh/photos/4\_singapore/day2/DSC00017.jpg" title="headru.sh">photo</a> [headru.sh] sums up my opinion of Americas influence in the world. That's right, you're a bunch of overbearing clowns. You're so xenophobic that the only way you can deal with a different culture is to mold it into a slightly poorer version of your own, so that you can pretend you're better off than them. Where of course "better off" is a purely financial metric. As a culture you are best defined by the words greed, image and ignorance.<br> <br>When you have the perfect society, please feel free to comment again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hitler had a similar idea .
How about you do what you do , and let other nations do what they do .
Mind your own damn business .
You ca n't even live up to your ludicrous dreams at home let alone have the moral authority to impose your ideas on others .
WE ARE NOT INTERESTED !
You loudly proclaim the right of others to do and think as they wish , but only as long as they coincide with your own narrow views .
Can you not see the hypocrisy ?
The litany of hypocritical acts committed by the USA grows ever longer .
We have 1000s of nukes , but you ca n't develop themGlobal War on Terror - except you 've forgotten the Taliban , Contra , IRA , et alOMG the planet 's going to be under water - but we reserve the right to buy the biggest most energy inefficient TVs and cars money can buyPeople should not be oppressed by the govt .
- but the DHS , TSA , CIA , NSA , FBI can monitor , arrest and hold without charge , censor , and " disappear " at will.Torture is illegal - except when it suits us.Aggressive acts by foreign powers are not to be tolerated - but we can get involved in Vietnam , Korea , Africa , IraqYou should have the right to use a piece of equipment you own in any way you choose - DMCAYou stand for Free Trade and capitalism - except when it does n't suit you , and conflicts with your business idealsETC.This photo [ headru.sh ] sums up my opinion of Americas influence in the world .
That 's right , you 're a bunch of overbearing clowns .
You 're so xenophobic that the only way you can deal with a different culture is to mold it into a slightly poorer version of your own , so that you can pretend you 're better off than them .
Where of course " better off " is a purely financial metric .
As a culture you are best defined by the words greed , image and ignorance .
When you have the perfect society , please feel free to comment again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hitler had a similar idea.
How about you do what you do, and let other nations do what they do.
Mind your own damn business.
You can't even live up to your ludicrous dreams at home let alone have the moral authority to impose your ideas on others.
WE ARE NOT INTERESTED !
You loudly proclaim the right of others to do and think as they wish, but only as long as they coincide with your own narrow views.
Can you not see the hypocrisy ?
The litany of hypocritical acts committed by the USA grows ever longer.
We have 1000s of nukes, but you can't develop themGlobal War on Terror - except you've forgotten the Taliban, Contra, IRA, et alOMG the planet's going to be under water - but we reserve the right to buy the biggest most energy inefficient TVs and cars money can buyPeople should not be oppressed by the govt.
- but the DHS, TSA, CIA, NSA, FBI can monitor, arrest and hold without charge, censor, and "disappear" at will.Torture is illegal - except when it suits us.Aggressive acts by foreign powers are not to be tolerated - but we can get involved in Vietnam, Korea, Africa, IraqYou should have the right to use a piece of equipment you own in any way you choose - DMCAYou stand for Free Trade and capitalism - except when it doesn't suit you, and conflicts with your business idealsETC.This photo [headru.sh] sums up my opinion of Americas influence in the world.
That's right, you're a bunch of overbearing clowns.
You're so xenophobic that the only way you can deal with a different culture is to mold it into a slightly poorer version of your own, so that you can pretend you're better off than them.
Where of course "better off" is a purely financial metric.
As a culture you are best defined by the words greed, image and ignorance.
When you have the perfect society, please feel free to comment again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183546</id>
	<title>Re:Google maps and satellit images do not match at</title>
	<author>TheLuggs</author>
	<datestamp>1258810440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
The Search for tianemen square did point to tianemen square on the map, and did not point to tainemen square on the satelite images. Logic dictates that the maps are correct and the satelite images are misaligned.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Search for tianemen square did point to tianemen square on the map , and did not point to tainemen square on the satelite images .
Logic dictates that the maps are correct and the satelite images are misaligned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The Search for tianemen square did point to tianemen square on the map, and did not point to tainemen square on the satelite images.
Logic dictates that the maps are correct and the satelite images are misaligned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183522</id>
	<title>Re:boycott Bing</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1258809960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Boycotts do not work. Go bing it and find out why.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Boycotts do not work .
Go bing it and find out why .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Boycotts do not work.
Go bing it and find out why.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183320</id>
	<title>Re:The NYT reporter misses the forest for the tree</title>
	<author>Imrik</author>
	<datestamp>1258805640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The searchers will still be unable to visit most of the links returned by the English search, the only real difference would be that you could read the summaries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The searchers will still be unable to visit most of the links returned by the English search , the only real difference would be that you could read the summaries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The searchers will still be unable to visit most of the links returned by the English search, the only real difference would be that you could read the summaries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30185232</id>
	<title>Re:For Freedom Day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258825140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks, American Dad!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks , American Dad !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks, American Dad!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183498</id>
	<title>Censorship is wrong.</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1258809600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the internet. Censorship is wrong. Stop being a fucking child microsoft, and start being a human being. Hell, children have a better sense of freedom than you. Just google the kid that refuses to pledge allegiance to the flag in his elementary school, and his reasons why...</p><p>Microsoft... BE AN AMERICAN COMPANY, OR GET THE FUCK OUT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the internet .
Censorship is wrong .
Stop being a fucking child microsoft , and start being a human being .
Hell , children have a better sense of freedom than you .
Just google the kid that refuses to pledge allegiance to the flag in his elementary school , and his reasons why...Microsoft... BE AN AMERICAN COMPANY , OR GET THE FUCK OUT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the internet.
Censorship is wrong.
Stop being a fucking child microsoft, and start being a human being.
Hell, children have a better sense of freedom than you.
Just google the kid that refuses to pledge allegiance to the flag in his elementary school, and his reasons why...Microsoft... BE AN AMERICAN COMPANY, OR GET THE FUCK OUT.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183396</id>
	<title>Google still the best option for Chinese people</title>
	<author>seshomaru samma</author>
	<datestamp>1258807380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>In China you can easily switch to google.com and get the same results as the rest if the world. You can search google.com in Chinese.
Bing does not allow you this luxury if you are from China. It switches to English and changes the background picture but gives you the same Chinese government results if it knows your IP is from China.


BTW- Chinese people know about Tiananmen
They have satellite dishes with Taiwanese channels that spend 50\% of their air time criticizing the mainland (the other 50\% is sex and celebrities)</htmltext>
<tokenext>In China you can easily switch to google.com and get the same results as the rest if the world .
You can search google.com in Chinese .
Bing does not allow you this luxury if you are from China .
It switches to English and changes the background picture but gives you the same Chinese government results if it knows your IP is from China .
BTW- Chinese people know about Tiananmen They have satellite dishes with Taiwanese channels that spend 50 \ % of their air time criticizing the mainland ( the other 50 \ % is sex and celebrities )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In China you can easily switch to google.com and get the same results as the rest if the world.
You can search google.com in Chinese.
Bing does not allow you this luxury if you are from China.
It switches to English and changes the background picture but gives you the same Chinese government results if it knows your IP is from China.
BTW- Chinese people know about Tiananmen
They have satellite dishes with Taiwanese channels that spend 50\% of their air time criticizing the mainland (the other 50\% is sex and celebrities)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183474</id>
	<title>That's an interesting way of doing it...</title>
	<author>Hillbert</author>
	<datestamp>1258809180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doesn't this mean that anyone in China who speaks, say, English or Russian could get around the censorship just by searching Bing in their other language?
And I suppose this also prevents Chinese people from using a proxy to search Bing, if anything in simplified Chinese is being censored regardless of IP location?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't this mean that anyone in China who speaks , say , English or Russian could get around the censorship just by searching Bing in their other language ?
And I suppose this also prevents Chinese people from using a proxy to search Bing , if anything in simplified Chinese is being censored regardless of IP location ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't this mean that anyone in China who speaks, say, English or Russian could get around the censorship just by searching Bing in their other language?
And I suppose this also prevents Chinese people from using a proxy to search Bing, if anything in simplified Chinese is being censored regardless of IP location?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184164</id>
	<title>Re:not really</title>
	<author>Khakii</author>
	<datestamp>1258818240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You might be forgetting image search which is the key thing that is censored. Searching the simplified chinese <a href="http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=" title="bing.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=</a> [bing.com] results in lots of tourist friendly images but the same query in English <a href="http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=tiananmen" title="bing.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=tiananmen</a> [bing.com] results in lots of tanks. I am not in China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You might be forgetting image search which is the key thing that is censored .
Searching the simplified chinese http : //www.bing.com/images/search ? q = [ bing.com ] results in lots of tourist friendly images but the same query in English http : //www.bing.com/images/search ? q = tiananmen [ bing.com ] results in lots of tanks .
I am not in China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might be forgetting image search which is the key thing that is censored.
Searching the simplified chinese http://www.bing.com/images/search?q= [bing.com] results in lots of tourist friendly images but the same query in English http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=tiananmen [bing.com] results in lots of tanks.
I am not in China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183300</id>
	<title>Re:Chinese</title>
	<author>RyoShin</author>
	<datestamp>1258805280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The difference here is that Bing is going above and beyond the "call of duty".  Google et al., as I understand it, filters only on their Chinese version (like google.cn).  Bing is extending this so that any search done with Chinese characters is filtered.</p><p>This doesn't make Google et al. any less complacent or "evil" for doing so, but it does show that Bing/Microsoft is quite happy to throw away freedom of speech outside of the required areas, and is thus more evil for it. (Of course, according to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. Microsoft is always evil, so this wouldn't be new for them.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The difference here is that Bing is going above and beyond the " call of duty " .
Google et al. , as I understand it , filters only on their Chinese version ( like google.cn ) .
Bing is extending this so that any search done with Chinese characters is filtered.This does n't make Google et al .
any less complacent or " evil " for doing so , but it does show that Bing/Microsoft is quite happy to throw away freedom of speech outside of the required areas , and is thus more evil for it .
( Of course , according to / .
Microsoft is always evil , so this would n't be new for them .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The difference here is that Bing is going above and beyond the "call of duty".
Google et al., as I understand it, filters only on their Chinese version (like google.cn).
Bing is extending this so that any search done with Chinese characters is filtered.This doesn't make Google et al.
any less complacent or "evil" for doing so, but it does show that Bing/Microsoft is quite happy to throw away freedom of speech outside of the required areas, and is thus more evil for it.
(Of course, according to /.
Microsoft is always evil, so this wouldn't be new for them.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184178</id>
	<title>Re:The evil government route?</title>
	<author>Lakitu</author>
	<datestamp>1258818420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Regardless of whether it's illegal, google does it.  Stop apologizing for repressive actions of govermnent.</p><p>from a comment above:</p><p>The footer of google.cn reads "According to local laws, regulations and policies, some search results are not shown." (google translation)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Regardless of whether it 's illegal , google does it .
Stop apologizing for repressive actions of govermnent.from a comment above : The footer of google.cn reads " According to local laws , regulations and policies , some search results are not shown .
" ( google translation )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Regardless of whether it's illegal, google does it.
Stop apologizing for repressive actions of govermnent.from a comment above:The footer of google.cn reads "According to local laws, regulations and policies, some search results are not shown.
" (google translation)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086</id>
	<title>contrast</title>
	<author>Lehk228</author>
	<datestamp>1258801740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>well if their goal was to differentiate from google, i guess "don't be evil" is a good place to stand apart.</htmltext>
<tokenext>well if their goal was to differentiate from google , i guess " do n't be evil " is a good place to stand apart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well if their goal was to differentiate from google, i guess "don't be evil" is a good place to stand apart.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183408</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft has become as evil as Google?</title>
	<author>BhaKi</author>
	<datestamp>1258807500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Once we're boycotting all the search engines that have caved into to the demands of the Chinese government, what search engines are left?</p></div><p>If you think that very few search engines would be left, then there's a better strategy for you: Instead of boycotting search engines, boycott Chinese products. That's what your government wants to achieve by flooding media with anti-China news. The sooner you boycott Chinese products, the sooner I get back a shit-free Slashdot. Oh, wait! What have I been thinking? After boycotting Chinese products, there will be news flood about some other country.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Once we 're boycotting all the search engines that have caved into to the demands of the Chinese government , what search engines are left ? If you think that very few search engines would be left , then there 's a better strategy for you : Instead of boycotting search engines , boycott Chinese products .
That 's what your government wants to achieve by flooding media with anti-China news .
The sooner you boycott Chinese products , the sooner I get back a shit-free Slashdot .
Oh , wait !
What have I been thinking ?
After boycotting Chinese products , there will be news flood about some other country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once we're boycotting all the search engines that have caved into to the demands of the Chinese government, what search engines are left?If you think that very few search engines would be left, then there's a better strategy for you: Instead of boycotting search engines, boycott Chinese products.
That's what your government wants to achieve by flooding media with anti-China news.
The sooner you boycott Chinese products, the sooner I get back a shit-free Slashdot.
Oh, wait!
What have I been thinking?
After boycotting Chinese products, there will be news flood about some other country.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183376</id>
	<title>just don't talk about it !</title>
	<author>mr\_musan</author>
	<datestamp>1258807020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't want<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. to get banned as well

though its so odd they haven't banned bcc yet ??? these chinese people are odd on this</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't want / .
to get banned as well though its so odd they have n't banned bcc yet ? ? ?
these chinese people are odd on this</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't want /.
to get banned as well

though its so odd they haven't banned bcc yet ???
these chinese people are odd on this</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184348</id>
	<title>Re:The NYT reporter misses the forest for the tree</title>
	<author>MadFarmAnimalz</author>
	<datestamp>1258819980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see your point. But think about this: if Google or Bing were filtering English language results at the request of the American government, would you be happy to swap over to Mandarin?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see your point .
But think about this : if Google or Bing were filtering English language results at the request of the American government , would you be happy to swap over to Mandarin ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see your point.
But think about this: if Google or Bing were filtering English language results at the request of the American government, would you be happy to swap over to Mandarin?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183562</id>
	<title>Compare to google's simplified chinese search</title>
	<author>ZankerH</author>
	<datestamp>1258810620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For "tiananmen square"

<a href="http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&amp;q=\%E5\%A4\%A9\%E5\%AE\%89\%E9\%97\%A8\%E5\%B9\%BF\%E5\%9C\%BA&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=wi" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&amp;q=\%E5\%A4\%A9\%E5\%AE\%89\%E9\%97\%A8\%E5\%B9\%BF\%E5\%9C\%BA&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=wi</a> [google.com]

Apparently, nothing to see here (apart from the parades of the glorious People's Liberation Army).


(disclaimer: I used google translate)</htmltext>
<tokenext>For " tiananmen square " http : //images.google.com/images ? hl = en&amp;q = \ % E5 \ % A4 \ % A9 \ % E5 \ % AE \ % 89 \ % E9 \ % 97 \ % A8 \ % E5 \ % B9 \ % BF \ % E5 \ % 9C \ % BA&amp;um = 1&amp;ie = UTF-8&amp;sa = N&amp;tab = wi [ google.com ] Apparently , nothing to see here ( apart from the parades of the glorious People 's Liberation Army ) .
( disclaimer : I used google translate )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For "tiananmen square"

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&amp;q=\%E5\%A4\%A9\%E5\%AE\%89\%E9\%97\%A8\%E5\%B9\%BF\%E5\%9C\%BA&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=wi [google.com]

Apparently, nothing to see here (apart from the parades of the glorious People's Liberation Army).
(disclaimer: I used google translate)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184270</id>
	<title>Re:Chinese Censorship != Attempt to Rewrite Histor</title>
	<author>Lakitu</author>
	<datestamp>1258819260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chinese censorship is almost entirely a way to stifle dissent because of a fear it might cause violence, which would in turn disrupt the country's attempts at modernization.</p><p>You can't compare "government-dictated coping mechanisms" to Western "coping mechanisms".  It's government-dictated!  In one case, you might have every single individual of a country feel one way because they choose to (which obviously is not the case).  In the Chinese example, you have to struggle to even hold that opinion -- even peacefully holding that opinion -- and you might face serious repercussions for it.</p><p>China has come so far, and it seems like everyone realizes that.  Why do you think so many people are looking to China as a new "emerging market" or whatever?  That was not the case 30 or 40 years ago.  That does not mean, however, that you can dismiss their "numerous failures", as it does not really matter if "government-dictated coping mechanisms" are good spirited or not.  They may be now, but a massive system of repression exists, and if it continues to exist in the future, it WILL be abused.</p><p>When you have a small group of people with extraordinary power deciding what is good for everyone, you are destined for injustice.  Expressing that fact is not "picking on" the Chinese people, it is a tried and true lesson which everyone had better hope many Chinese have learned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese censorship is almost entirely a way to stifle dissent because of a fear it might cause violence , which would in turn disrupt the country 's attempts at modernization.You ca n't compare " government-dictated coping mechanisms " to Western " coping mechanisms " .
It 's government-dictated !
In one case , you might have every single individual of a country feel one way because they choose to ( which obviously is not the case ) .
In the Chinese example , you have to struggle to even hold that opinion -- even peacefully holding that opinion -- and you might face serious repercussions for it.China has come so far , and it seems like everyone realizes that .
Why do you think so many people are looking to China as a new " emerging market " or whatever ?
That was not the case 30 or 40 years ago .
That does not mean , however , that you can dismiss their " numerous failures " , as it does not really matter if " government-dictated coping mechanisms " are good spirited or not .
They may be now , but a massive system of repression exists , and if it continues to exist in the future , it WILL be abused.When you have a small group of people with extraordinary power deciding what is good for everyone , you are destined for injustice .
Expressing that fact is not " picking on " the Chinese people , it is a tried and true lesson which everyone had better hope many Chinese have learned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese censorship is almost entirely a way to stifle dissent because of a fear it might cause violence, which would in turn disrupt the country's attempts at modernization.You can't compare "government-dictated coping mechanisms" to Western "coping mechanisms".
It's government-dictated!
In one case, you might have every single individual of a country feel one way because they choose to (which obviously is not the case).
In the Chinese example, you have to struggle to even hold that opinion -- even peacefully holding that opinion -- and you might face serious repercussions for it.China has come so far, and it seems like everyone realizes that.
Why do you think so many people are looking to China as a new "emerging market" or whatever?
That was not the case 30 or 40 years ago.
That does not mean, however, that you can dismiss their "numerous failures", as it does not really matter if "government-dictated coping mechanisms" are good spirited or not.
They may be now, but a massive system of repression exists, and if it continues to exist in the future, it WILL be abused.When you have a small group of people with extraordinary power deciding what is good for everyone, you are destined for injustice.
Expressing that fact is not "picking on" the Chinese people, it is a tried and true lesson which everyone had better hope many Chinese have learned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183702</id>
	<title>Re:The NYT reporter misses the forest for the tree</title>
	<author>hengdi</author>
	<datestamp>1258813200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>By contrast, Google censors everything in China, regardless of the language used for the query.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Not true. I live in China, and can easily find info on Tiananmen square, I just have to use google.com and not google.cn.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>By contrast , Google censors everything in China , regardless of the language used for the query .
Not true .
I live in China , and can easily find info on Tiananmen square , I just have to use google.com and not google.cn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By contrast, Google censors everything in China, regardless of the language used for the query.
Not true.
I live in China, and can easily find info on Tiananmen square, I just have to use google.com and not google.cn.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30197250</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1258891380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll address your silly child pornography and gay marriage "points"</p><p>First.. Child pornography:</p><p><i>Also, how anti-censorship are you? Search for "child pornography" on google images and you don't see any naked 8 year olds. Search "pornography" on google images and you see plenty of naked people. Do I think this is wrong? No.</i></p><p>I consider Child Pornography to be crime scene photos. Crime scene photos are not illegal, however child porn obviously is. I'm not sure child porn creates any more crimes than crime scene photos do.</p><p>Obviously i don't believe child pornography should be made legal and I think heavy penalties should be placed on those who commit such horrible acts, but is it illegal for the police to hold photographic evidence of child molestation? No. Why Google then? Its just a crime scene photo. OF COURSE i understand the reasoning behind why google cant, but... i'm just saying i'm not sure photographic evidence of violence, sex, be it fictional or non fictional creates any more or less copy cat crimes. In many ways it may deter crimes.</p><p>There are videos of terrorists cutting civilians heads off, and that is a crime scene... but its not illegal.</p><p>If Google's index happened to pick up a photo of child pornography, should they be held responsible for the criminal act of someone else?</p><p>States have varying legal ages of consent. One state has a law where 17 is legal to have sex with, but you cant photograph or videotape the sex act. Now in another state, that may be different. Is it child porn to film a 17 year old, where you can legally have sex with them? Yes by law, but its silly isnt it? Especially when kids are already filming themselves...</p><p>So obviously there are grey areas in life... Child pornography should be illegal, but again i'm not sure that crime scene photos make criminals. OF COURSE its digusting to look at such thing and get off, but no more so than looking at a beheading video and getting off.</p><p>Gay Marriage...</p><p>As for your Gay Marriage point.</p><p>Gay Marriage should be legal. Its that simple. AND YES.. If Google felt strongly enough about it, it would be their right to not do business in America until Gay Marriage was legal.</p><p>And to say "Google is not a political group" is just silly. Google certainly lives within our society right? Are they not subject to our governments laws? Are they not regulated in various ways?</p><p>Google is a political group. They have lobbyists. They have a vested interest in law and how it effects their business. You bet your ass Google is political, as much as anything else that exists in any system of laws.</p><p>Gay</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll address your silly child pornography and gay marriage " points " First.. Child pornography : Also , how anti-censorship are you ?
Search for " child pornography " on google images and you do n't see any naked 8 year olds .
Search " pornography " on google images and you see plenty of naked people .
Do I think this is wrong ?
No.I consider Child Pornography to be crime scene photos .
Crime scene photos are not illegal , however child porn obviously is .
I 'm not sure child porn creates any more crimes than crime scene photos do.Obviously i do n't believe child pornography should be made legal and I think heavy penalties should be placed on those who commit such horrible acts , but is it illegal for the police to hold photographic evidence of child molestation ?
No. Why Google then ?
Its just a crime scene photo .
OF COURSE i understand the reasoning behind why google cant , but... i 'm just saying i 'm not sure photographic evidence of violence , sex , be it fictional or non fictional creates any more or less copy cat crimes .
In many ways it may deter crimes.There are videos of terrorists cutting civilians heads off , and that is a crime scene... but its not illegal.If Google 's index happened to pick up a photo of child pornography , should they be held responsible for the criminal act of someone else ? States have varying legal ages of consent .
One state has a law where 17 is legal to have sex with , but you cant photograph or videotape the sex act .
Now in another state , that may be different .
Is it child porn to film a 17 year old , where you can legally have sex with them ?
Yes by law , but its silly isnt it ?
Especially when kids are already filming themselves...So obviously there are grey areas in life... Child pornography should be illegal , but again i 'm not sure that crime scene photos make criminals .
OF COURSE its digusting to look at such thing and get off , but no more so than looking at a beheading video and getting off.Gay Marriage...As for your Gay Marriage point.Gay Marriage should be legal .
Its that simple .
AND YES.. If Google felt strongly enough about it , it would be their right to not do business in America until Gay Marriage was legal.And to say " Google is not a political group " is just silly .
Google certainly lives within our society right ?
Are they not subject to our governments laws ?
Are they not regulated in various ways ? Google is a political group .
They have lobbyists .
They have a vested interest in law and how it effects their business .
You bet your ass Google is political , as much as anything else that exists in any system of laws.Gay  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll address your silly child pornography and gay marriage "points"First.. Child pornography:Also, how anti-censorship are you?
Search for "child pornography" on google images and you don't see any naked 8 year olds.
Search "pornography" on google images and you see plenty of naked people.
Do I think this is wrong?
No.I consider Child Pornography to be crime scene photos.
Crime scene photos are not illegal, however child porn obviously is.
I'm not sure child porn creates any more crimes than crime scene photos do.Obviously i don't believe child pornography should be made legal and I think heavy penalties should be placed on those who commit such horrible acts, but is it illegal for the police to hold photographic evidence of child molestation?
No. Why Google then?
Its just a crime scene photo.
OF COURSE i understand the reasoning behind why google cant, but... i'm just saying i'm not sure photographic evidence of violence, sex, be it fictional or non fictional creates any more or less copy cat crimes.
In many ways it may deter crimes.There are videos of terrorists cutting civilians heads off, and that is a crime scene... but its not illegal.If Google's index happened to pick up a photo of child pornography, should they be held responsible for the criminal act of someone else?States have varying legal ages of consent.
One state has a law where 17 is legal to have sex with, but you cant photograph or videotape the sex act.
Now in another state, that may be different.
Is it child porn to film a 17 year old, where you can legally have sex with them?
Yes by law, but its silly isnt it?
Especially when kids are already filming themselves...So obviously there are grey areas in life... Child pornography should be illegal, but again i'm not sure that crime scene photos make criminals.
OF COURSE its digusting to look at such thing and get off, but no more so than looking at a beheading video and getting off.Gay Marriage...As for your Gay Marriage point.Gay Marriage should be legal.
Its that simple.
AND YES.. If Google felt strongly enough about it, it would be their right to not do business in America until Gay Marriage was legal.And to say "Google is not a political group" is just silly.
Google certainly lives within our society right?
Are they not subject to our governments laws?
Are they not regulated in various ways?Google is a political group.
They have lobbyists.
They have a vested interest in law and how it effects their business.
You bet your ass Google is political, as much as anything else that exists in any system of laws.Gay
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30185194</id>
	<title>Doesn't seem to be true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258824960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I searched Bing for Tiananmen and the first thing that came up was:</p><p>Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</p><p>There were also several other hits regarding the protests. I'm not sure if this is something they changed just today or if the statements that Bing censored it is unfounded.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I searched Bing for Tiananmen and the first thing that came up was : Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 - Wikipedia , the free encyclopediaThere were also several other hits regarding the protests .
I 'm not sure if this is something they changed just today or if the statements that Bing censored it is unfounded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I searched Bing for Tiananmen and the first thing that came up was:Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThere were also several other hits regarding the protests.
I'm not sure if this is something they changed just today or if the statements that Bing censored it is unfounded.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183482</id>
	<title>Modern times</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258809420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In communist China, the internet censors YOU</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In communist China , the internet censors YOU</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In communist China, the internet censors YOU</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183842</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>mikechant</author>
	<datestamp>1258815000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Google also censor results in China. Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing. The difference is merely one of implementation.</i></p><p>I don't agree. I think there is a clear moral difference. Google seem to be doing the minimum they need to do to comply with Chinese law - restricting what is seen via the (effectively Chinese govt. owned)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.cn domain in China. MS are apparently censoring everything that is seen by anyone using simplified Chinese anywhere in the world. Yes, they could use another language - if they even release that some search results are 'going missing'. So MS get the 'evil' award in this case because they are in practice censoring far beyond what even Chinese law requires.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google also censor results in China .
Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing .
The difference is merely one of implementation.I do n't agree .
I think there is a clear moral difference .
Google seem to be doing the minimum they need to do to comply with Chinese law - restricting what is seen via the ( effectively Chinese govt .
owned ) .cn domain in China .
MS are apparently censoring everything that is seen by anyone using simplified Chinese anywhere in the world .
Yes , they could use another language - if they even release that some search results are 'going missing' .
So MS get the 'evil ' award in this case because they are in practice censoring far beyond what even Chinese law requires .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google also censor results in China.
Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing.
The difference is merely one of implementation.I don't agree.
I think there is a clear moral difference.
Google seem to be doing the minimum they need to do to comply with Chinese law - restricting what is seen via the (effectively Chinese govt.
owned) .cn domain in China.
MS are apparently censoring everything that is seen by anyone using simplified Chinese anywhere in the world.
Yes, they could use another language - if they even release that some search results are 'going missing'.
So MS get the 'evil' award in this case because they are in practice censoring far beyond what even Chinese law requires.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183282</id>
	<title>Google maps and satellit images do not match at TS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258804920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interestingly, for Tianamen Square, the google maps location seems to be about a block east of the satellite photo:</p><p><a href="http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&amp;source=s\_q&amp;hl=en&amp;geocode=&amp;q=tiananmen+square,+china&amp;sll=-25.335448,135.745076&amp;sspn=39.349464,79.013672&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;hq=&amp;hnear=Tiananmen+Square,+Dongcheng,+Beijing,+China&amp;ll=39.903745,116.393924&amp;spn=0.016559,0.036564&amp;t=h&amp;z=15" title="google.com.au">http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&amp;source=s\_q&amp;hl=en&amp;geocode=&amp;q=tiananmen+square,+china&amp;sll=-25.335448,135.745076&amp;sspn=39.349464,79.013672&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;hq=&amp;hnear=Tiananmen+Square,+Dongcheng,+Beijing,+China&amp;ll=39.903745,116.393924&amp;spn=0.016559,0.036564&amp;t=h&amp;z=15</a> [google.com.au]</p><p>compared to</p><p><a href="http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&amp;source=s\_q&amp;hl=en&amp;geocode=&amp;q=tiananmen+square,+china&amp;sll=-25.335448,135.745076&amp;sspn=39.349464,79.013672&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;hq=&amp;hnear=Tiananmen+Square,+Dongcheng,+Beijing,+China&amp;ll=39.903745,116.393924&amp;spn=0.016559,0.036564&amp;z=15" title="google.com.au">http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&amp;source=s\_q&amp;hl=en&amp;geocode=&amp;q=tiananmen+square,+china&amp;sll=-25.335448,135.745076&amp;sspn=39.349464,79.013672&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;hq=&amp;hnear=Tiananmen+Square,+Dongcheng,+Beijing,+China&amp;ll=39.903745,116.393924&amp;spn=0.016559,0.036564&amp;z=15</a> [google.com.au]</p><p>I wonder if their maps are shifted or their images are shifted? Anyone in Beijing have a GPS handy to get a reading for the square?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interestingly , for Tianamen Square , the google maps location seems to be about a block east of the satellite photo : http : //maps.google.com.au/maps ? f = q&amp;source = s \ _q&amp;hl = en&amp;geocode = &amp;q = tiananmen + square , + china&amp;sll = -25.335448,135.745076&amp;sspn = 39.349464,79.013672&amp;ie = UTF8&amp;hq = &amp;hnear = Tiananmen + Square , + Dongcheng , + Beijing , + China&amp;ll = 39.903745,116.393924&amp;spn = 0.016559,0.036564&amp;t = h&amp;z = 15 [ google.com.au ] compared tohttp : //maps.google.com.au/maps ? f = q&amp;source = s \ _q&amp;hl = en&amp;geocode = &amp;q = tiananmen + square , + china&amp;sll = -25.335448,135.745076&amp;sspn = 39.349464,79.013672&amp;ie = UTF8&amp;hq = &amp;hnear = Tiananmen + Square , + Dongcheng , + Beijing , + China&amp;ll = 39.903745,116.393924&amp;spn = 0.016559,0.036564&amp;z = 15 [ google.com.au ] I wonder if their maps are shifted or their images are shifted ?
Anyone in Beijing have a GPS handy to get a reading for the square ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interestingly, for Tianamen Square, the google maps location seems to be about a block east of the satellite photo:http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&amp;source=s\_q&amp;hl=en&amp;geocode=&amp;q=tiananmen+square,+china&amp;sll=-25.335448,135.745076&amp;sspn=39.349464,79.013672&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;hq=&amp;hnear=Tiananmen+Square,+Dongcheng,+Beijing,+China&amp;ll=39.903745,116.393924&amp;spn=0.016559,0.036564&amp;t=h&amp;z=15 [google.com.au]compared tohttp://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&amp;source=s\_q&amp;hl=en&amp;geocode=&amp;q=tiananmen+square,+china&amp;sll=-25.335448,135.745076&amp;sspn=39.349464,79.013672&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;hq=&amp;hnear=Tiananmen+Square,+Dongcheng,+Beijing,+China&amp;ll=39.903745,116.393924&amp;spn=0.016559,0.036564&amp;z=15 [google.com.au]I wonder if their maps are shifted or their images are shifted?
Anyone in Beijing have a GPS handy to get a reading for the square?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184328</id>
	<title>Re:Chinese</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258819800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am home-staying with a Chinese family, and they are generally very nice. They are a well educated, well-to-do family, both parents having lived and worked in Japan for at least a decade, and are currently working in Australia.</p><p>However, in the few political discussions I have had with them (which I really don't want to get drawn into, for obvious reasons that I am Taiwanese, anti-Chinese Communist Party, anti-KMT, and me being their tenant an'all<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-P) they seem to have a very warped view on having democracy in China (with hints that it applies to all Asian countries too!). It seems that they like the idea of democracy, but insists that it simply would not work in China because of greed and corruption, not in the top echelons of government, but instead at the lower levels where, according to them, it is apparantely impossible to control. Their view is that the democracy that exists in Taiwan is a shambles, almost as if they see it as a farcical show.</p><p>However - this is a family that has emigrated and enjoyed the freedom of Japan, and Australia (eg they have two kids!!). So, what seems to be weird about their thoughts are:</p><p>1. They are quietly proud of themselves being of Chinese heritage (well actually that can be said of most nationalities)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; - but they choose to live anywhere but China, yes I heard them say they'd much rather be in Oz or Japan than China.</p><p>2. They quietly want the respect and admiration of the westerners/foreigners (again, who doesn't like that) to the extent they'll show that they are educated enough to agree that democracy is a Good Thing(TM)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; - but they criticise the free and democratic Taiwan. They insisting that Taiwan is part of China, common cultures etc blah... but that Taiwan's democracy must be a joke, they should not follow suit because China does not work that way. How in the world can they possibly expect respect when they choose the bad thing while *knowing* that it is bad, for the 'practical' reason namely that Chinese people are too corrupt? Am I alone in thinking that it must cause them some pain to think like this? not being able to hold your head up high the very moment the topic of politics come up in polite company - "oh that lofty idea, its good, but Chinese people can't do it, but don't you dare insult us and can we has some respect plz!"</p><p>I suspect the reason that they still have these views despite having lived abroad for so long may partly be helped by the internet. I have noticed that they get their dose of news from Chinese media, and not the western outlets (well the parents do - I hope the kids will not be subjected to too much of this biased, ultra-nationalist reporting). It is sad to see that the stranglehold of the CCP is so strong though.</p><p>In relation to your post - no I do not to expect the Chinese will fix the problem of filtering themselves anytime soon, there are plenty who are fine with what seems to be contradicting thoughts that their government feeds them through their monstrously powerful media.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am home-staying with a Chinese family , and they are generally very nice .
They are a well educated , well-to-do family , both parents having lived and worked in Japan for at least a decade , and are currently working in Australia.However , in the few political discussions I have had with them ( which I really do n't want to get drawn into , for obvious reasons that I am Taiwanese , anti-Chinese Communist Party , anti-KMT , and me being their tenant an'all : -P ) they seem to have a very warped view on having democracy in China ( with hints that it applies to all Asian countries too ! ) .
It seems that they like the idea of democracy , but insists that it simply would not work in China because of greed and corruption , not in the top echelons of government , but instead at the lower levels where , according to them , it is apparantely impossible to control .
Their view is that the democracy that exists in Taiwan is a shambles , almost as if they see it as a farcical show.However - this is a family that has emigrated and enjoyed the freedom of Japan , and Australia ( eg they have two kids ! ! ) .
So , what seems to be weird about their thoughts are : 1 .
They are quietly proud of themselves being of Chinese heritage ( well actually that can be said of most nationalities )         - but they choose to live anywhere but China , yes I heard them say they 'd much rather be in Oz or Japan than China.2 .
They quietly want the respect and admiration of the westerners/foreigners ( again , who does n't like that ) to the extent they 'll show that they are educated enough to agree that democracy is a Good Thing ( TM )         - but they criticise the free and democratic Taiwan .
They insisting that Taiwan is part of China , common cultures etc blah... but that Taiwan 's democracy must be a joke , they should not follow suit because China does not work that way .
How in the world can they possibly expect respect when they choose the bad thing while * knowing * that it is bad , for the 'practical ' reason namely that Chinese people are too corrupt ?
Am I alone in thinking that it must cause them some pain to think like this ?
not being able to hold your head up high the very moment the topic of politics come up in polite company - " oh that lofty idea , its good , but Chinese people ca n't do it , but do n't you dare insult us and can we has some respect plz !
" I suspect the reason that they still have these views despite having lived abroad for so long may partly be helped by the internet .
I have noticed that they get their dose of news from Chinese media , and not the western outlets ( well the parents do - I hope the kids will not be subjected to too much of this biased , ultra-nationalist reporting ) .
It is sad to see that the stranglehold of the CCP is so strong though.In relation to your post - no I do not to expect the Chinese will fix the problem of filtering themselves anytime soon , there are plenty who are fine with what seems to be contradicting thoughts that their government feeds them through their monstrously powerful media .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am home-staying with a Chinese family, and they are generally very nice.
They are a well educated, well-to-do family, both parents having lived and worked in Japan for at least a decade, and are currently working in Australia.However, in the few political discussions I have had with them (which I really don't want to get drawn into, for obvious reasons that I am Taiwanese, anti-Chinese Communist Party, anti-KMT, and me being their tenant an'all :-P) they seem to have a very warped view on having democracy in China (with hints that it applies to all Asian countries too!).
It seems that they like the idea of democracy, but insists that it simply would not work in China because of greed and corruption, not in the top echelons of government, but instead at the lower levels where, according to them, it is apparantely impossible to control.
Their view is that the democracy that exists in Taiwan is a shambles, almost as if they see it as a farcical show.However - this is a family that has emigrated and enjoyed the freedom of Japan, and Australia (eg they have two kids!!).
So, what seems to be weird about their thoughts are:1.
They are quietly proud of themselves being of Chinese heritage (well actually that can be said of most nationalities)
        - but they choose to live anywhere but China, yes I heard them say they'd much rather be in Oz or Japan than China.2.
They quietly want the respect and admiration of the westerners/foreigners (again, who doesn't like that) to the extent they'll show that they are educated enough to agree that democracy is a Good Thing(TM)
        - but they criticise the free and democratic Taiwan.
They insisting that Taiwan is part of China, common cultures etc blah... but that Taiwan's democracy must be a joke, they should not follow suit because China does not work that way.
How in the world can they possibly expect respect when they choose the bad thing while *knowing* that it is bad, for the 'practical' reason namely that Chinese people are too corrupt?
Am I alone in thinking that it must cause them some pain to think like this?
not being able to hold your head up high the very moment the topic of politics come up in polite company - "oh that lofty idea, its good, but Chinese people can't do it, but don't you dare insult us and can we has some respect plz!
"I suspect the reason that they still have these views despite having lived abroad for so long may partly be helped by the internet.
I have noticed that they get their dose of news from Chinese media, and not the western outlets (well the parents do - I hope the kids will not be subjected to too much of this biased, ultra-nationalist reporting).
It is sad to see that the stranglehold of the CCP is so strong though.In relation to your post - no I do not to expect the Chinese will fix the problem of filtering themselves anytime soon, there are plenty who are fine with what seems to be contradicting thoughts that their government feeds them through their monstrously powerful media.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183650</id>
	<title>Is it legal?</title>
	<author>pmontra</author>
	<datestamp>1258812120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can they censor queries made by American citizens using a simplified chinese keyboard in the USA?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can they censor queries made by American citizens using a simplified chinese keyboard in the USA ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can they censor queries made by American citizens using a simplified chinese keyboard in the USA?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30188418</id>
	<title>Greed</title>
	<author>bvt</author>
	<datestamp>1258802040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's all about money and greed</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's all about money and greed</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's all about money and greed</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183406</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft has become as evil as Google?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258807500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has Jeeves also kowtowed to the Chinese government?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has Jeeves also kowtowed to the Chinese government ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has Jeeves also kowtowed to the Chinese government?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183098</id>
	<title>The Google route?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258801860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are they stating on said search results that they have filtered the results due to Chinese laws?</p><p>I mean, they can be only so subtle about it before China decides to block it entirely but at least MS could dangle that bit of info there for any one curious to wonder "Hey, now what law is that and why is it enforced?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are they stating on said search results that they have filtered the results due to Chinese laws ? I mean , they can be only so subtle about it before China decides to block it entirely but at least MS could dangle that bit of info there for any one curious to wonder " Hey , now what law is that and why is it enforced ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are they stating on said search results that they have filtered the results due to Chinese laws?I mean, they can be only so subtle about it before China decides to block it entirely but at least MS could dangle that bit of info there for any one curious to wonder "Hey, now what law is that and why is it enforced?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183206</id>
	<title>hmmmm</title>
	<author>the\_other\_one</author>
	<datestamp>1258803720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have been self censoring my bing english language querys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been self censoring my bing english language querys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been self censoring my bing english language querys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183150</id>
	<title>Chinese</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258802940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bing censors at the "request" of the Chinese government.  <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/06/01/25/0432239/Google-Agrees-to-Censor-Results-in-China" title="slashdot.org">Google</a> [slashdot.org] censors at the "request" of the Chinese government.  <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/06/06/16/1550221/Yahoo-China-has-the-Worst-Filtering-Policy" title="slashdot.org">Yahoo</a> [slashdot.org] censors at the "request" of the Chinese government.  As a result of whatever you care to attribute the subservience of the Chinese people, 21\% of our species is subject to the filtering policies of the Chinese government.  Ultimately the Chinese must be the the reason this tyranny comes to an end.  Or not.</p><p>The marketing companies of the West aren't interested in fighting their battles.  Stop expecting ad pimps to be responsible for liberating anyone.  Instead, raise your expectations of the Chinese.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bing censors at the " request " of the Chinese government .
Google [ slashdot.org ] censors at the " request " of the Chinese government .
Yahoo [ slashdot.org ] censors at the " request " of the Chinese government .
As a result of whatever you care to attribute the subservience of the Chinese people , 21 \ % of our species is subject to the filtering policies of the Chinese government .
Ultimately the Chinese must be the the reason this tyranny comes to an end .
Or not.The marketing companies of the West are n't interested in fighting their battles .
Stop expecting ad pimps to be responsible for liberating anyone .
Instead , raise your expectations of the Chinese .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bing censors at the "request" of the Chinese government.
Google [slashdot.org] censors at the "request" of the Chinese government.
Yahoo [slashdot.org] censors at the "request" of the Chinese government.
As a result of whatever you care to attribute the subservience of the Chinese people, 21\% of our species is subject to the filtering policies of the Chinese government.
Ultimately the Chinese must be the the reason this tyranny comes to an end.
Or not.The marketing companies of the West aren't interested in fighting their battles.
Stop expecting ad pimps to be responsible for liberating anyone.
Instead, raise your expectations of the Chinese.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30187826</id>
	<title>Bing admitted a bug - will be fixed</title>
	<author>Ececheira</author>
	<datestamp>1258798020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bing just repsonded to the issue here:</p><p><a href="http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx" title="bing.com">http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx</a> [bing.com]</p><p>They've found a bug in their image search algorithms and promise a fix by the end of the week.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bing just repsonded to the issue here : http : //www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx [ bing.com ] They 've found a bug in their image search algorithms and promise a fix by the end of the week .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bing just repsonded to the issue here:http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx [bing.com]They've found a bug in their image search algorithms and promise a fix by the end of the week.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30185572</id>
	<title>Lest we forget</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258826940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is what the Chinese authorities do not wish Chinese people to see.</p><p>http://www.boxun.com/hero/64/52\_1.shtml (WARNING: not for the squeamish, contains images of actual atrocities commited in Tianamen Square).</p><p>It's been twenty years, and they still can not admit what happened.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what the Chinese authorities do not wish Chinese people to see.http : //www.boxun.com/hero/64/52 \ _1.shtml ( WARNING : not for the squeamish , contains images of actual atrocities commited in Tianamen Square ) .It 's been twenty years , and they still can not admit what happened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what the Chinese authorities do not wish Chinese people to see.http://www.boxun.com/hero/64/52\_1.shtml (WARNING: not for the squeamish, contains images of actual atrocities commited in Tianamen Square).It's been twenty years, and they still can not admit what happened.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30194610</id>
	<title>Re:morality</title>
	<author>jc42</author>
	<datestamp>1258914180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For those agonizing over the morality issues, note that there's an excellent <a href="http://wpcomics.washingtonpost.com/client/wpc/db/2009/11/22/" title="washingtonpost.com">Doonesbury Comic</a> [washingtonpost.com] today on the topic.  It's about torture rather than censorship, but it's probably good enough to apply to most moral and ethical quandaries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For those agonizing over the morality issues , note that there 's an excellent Doonesbury Comic [ washingtonpost.com ] today on the topic .
It 's about torture rather than censorship , but it 's probably good enough to apply to most moral and ethical quandaries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those agonizing over the morality issues, note that there's an excellent Doonesbury Comic [washingtonpost.com] today on the topic.
It's about torture rather than censorship, but it's probably good enough to apply to most moral and ethical quandaries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30188892</id>
	<title>wtf</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258805160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So Microsoft is proactively censoring information, even where Chinese law doesn't govern? What the fuck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So Microsoft is proactively censoring information , even where Chinese law does n't govern ?
What the fuck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Microsoft is proactively censoring information, even where Chinese law doesn't govern?
What the fuck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30187130</id>
	<title>Re:For Freedom Day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258836780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>please take a good long nap, then rub your eyes hard and look around you. really LOOK and SEE what your freedom consists of. if you believe that choosing between mcdonald's and burger king is a relevant free choice as opposed to the choice the 'free market' made to offshore your manufacturing to china to make use of all that 'free market' labour then power to you. this is not a matter of scale, your individual free rights are restricted by the assets and value that 'gives' you that 'free' choice.</p><p>when was the last time you looked around at the long term residents in their cars at the far end of the walmart parking lot? was that a 'choice'?</p><p>please take a moment to review this bit here called 'the tragedy of the commons' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy\_of\_the\_commons and apply it to things other than land management.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>please take a good long nap , then rub your eyes hard and look around you .
really LOOK and SEE what your freedom consists of .
if you believe that choosing between mcdonald 's and burger king is a relevant free choice as opposed to the choice the 'free market ' made to offshore your manufacturing to china to make use of all that 'free market ' labour then power to you .
this is not a matter of scale , your individual free rights are restricted by the assets and value that 'gives ' you that 'free ' choice.when was the last time you looked around at the long term residents in their cars at the far end of the walmart parking lot ?
was that a 'choice ' ? please take a moment to review this bit here called 'the tragedy of the commons ' http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy \ _of \ _the \ _commons and apply it to things other than land management .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>please take a good long nap, then rub your eyes hard and look around you.
really LOOK and SEE what your freedom consists of.
if you believe that choosing between mcdonald's and burger king is a relevant free choice as opposed to the choice the 'free market' made to offshore your manufacturing to china to make use of all that 'free market' labour then power to you.
this is not a matter of scale, your individual free rights are restricted by the assets and value that 'gives' you that 'free' choice.when was the last time you looked around at the long term residents in their cars at the far end of the walmart parking lot?
was that a 'choice'?please take a moment to review this bit here called 'the tragedy of the commons' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy\_of\_the\_commons and apply it to things other than land management.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184316</id>
	<title>One word</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1258819680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>baudea.
<br>
That is pushed and controlled by the Chinese gov. in the same way that Pravda is pushed and owned by Russia, or Fox News is pushed and owned by the republican party.</htmltext>
<tokenext>baudea .
That is pushed and controlled by the Chinese gov .
in the same way that Pravda is pushed and owned by Russia , or Fox News is pushed and owned by the republican party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>baudea.
That is pushed and controlled by the Chinese gov.
in the same way that Pravda is pushed and owned by Russia, or Fox News is pushed and owned by the republican party.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184916</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone surprised?</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1258823400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I also think that the MS Bing commercials are about the dumbest I've seen."</p><p>You don't watch much TV do you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I also think that the MS Bing commercials are about the dumbest I 've seen .
" You do n't watch much TV do you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I also think that the MS Bing commercials are about the dumbest I've seen.
"You don't watch much TV do you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30187594</id>
	<title>Microsoft's response to this</title>
	<author>Osrin</author>
	<datestamp>1258796580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx" title="bing.com">http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx</a> [bing.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx [ bing.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx [bing.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30185108</id>
	<title>I just did a search for "  "</title>
	<author>crovira</author>
	<datestamp>1258824540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and Google is no better than Bing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and Google is no better than Bing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and Google is no better than Bing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183136</id>
	<title>boycott Bing</title>
	<author>simoncpu was here</author>
	<datestamp>1258802520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been "boycotting" Bing for quite some time now, because Google works for me.  Now that there's a call for boycott, I visited Bing instead just to find out what the controversy is all about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been " boycotting " Bing for quite some time now , because Google works for me .
Now that there 's a call for boycott , I visited Bing instead just to find out what the controversy is all about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been "boycotting" Bing for quite some time now, because Google works for me.
Now that there's a call for boycott, I visited Bing instead just to find out what the controversy is all about.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183928</id>
	<title>Chinese Censorship != Attempt to Rewrite History</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258816320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you ever done something wrong and then not wanted to talk about it? If you have, you know that avoiding the subject doesn't make it go away, but hey, at least it means you don't have to keep on confronting the it. In fact, as you may have seen it, ignoring your lapse may have allowed you to maintain a sufficient level of self-respect so that one day you could become a better person. It's always good to staying positive, right?</p><p>So what is the Chinese censorship of 64? At its core it is nothing more than a government-dictated instance of the above coping mechanism. Why is this important to know? Because unfortunately too many Westerners believe that its censorship has instead been some delusional attempt to rewrite history. If you're one of them, please, listen up. The Chinese do not want to rewrite history -- it's just that the wound is still too fresh for them to talk about it. Give them about 50 years and the discourse will change.</p><p>Also, please stop thinking that the government censorship is in someway actually preventing Chinese people themselves from knowing about 64. Oh sure, maybe you have a friend who told you that when they asked a mainlander about Tiananmen, they didn't seem to know anything except for how it's a good place for tourism. But do you want to know the real truth? Chinese people carry shame strongly (as do many other people), and the actual reason that person acted ignorant is because they just don't want to talk about it with your arrogant foreign ass. Sorry, they just don't. Imagine if tourists just kept on bugging Americans about slavery or the War in Iraq? The first couple times you may say something, but after a while, it'd just boil down to "whatever, are you going to buy the cap with the flag on it or what?".</p><p>So are we Americans any different? Ask us at a good time about the awful choices our nation has made, and the response you'll most often hear is, "that was the government's decision, not my own". From the sounds of it, maybe our choice of coping mechanism is different, but when it comes down to it our inability to attest to our own failures gleams threw just the same.</p><p>Point is, please stop picking on the Chinese. Let them as a modern nation continue to mature and prosper. They have come so far despite their numerous failures, and deserve our respect and at least a minor attempt at genuine understanding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you ever done something wrong and then not wanted to talk about it ?
If you have , you know that avoiding the subject does n't make it go away , but hey , at least it means you do n't have to keep on confronting the it .
In fact , as you may have seen it , ignoring your lapse may have allowed you to maintain a sufficient level of self-respect so that one day you could become a better person .
It 's always good to staying positive , right ? So what is the Chinese censorship of 64 ?
At its core it is nothing more than a government-dictated instance of the above coping mechanism .
Why is this important to know ?
Because unfortunately too many Westerners believe that its censorship has instead been some delusional attempt to rewrite history .
If you 're one of them , please , listen up .
The Chinese do not want to rewrite history -- it 's just that the wound is still too fresh for them to talk about it .
Give them about 50 years and the discourse will change.Also , please stop thinking that the government censorship is in someway actually preventing Chinese people themselves from knowing about 64 .
Oh sure , maybe you have a friend who told you that when they asked a mainlander about Tiananmen , they did n't seem to know anything except for how it 's a good place for tourism .
But do you want to know the real truth ?
Chinese people carry shame strongly ( as do many other people ) , and the actual reason that person acted ignorant is because they just do n't want to talk about it with your arrogant foreign ass .
Sorry , they just do n't .
Imagine if tourists just kept on bugging Americans about slavery or the War in Iraq ?
The first couple times you may say something , but after a while , it 'd just boil down to " whatever , are you going to buy the cap with the flag on it or what ?
" .So are we Americans any different ?
Ask us at a good time about the awful choices our nation has made , and the response you 'll most often hear is , " that was the government 's decision , not my own " .
From the sounds of it , maybe our choice of coping mechanism is different , but when it comes down to it our inability to attest to our own failures gleams threw just the same.Point is , please stop picking on the Chinese .
Let them as a modern nation continue to mature and prosper .
They have come so far despite their numerous failures , and deserve our respect and at least a minor attempt at genuine understanding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you ever done something wrong and then not wanted to talk about it?
If you have, you know that avoiding the subject doesn't make it go away, but hey, at least it means you don't have to keep on confronting the it.
In fact, as you may have seen it, ignoring your lapse may have allowed you to maintain a sufficient level of self-respect so that one day you could become a better person.
It's always good to staying positive, right?So what is the Chinese censorship of 64?
At its core it is nothing more than a government-dictated instance of the above coping mechanism.
Why is this important to know?
Because unfortunately too many Westerners believe that its censorship has instead been some delusional attempt to rewrite history.
If you're one of them, please, listen up.
The Chinese do not want to rewrite history -- it's just that the wound is still too fresh for them to talk about it.
Give them about 50 years and the discourse will change.Also, please stop thinking that the government censorship is in someway actually preventing Chinese people themselves from knowing about 64.
Oh sure, maybe you have a friend who told you that when they asked a mainlander about Tiananmen, they didn't seem to know anything except for how it's a good place for tourism.
But do you want to know the real truth?
Chinese people carry shame strongly (as do many other people), and the actual reason that person acted ignorant is because they just don't want to talk about it with your arrogant foreign ass.
Sorry, they just don't.
Imagine if tourists just kept on bugging Americans about slavery or the War in Iraq?
The first couple times you may say something, but after a while, it'd just boil down to "whatever, are you going to buy the cap with the flag on it or what?
".So are we Americans any different?
Ask us at a good time about the awful choices our nation has made, and the response you'll most often hear is, "that was the government's decision, not my own".
From the sounds of it, maybe our choice of coping mechanism is different, but when it comes down to it our inability to attest to our own failures gleams threw just the same.Point is, please stop picking on the Chinese.
Let them as a modern nation continue to mature and prosper.
They have come so far despite their numerous failures, and deserve our respect and at least a minor attempt at genuine understanding.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184932</id>
	<title>Re:boycott Bing</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1258823520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I've been "boycotting" Bing for quite some time now, because Google works for me."</p><p>Really? How much do you pay them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 've been " boycotting " Bing for quite some time now , because Google works for me. " Really ?
How much do you pay them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I've been "boycotting" Bing for quite some time now, because Google works for me."Really?
How much do you pay them?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184894</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>FatdogHaiku</author>
	<datestamp>1258823220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>True for google.cn, not google.com. TFA is talking about <b>any</b> search done at bing.com done in Chinese. I agree that both parties are dirty, google chose to keep the dirt where it started and bing makes it world wide... not the same thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>True for google.cn , not google.com .
TFA is talking about any search done at bing.com done in Chinese .
I agree that both parties are dirty , google chose to keep the dirt where it started and bing makes it world wide... not the same thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True for google.cn, not google.com.
TFA is talking about any search done at bing.com done in Chinese.
I agree that both parties are dirty, google chose to keep the dirt where it started and bing makes it world wide... not the same thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183204</id>
	<title>Microsoft has become as evil as Google?</title>
	<author>pedantic bore</author>
	<datestamp>1258803720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Gasp!</i> </p><p> Once we're boycotting all the search engines that have caved into to the demands of the Chinese government, what search engines are left? </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gasp !
Once we 're boycotting all the search engines that have caved into to the demands of the Chinese government , what search engines are left ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Gasp!
Once we're boycotting all the search engines that have caved into to the demands of the Chinese government, what search engines are left? </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184246</id>
	<title>Re:Chinese Censorship != Attempt to Rewrite Histor</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1258819080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Point is, please stop picking on the Chinese. Let them as a modern nation continue to mature and prosper. They have come so far despite their numerous failures, and deserve our respect and at least a minor attempt at genuine understanding.</i>
<br>
Sorry, but no. I have a lot of respect for CHINESE PPL, but for China, the gov.? Nope. Their approach is no different then it was 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, or 60 years ago. Basically, it is a totalitarian state that is AFRAID of its ppl.  Otherwise, they would have finished tianiman. Worse, they are the ones doing major destruction around the world in terms of pollution, economy, etc. I hold them (and W) mostly responsible for the current economic situation. CHina was given a gift by Clinton in giving them MFN as well as into WTO. And they have reneged on their part (free their money and drop their trade barriers). Instead, they have actually increased trade barriers, manipulate their money to make cheap cheap cheap exports relative to all other western money, use no pollution control to keep the cheapest prices and are subsidizing various industries. Nearly everything that the Chinese gov. is doing is regarded as unethical as well as illegal in almost the entire world. If another nation (developed or not) were doing the same to China, they would be upset. I do not hold the chinese ppl responsible for this (unlike I hold Americans responsible for voting in W a second time).<br> <br>
Finally, Chinese gov. IS attempting to rewrite 64. It is not simply that they are keeping it quiet, but they have recently taken to speaking about it as these ppl were terrorists. That is re-writing. It would similar if American gov. stated that Kent State murder was because students had physically taken over a number of buildings, holding hostages, and was killing soldiers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Point is , please stop picking on the Chinese .
Let them as a modern nation continue to mature and prosper .
They have come so far despite their numerous failures , and deserve our respect and at least a minor attempt at genuine understanding .
Sorry , but no .
I have a lot of respect for CHINESE PPL , but for China , the gov. ?
Nope. Their approach is no different then it was 10 , 20 , 30 , 40 , 50 , or 60 years ago .
Basically , it is a totalitarian state that is AFRAID of its ppl .
Otherwise , they would have finished tianiman .
Worse , they are the ones doing major destruction around the world in terms of pollution , economy , etc .
I hold them ( and W ) mostly responsible for the current economic situation .
CHina was given a gift by Clinton in giving them MFN as well as into WTO .
And they have reneged on their part ( free their money and drop their trade barriers ) .
Instead , they have actually increased trade barriers , manipulate their money to make cheap cheap cheap exports relative to all other western money , use no pollution control to keep the cheapest prices and are subsidizing various industries .
Nearly everything that the Chinese gov .
is doing is regarded as unethical as well as illegal in almost the entire world .
If another nation ( developed or not ) were doing the same to China , they would be upset .
I do not hold the chinese ppl responsible for this ( unlike I hold Americans responsible for voting in W a second time ) .
Finally , Chinese gov .
IS attempting to rewrite 64 .
It is not simply that they are keeping it quiet , but they have recently taken to speaking about it as these ppl were terrorists .
That is re-writing .
It would similar if American gov .
stated that Kent State murder was because students had physically taken over a number of buildings , holding hostages , and was killing soldiers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Point is, please stop picking on the Chinese.
Let them as a modern nation continue to mature and prosper.
They have come so far despite their numerous failures, and deserve our respect and at least a minor attempt at genuine understanding.
Sorry, but no.
I have a lot of respect for CHINESE PPL, but for China, the gov.?
Nope. Their approach is no different then it was 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, or 60 years ago.
Basically, it is a totalitarian state that is AFRAID of its ppl.
Otherwise, they would have finished tianiman.
Worse, they are the ones doing major destruction around the world in terms of pollution, economy, etc.
I hold them (and W) mostly responsible for the current economic situation.
CHina was given a gift by Clinton in giving them MFN as well as into WTO.
And they have reneged on their part (free their money and drop their trade barriers).
Instead, they have actually increased trade barriers, manipulate their money to make cheap cheap cheap exports relative to all other western money, use no pollution control to keep the cheapest prices and are subsidizing various industries.
Nearly everything that the Chinese gov.
is doing is regarded as unethical as well as illegal in almost the entire world.
If another nation (developed or not) were doing the same to China, they would be upset.
I do not hold the chinese ppl responsible for this (unlike I hold Americans responsible for voting in W a second time).
Finally, Chinese gov.
IS attempting to rewrite 64.
It is not simply that they are keeping it quiet, but they have recently taken to speaking about it as these ppl were terrorists.
That is re-writing.
It would similar if American gov.
stated that Kent State murder was because students had physically taken over a number of buildings, holding hostages, and was killing soldiers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183126</id>
	<title>Anyone surprised?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258802400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is Microsoft.</p><p>They probably meant to only censor these things in China, but v1 of their filters are worldwide.</p><p>They'll have it fixed by v3.  Probably.  Maybe.  I doubt it.</p><p>(Note:  I also think that the MS Bing commercials are about the dumbest I've seen.  They beat out the mother and son's college roommate making kissy faces at each other.  And that takes doing.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is Microsoft.They probably meant to only censor these things in China , but v1 of their filters are worldwide.They 'll have it fixed by v3 .
Probably. Maybe .
I doubt it .
( Note : I also think that the MS Bing commercials are about the dumbest I 've seen .
They beat out the mother and son 's college roommate making kissy faces at each other .
And that takes doing .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is Microsoft.They probably meant to only censor these things in China, but v1 of their filters are worldwide.They'll have it fixed by v3.
Probably.  Maybe.
I doubt it.
(Note:  I also think that the MS Bing commercials are about the dumbest I've seen.
They beat out the mother and son's college roommate making kissy faces at each other.
And that takes doing.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186338</id>
	<title>If you want to see something interesting try baidu</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258831920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Go to baidu.com, it's a Chinese search engine.<br>Write "falun gong" to the box. Hit enter.<br>Watch your connection die. Even the front page won't work.</p><p>Enjoy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Go to baidu.com , it 's a Chinese search engine.Write " falun gong " to the box .
Hit enter.Watch your connection die .
Even the front page wo n't work.Enjoy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go to baidu.com, it's a Chinese search engine.Write "falun gong" to the box.
Hit enter.Watch your connection die.
Even the front page won't work.Enjoy!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722</id>
	<title>For Freedom Day</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1258813560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been on the fence about listening to China, but no more. I  conclude that the American idea of freedom, the American revolution, is an ongoing experiment and must apply everywhere in the world.  We Americans by nature are assholes, so we may as well do something productive with it.  We are obligated to participate, to be subversive to tyranny or even tendencies towards it, everywhere we go and we must be that way at home.</p><p>American companies operate because they are granted license to by the people of the united states as a whole.</p><p>At home, nor abroad, can we tolerate any government that violates any fundamental liberty.  Even if we cannot agree on what fundamental liberties all, we must be dedicated to the idea that the more liberties that we uphold, the more we have.  We forget that freedom is so sacred as of late, and we listen too much to those who would say that we have freedom too much.</p><p>I say that we say that for right now today is Freedom Day.  Take a second to glance at the Constitution and understand that the government is allowed to do only what is on that little piece of paper and you are allowed to do everything else.  Write whatever you want, go to a gun store, read something subversive, stop by a church, hang with some protestors, revel in the fact that you are free and can do things.  Even as we bum out about how the west has gotten the short of the stick in manufacturing, we should be extremely cognizant that we can do so many things our counterparts in China and other parts Asia cannot, I can take my made in Chinese flag and I can burn it.</p><p>Today is Freedom Day, and so is every day.  Remind yourself that you are free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been on the fence about listening to China , but no more .
I conclude that the American idea of freedom , the American revolution , is an ongoing experiment and must apply everywhere in the world .
We Americans by nature are assholes , so we may as well do something productive with it .
We are obligated to participate , to be subversive to tyranny or even tendencies towards it , everywhere we go and we must be that way at home.American companies operate because they are granted license to by the people of the united states as a whole.At home , nor abroad , can we tolerate any government that violates any fundamental liberty .
Even if we can not agree on what fundamental liberties all , we must be dedicated to the idea that the more liberties that we uphold , the more we have .
We forget that freedom is so sacred as of late , and we listen too much to those who would say that we have freedom too much.I say that we say that for right now today is Freedom Day .
Take a second to glance at the Constitution and understand that the government is allowed to do only what is on that little piece of paper and you are allowed to do everything else .
Write whatever you want , go to a gun store , read something subversive , stop by a church , hang with some protestors , revel in the fact that you are free and can do things .
Even as we bum out about how the west has gotten the short of the stick in manufacturing , we should be extremely cognizant that we can do so many things our counterparts in China and other parts Asia can not , I can take my made in Chinese flag and I can burn it.Today is Freedom Day , and so is every day .
Remind yourself that you are free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been on the fence about listening to China, but no more.
I  conclude that the American idea of freedom, the American revolution, is an ongoing experiment and must apply everywhere in the world.
We Americans by nature are assholes, so we may as well do something productive with it.
We are obligated to participate, to be subversive to tyranny or even tendencies towards it, everywhere we go and we must be that way at home.American companies operate because they are granted license to by the people of the united states as a whole.At home, nor abroad, can we tolerate any government that violates any fundamental liberty.
Even if we cannot agree on what fundamental liberties all, we must be dedicated to the idea that the more liberties that we uphold, the more we have.
We forget that freedom is so sacred as of late, and we listen too much to those who would say that we have freedom too much.I say that we say that for right now today is Freedom Day.
Take a second to glance at the Constitution and understand that the government is allowed to do only what is on that little piece of paper and you are allowed to do everything else.
Write whatever you want, go to a gun store, read something subversive, stop by a church, hang with some protestors, revel in the fact that you are free and can do things.
Even as we bum out about how the west has gotten the short of the stick in manufacturing, we should be extremely cognizant that we can do so many things our counterparts in China and other parts Asia cannot, I can take my made in Chinese flag and I can burn it.Today is Freedom Day, and so is every day.
Remind yourself that you are free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183504</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1258809720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google are another group of ass hats. Google, better start acting like an American company and stand for something.</p><p>Oh but they need the chinese market.... boo hoo.</p><p>BRING THE CHINESE freedom of information... not cow tow to them and insult all of us who believe in it dearly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google are another group of ass hats .
Google , better start acting like an American company and stand for something.Oh but they need the chinese market.... boo hoo.BRING THE CHINESE freedom of information... not cow tow to them and insult all of us who believe in it dearly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google are another group of ass hats.
Google, better start acting like an American company and stand for something.Oh but they need the chinese market.... boo hoo.BRING THE CHINESE freedom of information... not cow tow to them and insult all of us who believe in it dearly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30185538</id>
	<title>Utterly spineless</title>
	<author>Brummund</author>
	<datestamp>1258826820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is really disgraceful:</p><p><a href="http://images.google.cn/images?hl=zh-CN&amp;source=hp&amp;q=Tiananmen&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=wi" title="google.cn">http://images.google.cn/images?hl=zh-CN&amp;source=hp&amp;q=Tiananmen&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=wi</a> [google.cn]<br><a href="http://images.google.com/images?hl=no&amp;source=hp&amp;q=Tiananmen&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=wi" title="google.com">http://images.google.com/images?hl=no&amp;source=hp&amp;q=Tiananmen&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=wi</a> [google.com]</p><p>So much for "Don't be evil"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-/</p><p>But interestingly enough, add a typo to the name and "square massacre":</p><p><a href="http://images.google.cn/images?gbv=2&amp;hl=zh-CN&amp;sa=1&amp;q=tianamen+square+massacre&amp;btnG=&amp;\%2332034;&amp;\%2322270;&amp;\%2329255;&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=&amp;start=0" title="google.cn">http://images.google.cn/images?gbv=2&amp;hl=zh-CN&amp;sa=1&amp;q=tianamen+square+massacre&amp;btnG=&amp;\%2332034;&amp;\%2322270;&amp;\%2329255;&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=&amp;start=0</a> [google.cn]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is really disgraceful : http : //images.google.cn/images ? hl = zh-CN&amp;source = hp&amp;q = Tiananmen&amp;um = 1&amp;ie = UTF-8&amp;sa = N&amp;tab = wi [ google.cn ] http : //images.google.com/images ? hl = no&amp;source = hp&amp;q = Tiananmen&amp;um = 1&amp;ie = UTF-8&amp;sa = N&amp;tab = wi [ google.com ] So much for " Do n't be evil " : -/But interestingly enough , add a typo to the name and " square massacre " : http : //images.google.cn/images ? gbv = 2&amp;hl = zh-CN&amp;sa = 1&amp;q = tianamen + square + massacre&amp;btnG = &amp; \ % 2332034 ; &amp; \ % 2322270 ; &amp; \ % 2329255 ; &amp;aq = f&amp;oq = &amp;start = 0 [ google.cn ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is really disgraceful:http://images.google.cn/images?hl=zh-CN&amp;source=hp&amp;q=Tiananmen&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=wi [google.cn]http://images.google.com/images?hl=no&amp;source=hp&amp;q=Tiananmen&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=wi [google.com]So much for "Don't be evil" :-/But interestingly enough, add a typo to the name and "square massacre":http://images.google.cn/images?gbv=2&amp;hl=zh-CN&amp;sa=1&amp;q=tianamen+square+massacre&amp;btnG=&amp;\%2332034;&amp;\%2322270;&amp;\%2329255;&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=&amp;start=0 [google.cn]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183266</id>
	<title>boycott link</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258804680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Am I the only one which finds it hilarious that in an article named "Boycott Microsoft Bing", there is a clickable link to Bing... and if you consider that it's not very often that you actually search for a new search engine... this might be one of the few cases when you get in contact with Bing at all... so if anything it will probably have the reverse effect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one which finds it hilarious that in an article named " Boycott Microsoft Bing " , there is a clickable link to Bing... and if you consider that it 's not very often that you actually search for a new search engine... this might be one of the few cases when you get in contact with Bing at all... so if anything it will probably have the reverse effect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one which finds it hilarious that in an article named "Boycott Microsoft Bing", there is a clickable link to Bing... and if you consider that it's not very often that you actually search for a new search engine... this might be one of the few cases when you get in contact with Bing at all... so if anything it will probably have the reverse effect.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184866</id>
	<title>Re:For Freedom Day</title>
	<author>chance2105</author>
	<datestamp>1258823040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Glenn?  Is that you?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Glenn ?
Is that you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Glenn?
Is that you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184842</id>
	<title>It's all about the code</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1258822920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The Microsoft solution strikes me as the quick-and-dirty solution, while the Google method shows more advanced programming."</p><p>I know I prefer a more sophisticated implementation when I am censored. Perhaps Google could add another advanced feature like logging the IP for "suspect" searches for the Chinese government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Microsoft solution strikes me as the quick-and-dirty solution , while the Google method shows more advanced programming .
" I know I prefer a more sophisticated implementation when I am censored .
Perhaps Google could add another advanced feature like logging the IP for " suspect " searches for the Chinese government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Microsoft solution strikes me as the quick-and-dirty solution, while the Google method shows more advanced programming.
"I know I prefer a more sophisticated implementation when I am censored.
Perhaps Google could add another advanced feature like logging the IP for "suspect" searches for the Chinese government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186236</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>budfields</author>
	<datestamp>1258831260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pardon me, but what if the Chinese searcher in question doesn't know English?

Also, to my eyes at least, worldwide censorship is certainly worse than limited in-China-only censorship, necessary to do business in China at all, which can be easily avoided by Chinese citizens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pardon me , but what if the Chinese searcher in question does n't know English ?
Also , to my eyes at least , worldwide censorship is certainly worse than limited in-China-only censorship , necessary to do business in China at all , which can be easily avoided by Chinese citizens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pardon me, but what if the Chinese searcher in question doesn't know English?
Also, to my eyes at least, worldwide censorship is certainly worse than limited in-China-only censorship, necessary to do business in China at all, which can be easily avoided by Chinese citizens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186702</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft has become as evil as Google?</title>
	<author>baKanale</author>
	<datestamp>1258833900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To paraphrase the GP, once we're boycotting all the products that have been produced by the Chinese, what products are left?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To paraphrase the GP , once we 're boycotting all the products that have been produced by the Chinese , what products are left ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To paraphrase the GP, once we're boycotting all the products that have been produced by the Chinese, what products are left?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183400</id>
	<title>Evil?</title>
	<author>KingSkippus</author>
	<datestamp>1258807440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA:</p><blockquote><div><p>Microsoft's current position, which insults my intelligence and yours, is that there was indeed a bug of some kind and that that is fixed--but that searches in simplified characters continue to produce pro-Communist results because of the algorithms used.</p></div></blockquote><p>Think about this.  Most web sites that are in simplified Chinese are probably in...  Wait for it...  China!</p><p>So I'm guessing that since discussion of topics contrary to the state agenda will get you thrown in jail, that most sites written in simplified Chinese about things such as Tienanmen Square <i>really are</i> about how it's a nice place to visit.  If that's the case, then it's entirely believable to me that top search results in simplified Chinese for topics like that would return state-sanctioned sites.</p><p>It's not insulting to my intelligence to think that there's probably nothing to see here, except a reporter who is probably justifiably skeptical of Microsoft's claims, but in this particular case, is probably being a bit overzealous in his accusations.</p><p>I wonder, if the reporter tried an Arabic language search for something like "American aggression" and most results returned (surprise!) web sites expressing anti-American sentiment, that <i>must</i> mean that Microsoft is also appeasing terrorists, right?  EVIL!!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : Microsoft 's current position , which insults my intelligence and yours , is that there was indeed a bug of some kind and that that is fixed--but that searches in simplified characters continue to produce pro-Communist results because of the algorithms used.Think about this .
Most web sites that are in simplified Chinese are probably in... Wait for it... China ! So I 'm guessing that since discussion of topics contrary to the state agenda will get you thrown in jail , that most sites written in simplified Chinese about things such as Tienanmen Square really are about how it 's a nice place to visit .
If that 's the case , then it 's entirely believable to me that top search results in simplified Chinese for topics like that would return state-sanctioned sites.It 's not insulting to my intelligence to think that there 's probably nothing to see here , except a reporter who is probably justifiably skeptical of Microsoft 's claims , but in this particular case , is probably being a bit overzealous in his accusations.I wonder , if the reporter tried an Arabic language search for something like " American aggression " and most results returned ( surprise !
) web sites expressing anti-American sentiment , that must mean that Microsoft is also appeasing terrorists , right ?
EVIL ! ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:Microsoft's current position, which insults my intelligence and yours, is that there was indeed a bug of some kind and that that is fixed--but that searches in simplified characters continue to produce pro-Communist results because of the algorithms used.Think about this.
Most web sites that are in simplified Chinese are probably in...  Wait for it...  China!So I'm guessing that since discussion of topics contrary to the state agenda will get you thrown in jail, that most sites written in simplified Chinese about things such as Tienanmen Square really are about how it's a nice place to visit.
If that's the case, then it's entirely believable to me that top search results in simplified Chinese for topics like that would return state-sanctioned sites.It's not insulting to my intelligence to think that there's probably nothing to see here, except a reporter who is probably justifiably skeptical of Microsoft's claims, but in this particular case, is probably being a bit overzealous in his accusations.I wonder, if the reporter tried an Arabic language search for something like "American aggression" and most results returned (surprise!
) web sites expressing anti-American sentiment, that must mean that Microsoft is also appeasing terrorists, right?
EVIL!!!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183446</id>
	<title>Re:Google maps and satellit images do not match at</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258808400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't you get it?  Anyone who wants to visit Tiananmen Square is being sent to the Ministry of Public Security for...reeducation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you get it ?
Anyone who wants to visit Tiananmen Square is being sent to the Ministry of Public Security for...reeducation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you get it?
Anyone who wants to visit Tiananmen Square is being sent to the Ministry of Public Security for...reeducation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184182</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft has become as evil as Google?</title>
	<author>phiwum</author>
	<datestamp>1258818420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You think that the American gov't produces anti-China news stories?  And they do this because they're pissed that China sells too many products here?</p><p>Gotta say, it's a cute theory.  Thoroughly unencumbered by facts, but darling nonetheless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You think that the American gov't produces anti-China news stories ?
And they do this because they 're pissed that China sells too many products here ? Got ta say , it 's a cute theory .
Thoroughly unencumbered by facts , but darling nonetheless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You think that the American gov't produces anti-China news stories?
And they do this because they're pissed that China sells too many products here?Gotta say, it's a cute theory.
Thoroughly unencumbered by facts, but darling nonetheless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183706</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone surprised?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258813260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>a lot of other companies also censor. i'm sure you trip over your dick to kiss their ass when it suits you. you're a fucking hypocrite.</htmltext>
<tokenext>a lot of other companies also censor .
i 'm sure you trip over your dick to kiss their ass when it suits you .
you 're a fucking hypocrite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a lot of other companies also censor.
i'm sure you trip over your dick to kiss their ass when it suits you.
you're a fucking hypocrite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30185910</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>troll8901</author>
	<datestamp>1258829040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Google is smart to take whatever market they can get in China, and as they gain influence, pressure the Chinese government (the way they pressure the US and EU) to do things the google way (open).</p></div><p>Just like the iTunes store.  This is smart of Google.</p><p>The reasons why the RIAA gave in (allow non-DRM music to be sold), may not be applicable to the Chinese government, I suppose.  I'd wait and see how Google handles this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google is smart to take whatever market they can get in China , and as they gain influence , pressure the Chinese government ( the way they pressure the US and EU ) to do things the google way ( open ) .Just like the iTunes store .
This is smart of Google.The reasons why the RIAA gave in ( allow non-DRM music to be sold ) , may not be applicable to the Chinese government , I suppose .
I 'd wait and see how Google handles this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google is smart to take whatever market they can get in China, and as they gain influence, pressure the Chinese government (the way they pressure the US and EU) to do things the google way (open).Just like the iTunes store.
This is smart of Google.The reasons why the RIAA gave in (allow non-DRM music to be sold), may not be applicable to the Chinese government, I suppose.
I'd wait and see how Google handles this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30259404</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259434500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that there are more countries where mandarin is used besides China. Taiwan and Singapore are two examples. Taiwan would be a very interesting case because of its strained relationship with China. I know here in Singapore simplified Chinese is used officially. I think they use traditional in Taiwan, but I'm sure the people there would know and perhaps use simplified as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that there are more countries where mandarin is used besides China .
Taiwan and Singapore are two examples .
Taiwan would be a very interesting case because of its strained relationship with China .
I know here in Singapore simplified Chinese is used officially .
I think they use traditional in Taiwan , but I 'm sure the people there would know and perhaps use simplified as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that there are more countries where mandarin is used besides China.
Taiwan and Singapore are two examples.
Taiwan would be a very interesting case because of its strained relationship with China.
I know here in Singapore simplified Chinese is used officially.
I think they use traditional in Taiwan, but I'm sure the people there would know and perhaps use simplified as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183226</id>
	<title>c0m</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258804080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone That thinks in eternity...Romeo</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone That thinks in eternity...Romeo</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone That thinks in eternity...Romeo</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186374</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1258832100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bing, Google, and Yahoo all censor results in China.</p><p>The only difference here is that Bing doesn't differentiate between Chinese language, and Chinese location-- so if you're searching in Chinese, even if you're in the US, you still get the censored results. I don't believe this is really that big a deal, frankly... maybe in BC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bing , Google , and Yahoo all censor results in China.The only difference here is that Bing does n't differentiate between Chinese language , and Chinese location-- so if you 're searching in Chinese , even if you 're in the US , you still get the censored results .
I do n't believe this is really that big a deal , frankly... maybe in BC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bing, Google, and Yahoo all censor results in China.The only difference here is that Bing doesn't differentiate between Chinese language, and Chinese location-- so if you're searching in Chinese, even if you're in the US, you still get the censored results.
I don't believe this is really that big a deal, frankly... maybe in BC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183148</id>
	<title>The evil government route?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258802880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Are they stating on said search results that they have filtered the results due to Chinese laws?</p><p>I mean, they can be only so subtle about it before China decides to block it entirely but at least MS could dangle that bit of info there for any one curious to wonder "Hey, now what law is that and why is it enforced?"</p></div><p>It's most likely illegal to give people unbiased information or hint at the fact you are being compelled to give limited information. Living with government abuses is a condition of doing business in any country.</p><p>It's not just China that does this anyway, they just do it worse than most. Behavior of this type is common in most countries. I've seen a few blatant examples of this kind of censorship from the UK coming from both the government and private interests. It's likely that for every government abuse of this type that's noticed there are a few thousand that aren't.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are they stating on said search results that they have filtered the results due to Chinese laws ? I mean , they can be only so subtle about it before China decides to block it entirely but at least MS could dangle that bit of info there for any one curious to wonder " Hey , now what law is that and why is it enforced ?
" It 's most likely illegal to give people unbiased information or hint at the fact you are being compelled to give limited information .
Living with government abuses is a condition of doing business in any country.It 's not just China that does this anyway , they just do it worse than most .
Behavior of this type is common in most countries .
I 've seen a few blatant examples of this kind of censorship from the UK coming from both the government and private interests .
It 's likely that for every government abuse of this type that 's noticed there are a few thousand that are n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are they stating on said search results that they have filtered the results due to Chinese laws?I mean, they can be only so subtle about it before China decides to block it entirely but at least MS could dangle that bit of info there for any one curious to wonder "Hey, now what law is that and why is it enforced?
"It's most likely illegal to give people unbiased information or hint at the fact you are being compelled to give limited information.
Living with government abuses is a condition of doing business in any country.It's not just China that does this anyway, they just do it worse than most.
Behavior of this type is common in most countries.
I've seen a few blatant examples of this kind of censorship from the UK coming from both the government and private interests.
It's likely that for every government abuse of this type that's noticed there are a few thousand that aren't.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186042</id>
	<title>Re:contrast</title>
	<author>gtbritishskull</author>
	<datestamp>1258829820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I will repost from above...


<p>I don't see how allowing a COUNTRY'S GOVERNMENT to censor is evil. Whether or not the censorship is ethical is a different question. What if the china turned into a fully legitimate and people mandated democracy and still decided that they wanted the censorship? Should the google that you want still not operate in china? Because, that would be discriminating against a people and a culture, which in America we believe is wrong (or evil?).

</p><p>Google is not a political group, it is a company. And, I do not want it to be a political group. A company should not define a people's morality. That should happen from the people through the government. I think google should do everything they can to be open and free, but it is not their job to fight the chinese government.

</p><p>Also, how anti-censorship are you? Search for "child pornography" on google images and you don't see any naked 8 year olds. Search "pornography" on google images and you see plenty of naked people. Do I think this is wrong? No. Do you? If not, then your problem is not censorship, but just that YOU THINK china censors too much. Who are you (or the United States in general) to decide for another country what they should and should not censor. What would you think if google refused to do business in the United States because we do not allow gay marriage? While I am in support of gay marriage, I would be pissed off because I would not want any company dictating the US's morality. Open your eyes. Google claims to try not to be evil, not to fix all of the world's problems. Especially since meddling in other countries problems is the road to becoming "evil".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I will repost from above.. . I do n't see how allowing a COUNTRY 'S GOVERNMENT to censor is evil .
Whether or not the censorship is ethical is a different question .
What if the china turned into a fully legitimate and people mandated democracy and still decided that they wanted the censorship ?
Should the google that you want still not operate in china ?
Because , that would be discriminating against a people and a culture , which in America we believe is wrong ( or evil ? ) .
Google is not a political group , it is a company .
And , I do not want it to be a political group .
A company should not define a people 's morality .
That should happen from the people through the government .
I think google should do everything they can to be open and free , but it is not their job to fight the chinese government .
Also , how anti-censorship are you ?
Search for " child pornography " on google images and you do n't see any naked 8 year olds .
Search " pornography " on google images and you see plenty of naked people .
Do I think this is wrong ?
No. Do you ?
If not , then your problem is not censorship , but just that YOU THINK china censors too much .
Who are you ( or the United States in general ) to decide for another country what they should and should not censor .
What would you think if google refused to do business in the United States because we do not allow gay marriage ?
While I am in support of gay marriage , I would be pissed off because I would not want any company dictating the US 's morality .
Open your eyes .
Google claims to try not to be evil , not to fix all of the world 's problems .
Especially since meddling in other countries problems is the road to becoming " evil " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will repost from above...


I don't see how allowing a COUNTRY'S GOVERNMENT to censor is evil.
Whether or not the censorship is ethical is a different question.
What if the china turned into a fully legitimate and people mandated democracy and still decided that they wanted the censorship?
Should the google that you want still not operate in china?
Because, that would be discriminating against a people and a culture, which in America we believe is wrong (or evil?).
Google is not a political group, it is a company.
And, I do not want it to be a political group.
A company should not define a people's morality.
That should happen from the people through the government.
I think google should do everything they can to be open and free, but it is not their job to fight the chinese government.
Also, how anti-censorship are you?
Search for "child pornography" on google images and you don't see any naked 8 year olds.
Search "pornography" on google images and you see plenty of naked people.
Do I think this is wrong?
No. Do you?
If not, then your problem is not censorship, but just that YOU THINK china censors too much.
Who are you (or the United States in general) to decide for another country what they should and should not censor.
What would you think if google refused to do business in the United States because we do not allow gay marriage?
While I am in support of gay marriage, I would be pissed off because I would not want any company dictating the US's morality.
Open your eyes.
Google claims to try not to be evil, not to fix all of the world's problems.
Especially since meddling in other countries problems is the road to becoming "evil".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183504</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30216202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30187130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30185232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30205002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30259404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30194610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30197250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30185910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_0158213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30185232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30187130
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183242
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183498
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183148
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184178
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183546
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183650
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184164
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183474
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183400
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183216
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183598
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184842
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30194610
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30185910
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30205002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183842
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30216202
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184388
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186236
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183504
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186042
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30197250
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183814
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184894
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30259404
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183408
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184182
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30186702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184270
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_0158213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30184328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_0158213.30183300
</commentlist>
</conversation>
