<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_27_1612211</id>
	<title>Facebook Putting Batteries On-Board Its Servers</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1259344740000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>1sockchuck writes <i>"The data center of the future may have no central UPS units, and be filled with <a href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/11/27/facebook-follows-google-to-data-center-savings/">servers with on-board batteries</a>. Facebook says it will adopt a new power distribution design that shifts the UPS and battery backup functions from the data center into the cabinet by adding a 12-volt battery to each server power supply, an approach <a href="//tech.slashdot.org/story/09/04/02/157244/Google-Reveals-Secret-Server-Designs">pioneered by Google</a>. Facebook says the move will slash its power bill and save millions in capital expenses on UPS systems and PDUs. Facebook acknowledged that these types of custom designs are limited to large companies, but called on server vendors and data center builders to <a href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/11/27/should-servers-come-with-batteries/">adapt their offerings</a> to make them available to smaller companies."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>1sockchuck writes " The data center of the future may have no central UPS units , and be filled with servers with on-board batteries .
Facebook says it will adopt a new power distribution design that shifts the UPS and battery backup functions from the data center into the cabinet by adding a 12-volt battery to each server power supply , an approach pioneered by Google .
Facebook says the move will slash its power bill and save millions in capital expenses on UPS systems and PDUs .
Facebook acknowledged that these types of custom designs are limited to large companies , but called on server vendors and data center builders to adapt their offerings to make them available to smaller companies .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1sockchuck writes "The data center of the future may have no central UPS units, and be filled with servers with on-board batteries.
Facebook says it will adopt a new power distribution design that shifts the UPS and battery backup functions from the data center into the cabinet by adding a 12-volt battery to each server power supply, an approach pioneered by Google.
Facebook says the move will slash its power bill and save millions in capital expenses on UPS systems and PDUs.
Facebook acknowledged that these types of custom designs are limited to large companies, but called on server vendors and data center builders to adapt their offerings to make them available to smaller companies.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247742</id>
	<title>Makes even more sense in SOHO and Retail</title>
	<author>temojen</author>
	<datestamp>1259352240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember seeing a power supply around 2004 that had one or more backup batteries that fit in trays in 5.25" drivebays so you could hot-swap them and they were internal to the server. A SOHO or retail server (for a handful of POS' ) with this and a couple of PCI multiport ethernet cards and a PCI docsis or DSL modem would do a lot to consolidate the IT equiplent and all it's power bricks and interconnections. Sadly I've not been able to find that type of power supply since.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember seeing a power supply around 2004 that had one or more backup batteries that fit in trays in 5.25 " drivebays so you could hot-swap them and they were internal to the server .
A SOHO or retail server ( for a handful of POS ' ) with this and a couple of PCI multiport ethernet cards and a PCI docsis or DSL modem would do a lot to consolidate the IT equiplent and all it 's power bricks and interconnections .
Sadly I 've not been able to find that type of power supply since .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember seeing a power supply around 2004 that had one or more backup batteries that fit in trays in 5.25" drivebays so you could hot-swap them and they were internal to the server.
A SOHO or retail server (for a handful of POS' ) with this and a couple of PCI multiport ethernet cards and a PCI docsis or DSL modem would do a lot to consolidate the IT equiplent and all it's power bricks and interconnections.
Sadly I've not been able to find that type of power supply since.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30252418</id>
	<title>Sorry it's a little late, but it has to be asked</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259342520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where does the EPO button go?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where does the EPO button go ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where does the EPO button go?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248376</id>
	<title>Re:I'm sure this looks great on Powerpoint</title>
	<author>jefu</author>
	<datestamp>1259313240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>gmail started going down for hours (and for some users, more than a day) at a time on a regular basis.</p></div><p>
By "on a regular basis" do you mean twice (and unpredictably) in the last year or so?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>gmail started going down for hours ( and for some users , more than a day ) at a time on a regular basis .
By " on a regular basis " do you mean twice ( and unpredictably ) in the last year or so ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>gmail started going down for hours (and for some users, more than a day) at a time on a regular basis.
By "on a regular basis" do you mean twice (and unpredictably) in the last year or so?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248552</id>
	<title>Re:Oh good</title>
	<author>Minwee</author>
	<datestamp>1259314320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't worry.  You could start a group called "Bring back Facebook!" and get everybody you know to join.
</p><p>I'm sure that would help somehow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry .
You could start a group called " Bring back Facebook !
" and get everybody you know to join .
I 'm sure that would help somehow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry.
You could start a group called "Bring back Facebook!
" and get everybody you know to join.
I'm sure that would help somehow.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194</id>
	<title>Oh good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259349000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What would the world be like if facebook went offline... I'm not sure I could continue living.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What would the world be like if facebook went offline... I 'm not sure I could continue living .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would the world be like if facebook went offline... I'm not sure I could continue living.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247624</id>
	<title>Re:The best solution?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259351520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This already exists. Among the many links I got from Google when searching for info about DC server power: <a href="http://www.leonardo-energy.org/dc-power-distribution-server-farms" title="leonardo-energy.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.leonardo-energy.org/dc-power-distribution-server-farms</a> [leonardo-energy.org]</p><p>I invite you to actually Google the things you are interested in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This already exists .
Among the many links I got from Google when searching for info about DC server power : http : //www.leonardo-energy.org/dc-power-distribution-server-farms [ leonardo-energy.org ] I invite you to actually Google the things you are interested in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This already exists.
Among the many links I got from Google when searching for info about DC server power: http://www.leonardo-energy.org/dc-power-distribution-server-farms [leonardo-energy.org]I invite you to actually Google the things you are interested in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247442</id>
	<title>Facebook is converting to solid state drives.</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1259350680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Facebook is also converting over to solid state drives.  They will have relatively low power consumption per board.  Putting both flash chips and a backup battery on each board makes sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook is also converting over to solid state drives .
They will have relatively low power consumption per board .
Putting both flash chips and a backup battery on each board makes sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Facebook is also converting over to solid state drives.
They will have relatively low power consumption per board.
Putting both flash chips and a backup battery on each board makes sense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247546</id>
	<title>Re:12 Volt?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259351160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What do you think a UPS is? Most have 1-4 sealed lead acid 12V batteries in them, the 3KVA ones we have have 2 pairs of 2 batteries in series which make a fairly deep capacity 24V system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you think a UPS is ?
Most have 1-4 sealed lead acid 12V batteries in them , the 3KVA ones we have have 2 pairs of 2 batteries in series which make a fairly deep capacity 24V system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you think a UPS is?
Most have 1-4 sealed lead acid 12V batteries in them, the 3KVA ones we have have 2 pairs of 2 batteries in series which make a fairly deep capacity 24V system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247160</id>
	<title>Maybe if this was any other company I'd be excited</title>
	<author>Paktu</author>
	<datestamp>1259348760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Facebook's IT department is a joke.  Rather than this stupidity with putting batteries on the servers, how 'bout fixing Facebook chat so it actually works more than 20\% of the time?  Marketplace is useless too, it used to be good a couple years ago but then they did a crappy redesign and no one uses it now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook 's IT department is a joke .
Rather than this stupidity with putting batteries on the servers , how 'bout fixing Facebook chat so it actually works more than 20 \ % of the time ?
Marketplace is useless too , it used to be good a couple years ago but then they did a crappy redesign and no one uses it now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Facebook's IT department is a joke.
Rather than this stupidity with putting batteries on the servers, how 'bout fixing Facebook chat so it actually works more than 20\% of the time?
Marketplace is useless too, it used to be good a couple years ago but then they did a crappy redesign and no one uses it now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249078</id>
	<title>Re:I'm sure this looks great on Powerpoint</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259317080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is exactly correct.   The probability of failure (inverse reliability) will be extremely low with a design like this, because the it takes so many failures to result in an outage.   As opposed to a critical power system that uses distributed critical power from a centralized UPS system where less equipment has to fail in order to result in an outage.   The mean time to restore (MTTR) will also be huge.   The biggest problem is maintainability.   Batteries, like any other piece of equipment must be serviced on a regular basis.   I'd be willing to bet on batteries of this size, there is no maintenance and probably no monitoring.   Normally mission critical facilities have a staff of technicians/engineers that handle maintenance and monitor the system in the event of a component failure and are available to respond accordingly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly correct .
The probability of failure ( inverse reliability ) will be extremely low with a design like this , because the it takes so many failures to result in an outage .
As opposed to a critical power system that uses distributed critical power from a centralized UPS system where less equipment has to fail in order to result in an outage .
The mean time to restore ( MTTR ) will also be huge .
The biggest problem is maintainability .
Batteries , like any other piece of equipment must be serviced on a regular basis .
I 'd be willing to bet on batteries of this size , there is no maintenance and probably no monitoring .
Normally mission critical facilities have a staff of technicians/engineers that handle maintenance and monitor the system in the event of a component failure and are available to respond accordingly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is exactly correct.
The probability of failure (inverse reliability) will be extremely low with a design like this, because the it takes so many failures to result in an outage.
As opposed to a critical power system that uses distributed critical power from a centralized UPS system where less equipment has to fail in order to result in an outage.
The mean time to restore (MTTR) will also be huge.
The biggest problem is maintainability.
Batteries, like any other piece of equipment must be serviced on a regular basis.
I'd be willing to bet on batteries of this size, there is no maintenance and probably no monitoring.
Normally mission critical facilities have a staff of technicians/engineers that handle maintenance and monitor the system in the event of a component failure and are available to respond accordingly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249694</id>
	<title>Re:The best solution?</title>
	<author>inKubus</author>
	<datestamp>1259320320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you read the Google stuff, they have a number of reasons for it.  Firstly, they wanted to minimize or eliminate conversion costs (Converting AC to DC and vice versa takes energy, sometimes 10-20\% right off the top in heat.  Secondly, they didn't want to have to do standard systems planning to deploy more capacity.  With a central UPS, you have to worry about how many systems are plugged in, how many VA, etc.  You have to do these calcuations and planning all the time with new hardware configurations.  Google wants to be able to add capacity as fast as possible, so they mass produce a single  computing "unit" that only needs power and network.  All the costs are packaged into one unit.  This minimizes everything from planning meetings to deployment patterns.  If you have a given rack they run a certain amount of AC to it that will support x number of units.  That's all the deployment engineer needs to know.  The Google mainframe asks for more processors, the deployment person just loads up a rack and turns them on.  Thirdly, the batteries and compute units are both on the same replacement cycle, so they will replace the entire unit at once, recycle the batteries, etc.  Lastly, one of the largest costs in a generator set and UPS is the switching over to emergency power.  Generators have to start up and come up to phase.  This might not happen simultaneously for all the generators either.  This could cause a huge brownout which would take everything out if say only one generator came on.  Normally you would make sure everything is segmented but with the decentralized system you don't have to do that.  The battery will make up for any shortage as well as a total loss.  So your motherboard will have totally constant power no matter what.</p><p>Look for the google research on conversion losses, though.  It's published out there somewhere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read the Google stuff , they have a number of reasons for it .
Firstly , they wanted to minimize or eliminate conversion costs ( Converting AC to DC and vice versa takes energy , sometimes 10-20 \ % right off the top in heat .
Secondly , they did n't want to have to do standard systems planning to deploy more capacity .
With a central UPS , you have to worry about how many systems are plugged in , how many VA , etc .
You have to do these calcuations and planning all the time with new hardware configurations .
Google wants to be able to add capacity as fast as possible , so they mass produce a single computing " unit " that only needs power and network .
All the costs are packaged into one unit .
This minimizes everything from planning meetings to deployment patterns .
If you have a given rack they run a certain amount of AC to it that will support x number of units .
That 's all the deployment engineer needs to know .
The Google mainframe asks for more processors , the deployment person just loads up a rack and turns them on .
Thirdly , the batteries and compute units are both on the same replacement cycle , so they will replace the entire unit at once , recycle the batteries , etc .
Lastly , one of the largest costs in a generator set and UPS is the switching over to emergency power .
Generators have to start up and come up to phase .
This might not happen simultaneously for all the generators either .
This could cause a huge brownout which would take everything out if say only one generator came on .
Normally you would make sure everything is segmented but with the decentralized system you do n't have to do that .
The battery will make up for any shortage as well as a total loss .
So your motherboard will have totally constant power no matter what.Look for the google research on conversion losses , though .
It 's published out there somewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read the Google stuff, they have a number of reasons for it.
Firstly, they wanted to minimize or eliminate conversion costs (Converting AC to DC and vice versa takes energy, sometimes 10-20\% right off the top in heat.
Secondly, they didn't want to have to do standard systems planning to deploy more capacity.
With a central UPS, you have to worry about how many systems are plugged in, how many VA, etc.
You have to do these calcuations and planning all the time with new hardware configurations.
Google wants to be able to add capacity as fast as possible, so they mass produce a single  computing "unit" that only needs power and network.
All the costs are packaged into one unit.
This minimizes everything from planning meetings to deployment patterns.
If you have a given rack they run a certain amount of AC to it that will support x number of units.
That's all the deployment engineer needs to know.
The Google mainframe asks for more processors, the deployment person just loads up a rack and turns them on.
Thirdly, the batteries and compute units are both on the same replacement cycle, so they will replace the entire unit at once, recycle the batteries, etc.
Lastly, one of the largest costs in a generator set and UPS is the switching over to emergency power.
Generators have to start up and come up to phase.
This might not happen simultaneously for all the generators either.
This could cause a huge brownout which would take everything out if say only one generator came on.
Normally you would make sure everything is segmented but with the decentralized system you don't have to do that.
The battery will make up for any shortage as well as a total loss.
So your motherboard will have totally constant power no matter what.Look for the google research on conversion losses, though.
It's published out there somewhere.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247522</id>
	<title>Re:On board batteries fine, but 277 volt?</title>
	<author>ThreeGigs</author>
	<datestamp>1259350980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Three-Phase power is generally cheaper when you're talking megawatts, and can be used more efficiently.</p><p>Linkage:<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-phase\_electric\_power" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-phase\_electric\_power</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>A typical office building will use flourescent lighting based on 277 volt supply.<br>(note the above applies only to the United States)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Three-Phase power is generally cheaper when you 're talking megawatts , and can be used more efficiently.Linkage : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-phase \ _electric \ _power [ wikipedia.org ] A typical office building will use flourescent lighting based on 277 volt supply .
( note the above applies only to the United States )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Three-Phase power is generally cheaper when you're talking megawatts, and can be used more efficiently.Linkage:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-phase\_electric\_power [wikipedia.org]A typical office building will use flourescent lighting based on 277 volt supply.
(note the above applies only to the United States)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247818</id>
	<title>Re:Batteries are Possible on Servers.</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1259352780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do you assume that the in-server batteries will be completely ignored but a central UPS will be meticulously maintained?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do you assume that the in-server batteries will be completely ignored but a central UPS will be meticulously maintained ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do you assume that the in-server batteries will be completely ignored but a central UPS will be meticulously maintained?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247266</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247128</id>
	<title>Your official guide to the Jigaboo presidency</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259348520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger! If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.</p><p>INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.<br>You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model. Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e. chained together. Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever. Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them. This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud. House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape. At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name. Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data. Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger. If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima. Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke. Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes. These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.</p><p>CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGER<br>Owing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords. Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular. However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue. Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much. Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway. Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's). This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boat</p><p>HOUSING YOUR NIGGER.<br>Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars. Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through. The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage. So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers. You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground. Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage. Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now. In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape. As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put. Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.</p><p>FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.<br>Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon. You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it. Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water. Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc. Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day. Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives. He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result. You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained. You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton. You really would. Coffee beans? Don't ask. You have no idea.</p><p>MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.<br>Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind. The nigger's most</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger !
If handled properly , your apeman will give years of valuable , if reluctant , service.INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model .
Field niggers work best in a serial configuration , i.e .
chained together .
Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it , and do n't even think about taking that chain off , ever .
Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them .
This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud .
House niggers work best as standalone units , but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape .
At this stage , your nigger can also be given a name .
Most owners use the same names over and over , since niggers become confused by too much data .
Rufus , Rastus , Remus , Toby , Carslisle , Carlton , Hey-You ! -Yes-you ! , Yeller , Blackstar , and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger .
If your nigger is a ho , it should be called Latrelle , L'Tanya , or Jemima .
Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke .
Pearl , Blossom , and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes .
These names go straight over your nigger 's head , by the way.CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGEROwing to a design error , your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords .
Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - " muh dick " being the most popular .
However , others make barking , yelping , yapping noises and appear to be in some pain , so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger 's tongue .
Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least , you wo n't hear it complaining anywhere near as much .
Niggers have nothing interesting to say , anyway .
Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons ( yours , mine , and that of women , not the nigger 's ) .
This is strongly recommended , and frankly , it 's a mystery why this is not done on the boatHOUSING YOUR NIGGER.Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars .
Make sure , however , that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through .
The rule of thumb is , four niggers per square yard of cage .
So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers .
You can site a nigger cage anywhere , even on soft ground .
Do n't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage .
Niggers never invented the shovel before and they 're not about to now .
In any case , your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape .
As long as the free food holds out , your nigger is living better than it did in Africa , so it will stay put .
Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage , as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.Your Nigger likes fried chicken , corn bread , and watermelon .
You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly does n't deserve it .
Instead , feed it on porridge with salt , and creek water .
Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields , other niggers , etc .
Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat , but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day .
Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer , since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives .
He reports he does n't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result .
You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work , since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained .
You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton .
You really would .
Coffee beans ?
Do n't ask .
You have no idea.MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.Niggers are very , very averse to work of any kind .
The nigger 's most</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger!
If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model.
Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e.
chained together.
Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever.
Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them.
This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud.
House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape.
At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name.
Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data.
Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger.
If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima.
Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke.
Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes.
These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGEROwing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords.
Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular.
However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue.
Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much.
Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway.
Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's).
This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boatHOUSING YOUR NIGGER.Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars.
Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through.
The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage.
So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers.
You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground.
Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage.
Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now.
In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape.
As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put.
Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon.
You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it.
Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water.
Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc.
Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day.
Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives.
He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result.
You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained.
You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton.
You really would.
Coffee beans?
Don't ask.
You have no idea.MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind.
The nigger's most</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248048</id>
	<title>Re:This right after...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259354040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Boyfriend: Next please!</p><p>(Because there is no such thing as a &ldquo;special one&rdquo;. It&rsquo;s only in your head. And the cure is FTAG [fuck ten other girls]. ^^)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Boyfriend : Next please !
( Because there is no such thing as a    special one    .
It    s only in your head .
And the cure is FTAG [ fuck ten other girls ] .
^ ^ )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Boyfriend: Next please!
(Because there is no such thing as a “special one”.
It’s only in your head.
And the cure is FTAG [fuck ten other girls].
^^)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247326</id>
	<title>What does this say about Facebook?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259349780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That they anticipate frequent disruptions in the electrical grid?</p><p>That they regard their service as some kind of public utility?</p><p>That they think they are Google?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That they anticipate frequent disruptions in the electrical grid ? That they regard their service as some kind of public utility ? That they think they are Google ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That they anticipate frequent disruptions in the electrical grid?That they regard their service as some kind of public utility?That they think they are Google?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249126</id>
	<title>Power Spikes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259317380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Half the time I use an UPS to filter out power spikes. Not sure these onboard batteries would perform that trick as well as the big hunk located on the bottom of my racks<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Half the time I use an UPS to filter out power spikes .
Not sure these onboard batteries would perform that trick as well as the big hunk located on the bottom of my racks .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Half the time I use an UPS to filter out power spikes.
Not sure these onboard batteries would perform that trick as well as the big hunk located on the bottom of my racks ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247670</id>
	<title>Re:The best solution?</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1259351820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Or why not use DC for the entire data center and put the battery at the Data Center level?</p></div><p>12VDC, each unit needs 300W at least... That's 25 amps per unit. Think <a href="http://www.windsun.com/Hardware/Wire\_Table.htm" title="windsun.com">wire gauge</a> [windsun.com]. That's the reason, long and short. That, and you can't run 12VDC very far before power loss becomes a significant consideration.</p><p>Tesla figured this out over a hundred years ago -- AC powers and transformers = more efficient.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or why not use DC for the entire data center and put the battery at the Data Center level ? 12VDC , each unit needs 300W at least... That 's 25 amps per unit .
Think wire gauge [ windsun.com ] .
That 's the reason , long and short .
That , and you ca n't run 12VDC very far before power loss becomes a significant consideration.Tesla figured this out over a hundred years ago -- AC powers and transformers = more efficient .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or why not use DC for the entire data center and put the battery at the Data Center level?12VDC, each unit needs 300W at least... That's 25 amps per unit.
Think wire gauge [windsun.com].
That's the reason, long and short.
That, and you can't run 12VDC very far before power loss becomes a significant consideration.Tesla figured this out over a hundred years ago -- AC powers and transformers = more efficient.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247754</id>
	<title>Doing it wrong....</title>
	<author>GuyFawkes</author>
	<datestamp>1259352300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, computers operate on DC.</p><p>Yes, putting a DC battery in between the DC output of the PSU and the DC input of the mobo will have a UPS / Laptop battery effect on temporary mains voltage loss.</p><p>The problem is very few mobos only have 12VDC input. This won't take care of the vast majority of mobos that also require 5VDC</p><p>5VDC isn't practicably doable from lead-acid @ around 2 VDC per cell.</p><p>Yes, there are ways around this, but the only practical ones are external DC-DC conversion, *or* 12VDC only mobos, which use on board internal DC-DC concersion.</p><p>ALL mobos use some form of onboard DC-DC conversion, even if only for the CPU.</p><p>If you want to buy a 12VDC mobo, do a google for industrial computer mobos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , computers operate on DC.Yes , putting a DC battery in between the DC output of the PSU and the DC input of the mobo will have a UPS / Laptop battery effect on temporary mains voltage loss.The problem is very few mobos only have 12VDC input .
This wo n't take care of the vast majority of mobos that also require 5VDC5VDC is n't practicably doable from lead-acid @ around 2 VDC per cell.Yes , there are ways around this , but the only practical ones are external DC-DC conversion , * or * 12VDC only mobos , which use on board internal DC-DC concersion.ALL mobos use some form of onboard DC-DC conversion , even if only for the CPU.If you want to buy a 12VDC mobo , do a google for industrial computer mobos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, computers operate on DC.Yes, putting a DC battery in between the DC output of the PSU and the DC input of the mobo will have a UPS / Laptop battery effect on temporary mains voltage loss.The problem is very few mobos only have 12VDC input.
This won't take care of the vast majority of mobos that also require 5VDC5VDC isn't practicably doable from lead-acid @ around 2 VDC per cell.Yes, there are ways around this, but the only practical ones are external DC-DC conversion, *or* 12VDC only mobos, which use on board internal DC-DC concersion.ALL mobos use some form of onboard DC-DC conversion, even if only for the CPU.If you want to buy a 12VDC mobo, do a google for industrial computer mobos.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247208</id>
	<title>What about disposal?</title>
	<author>Turzyx</author>
	<datestamp>1259349060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a rough estimate I would say mission critical servers get changed out every 3, maybe 4 years. I would imagine any cells would need to be at least laptop battery sized to run the server for an appreciable period of time, so what is going to happen when a server gets replaced? Keep the battery? I don't think so.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a rough estimate I would say mission critical servers get changed out every 3 , maybe 4 years .
I would imagine any cells would need to be at least laptop battery sized to run the server for an appreciable period of time , so what is going to happen when a server gets replaced ?
Keep the battery ?
I do n't think so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a rough estimate I would say mission critical servers get changed out every 3, maybe 4 years.
I would imagine any cells would need to be at least laptop battery sized to run the server for an appreciable period of time, so what is going to happen when a server gets replaced?
Keep the battery?
I don't think so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247316</id>
	<title>New wheels, same cycle....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259349720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Distributed!<br>Centralized!<br>Distributed!<br>Centralized!<br>Distr...</p><p>ad infinitum</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Distributed ! Centralized ! Distributed ! Centralized ! Distr...ad infinitum</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Distributed!Centralized!Distributed!Centralized!Distr...ad infinitum</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248550</id>
	<title>patent pending</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1259314320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Facebook says it will adopt a new power distribution design that shifts the UPS and battery backup functions from the data center into the cabinet by adding a 12-volt battery to each server power supply, an approach pioneered by Google.</p></div></blockquote><p>I hope facebook's lawyers know that Google has a <a href="http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&amp;Sect2=HITOFF&amp;d=PG01&amp;p=1&amp;u=\%2Fnetahtml\%2FPTO\%2Fsrchnum.html&amp;r=1&amp;f=G&amp;l=50&amp;s1=\%2220080030078\%22.PGNR.&amp;OS=DN/20080030078&amp;RS=DN/20080030078" title="uspto.gov">patent application</a> [uspto.gov] for this very idea. TFA didn't mention whether or not they are actually licensing these and other Google-patented techniques.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook says it will adopt a new power distribution design that shifts the UPS and battery backup functions from the data center into the cabinet by adding a 12-volt battery to each server power supply , an approach pioneered by Google.I hope facebook 's lawyers know that Google has a patent application [ uspto.gov ] for this very idea .
TFA did n't mention whether or not they are actually licensing these and other Google-patented techniques .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Facebook says it will adopt a new power distribution design that shifts the UPS and battery backup functions from the data center into the cabinet by adding a 12-volt battery to each server power supply, an approach pioneered by Google.I hope facebook's lawyers know that Google has a patent application [uspto.gov] for this very idea.
TFA didn't mention whether or not they are actually licensing these and other Google-patented techniques.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30250528</id>
	<title>Re:On board batteries fine, but 277 volt?</title>
	<author>robertorton</author>
	<datestamp>1259324820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>lower Volts = higher Amps = more copper @ same watts</htmltext>
<tokenext>lower Volts = higher Amps = more copper @ same watts</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lower Volts = higher Amps = more copper @ same watts</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248072</id>
	<title>Re:New wheels, same cycle....</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259354220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BOTH!<br>And other options. With gray areas in-between<br>And other dimensions. With different amounts of orthogonality!<br>And with scales relative to the observer!<br>And not a point, but a volume inside them.</p><p>HA! Stupid box can&rsquo;t keep me from thinking freely!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BOTH ! And other options .
With gray areas in-betweenAnd other dimensions .
With different amounts of orthogonality ! And with scales relative to the observer ! And not a point , but a volume inside them.HA !
Stupid box can    t keep me from thinking freely !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BOTH!And other options.
With gray areas in-betweenAnd other dimensions.
With different amounts of orthogonality!And with scales relative to the observer!And not a point, but a volume inside them.HA!
Stupid box can’t keep me from thinking freely!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247464</id>
	<title>units</title>
	<author>SuperBanana</author>
	<datestamp>1259350740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>How long is twelve volts going to keep a server running? A UPS would guarantee that you have enough time to finish transfers and close connections before shutting down into a safe mode, even give clients a warning before shutting down.</i>

</p><p>Volts are a measure of electrical potential, not capacity.  You mean watt-hours, most likely.

</p><p> <i>How long is twelve volts going to keep a server running? A UPS would guarantee that you have enough time to finish transfers and close connections before shutting down into a safe mode, even give clients a warning before shutting down.</i>

</p><p>That depends on how big the UPS is.  Many large-scale datacenter UPS's are only designed to ride out the time between when the power goes out and the generator is warmed up enough to take the load (tolerances are not 'right' when the engine is cold, so damage is caused, or the engine won't provide rated output.)

</p><p>The argument is that in a "cloud", none of this matters- you only need to ride out a temporary power outage, or allow the machine to shut down properly so it doesn't have to be repaired software-wise.  However, for the rest of us who don't live in poofy clouds and have non-cloud things like mail servers, yeah, you're right- the capacity in a server is pretty low.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How long is twelve volts going to keep a server running ?
A UPS would guarantee that you have enough time to finish transfers and close connections before shutting down into a safe mode , even give clients a warning before shutting down .
Volts are a measure of electrical potential , not capacity .
You mean watt-hours , most likely .
How long is twelve volts going to keep a server running ?
A UPS would guarantee that you have enough time to finish transfers and close connections before shutting down into a safe mode , even give clients a warning before shutting down .
That depends on how big the UPS is .
Many large-scale datacenter UPS 's are only designed to ride out the time between when the power goes out and the generator is warmed up enough to take the load ( tolerances are not 'right ' when the engine is cold , so damage is caused , or the engine wo n't provide rated output .
) The argument is that in a " cloud " , none of this matters- you only need to ride out a temporary power outage , or allow the machine to shut down properly so it does n't have to be repaired software-wise .
However , for the rest of us who do n't live in poofy clouds and have non-cloud things like mail servers , yeah , you 're right- the capacity in a server is pretty low .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> How long is twelve volts going to keep a server running?
A UPS would guarantee that you have enough time to finish transfers and close connections before shutting down into a safe mode, even give clients a warning before shutting down.
Volts are a measure of electrical potential, not capacity.
You mean watt-hours, most likely.
How long is twelve volts going to keep a server running?
A UPS would guarantee that you have enough time to finish transfers and close connections before shutting down into a safe mode, even give clients a warning before shutting down.
That depends on how big the UPS is.
Many large-scale datacenter UPS's are only designed to ride out the time between when the power goes out and the generator is warmed up enough to take the load (tolerances are not 'right' when the engine is cold, so damage is caused, or the engine won't provide rated output.
)

The argument is that in a "cloud", none of this matters- you only need to ride out a temporary power outage, or allow the machine to shut down properly so it doesn't have to be repaired software-wise.
However, for the rest of us who don't live in poofy clouds and have non-cloud things like mail servers, yeah, you're right- the capacity in a server is pretty low.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248554</id>
	<title>How many batteries ??</title>
	<author>Archfeld</author>
	<datestamp>1259314320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many betteries will they need and what is the ecological impact or recycle strategy and life span of said batteries ?? It seems that this might save in the short term but be a real mess in the long term.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many betteries will they need and what is the ecological impact or recycle strategy and life span of said batteries ? ?
It seems that this might save in the short term but be a real mess in the long term .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many betteries will they need and what is the ecological impact or recycle strategy and life span of said batteries ??
It seems that this might save in the short term but be a real mess in the long term.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248368</id>
	<title>Re:Oh good</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259313180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It&rsquo;s OK. You will become &ldquo;an hero&rdquo; then.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br>Facebook users will finally love you then!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It    s OK. You will become    an hero    then .
: ) Facebook users will finally love you then !
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It’s OK. You will become “an hero” then.
:)Facebook users will finally love you then!
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247520</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>nightfire-unique</author>
	<datestamp>1259350980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is idiotic.  Why not just run the equipment on 48VDC (telco style) with extremely high efficiency DC SMPSes and heavy gauge wiring?  Power that directly with a large bank of batteries.. no inverter.. no distributed battery mess (pressure discs do burst).. no capacity limits.. no server weight issues..</p><p>Not to mention, under this scheme you can no longer fully de-energize the datacenter (or parts of it).  An EPO switch could cut the mains, but I certainly wouldn't want thousands of fully-charged batteries helping to fuel a fire.</p><p>And how do you measure the health of thousands of batteries?  Automated transfer discharge tests?  Sounds like a recipe for frequent node failures.  A centralized power system can perform offline load tests, split-bank tests, etc. so you <b>know</b> how your batteries will perform when you need them.</p><p>And finally, when LIPO starts to become economical, a centralized battery system is a quick, easy, online replacement.  Not necessarily so in this scheme (charge/discharge controllers are different).

</p><p>I suppose there must be some advantage to this, but I can't see it.  It feels like some non-technical VP went to a distributed computing conference and levied an ill researched directive on the company.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is idiotic .
Why not just run the equipment on 48VDC ( telco style ) with extremely high efficiency DC SMPSes and heavy gauge wiring ?
Power that directly with a large bank of batteries.. no inverter.. no distributed battery mess ( pressure discs do burst ) .. no capacity limits.. no server weight issues..Not to mention , under this scheme you can no longer fully de-energize the datacenter ( or parts of it ) .
An EPO switch could cut the mains , but I certainly would n't want thousands of fully-charged batteries helping to fuel a fire.And how do you measure the health of thousands of batteries ?
Automated transfer discharge tests ?
Sounds like a recipe for frequent node failures .
A centralized power system can perform offline load tests , split-bank tests , etc .
so you know how your batteries will perform when you need them.And finally , when LIPO starts to become economical , a centralized battery system is a quick , easy , online replacement .
Not necessarily so in this scheme ( charge/discharge controllers are different ) .
I suppose there must be some advantage to this , but I ca n't see it .
It feels like some non-technical VP went to a distributed computing conference and levied an ill researched directive on the company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is idiotic.
Why not just run the equipment on 48VDC (telco style) with extremely high efficiency DC SMPSes and heavy gauge wiring?
Power that directly with a large bank of batteries.. no inverter.. no distributed battery mess (pressure discs do burst).. no capacity limits.. no server weight issues..Not to mention, under this scheme you can no longer fully de-energize the datacenter (or parts of it).
An EPO switch could cut the mains, but I certainly wouldn't want thousands of fully-charged batteries helping to fuel a fire.And how do you measure the health of thousands of batteries?
Automated transfer discharge tests?
Sounds like a recipe for frequent node failures.
A centralized power system can perform offline load tests, split-bank tests, etc.
so you know how your batteries will perform when you need them.And finally, when LIPO starts to become economical, a centralized battery system is a quick, easy, online replacement.
Not necessarily so in this scheme (charge/discharge controllers are different).
I suppose there must be some advantage to this, but I can't see it.
It feels like some non-technical VP went to a distributed computing conference and levied an ill researched directive on the company.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247260</id>
	<title>"mesh" thinking</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259349360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with mesh computing is that it <i>doesn't</i> save in energy costs. With a centralized UPS and power supply, improving efficiency requires that you upgrade one unit. This way, you have to upgrade a few hundred units. It's similar to why moving to electric cars is advocated despite their limited range and low performance: Because it's easier to upgrade a dozen power plants than a few hundred thousand cars, to take advantage of the latest technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with mesh computing is that it does n't save in energy costs .
With a centralized UPS and power supply , improving efficiency requires that you upgrade one unit .
This way , you have to upgrade a few hundred units .
It 's similar to why moving to electric cars is advocated despite their limited range and low performance : Because it 's easier to upgrade a dozen power plants than a few hundred thousand cars , to take advantage of the latest technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with mesh computing is that it doesn't save in energy costs.
With a centralized UPS and power supply, improving efficiency requires that you upgrade one unit.
This way, you have to upgrade a few hundred units.
It's similar to why moving to electric cars is advocated despite their limited range and low performance: Because it's easier to upgrade a dozen power plants than a few hundred thousand cars, to take advantage of the latest technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247214</id>
	<title>Re:12 Volt?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259349060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what do you suppose powers a UPS?  Hint: a battery.</p><p>A 12v battery could provide plenty of power to safely shut down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what do you suppose powers a UPS ?
Hint : a battery.A 12v battery could provide plenty of power to safely shut down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what do you suppose powers a UPS?
Hint: a battery.A 12v battery could provide plenty of power to safely shut down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248080</id>
	<title>Re:This right after...</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1259354280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thing is, boyfriend is jealous 'cos he doesn't have 5000 nubile teen girls as friends, whereas Girlfriend is just happy to get mindless attention from them, she's never going to meet any of those losers.</p><p>The trick is just to relax about it all, if your gf flirts she could be unhappy with you and looking for an alternative (but she can do this silently too, and you should be able to tell anyway). If she does that and you let her, not only is she happy, calm and confident, but also she'll think you're great and understanding (ha! just don't tell her otherwise). If you can park your jealous, possessive ego, you should be able to build a strong relationship instead of fighting over nothing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thing is , boyfriend is jealous 'cos he does n't have 5000 nubile teen girls as friends , whereas Girlfriend is just happy to get mindless attention from them , she 's never going to meet any of those losers.The trick is just to relax about it all , if your gf flirts she could be unhappy with you and looking for an alternative ( but she can do this silently too , and you should be able to tell anyway ) .
If she does that and you let her , not only is she happy , calm and confident , but also she 'll think you 're great and understanding ( ha !
just do n't tell her otherwise ) .
If you can park your jealous , possessive ego , you should be able to build a strong relationship instead of fighting over nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thing is, boyfriend is jealous 'cos he doesn't have 5000 nubile teen girls as friends, whereas Girlfriend is just happy to get mindless attention from them, she's never going to meet any of those losers.The trick is just to relax about it all, if your gf flirts she could be unhappy with you and looking for an alternative (but she can do this silently too, and you should be able to tell anyway).
If she does that and you let her, not only is she happy, calm and confident, but also she'll think you're great and understanding (ha!
just don't tell her otherwise).
If you can park your jealous, possessive ego, you should be able to build a strong relationship instead of fighting over nothing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178</id>
	<title>This right after...</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1259348820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This right after they announced they were going public. This will definitely boost their stock price.<br>I think facebook has some good merit, however I am an avid anti facebook poster boy when it comes to destroying<br>relationships. If you thought it was easy before to hook up online and cheat on your spouse, well imagine now!!!</p><p>Girlfriend: "Hey, i got over 5000 friends online, isn't it wonderful???"<br>Boyfriend: "ummm...why are they all pictures of young good looking dudes wearing no shirts....?"<br>Girlfriend: "well that's because you can put anything on there..."<br>Boyfriend: "how long have you know these so called friends?"<br>Girlfriend: "Well not long, most are people that invited me to be their friend"<br>Boyfriend: "Why is this guy keep writing on your wall how hot you are....I am not sure i really like this..."<br>Girlfriend: "You always make such a big deal about nothing..."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This right after they announced they were going public .
This will definitely boost their stock price.I think facebook has some good merit , however I am an avid anti facebook poster boy when it comes to destroyingrelationships .
If you thought it was easy before to hook up online and cheat on your spouse , well imagine now ! !
! Girlfriend : " Hey , i got over 5000 friends online , is n't it wonderful ? ? ?
" Boyfriend : " ummm...why are they all pictures of young good looking dudes wearing no shirts.... ?
" Girlfriend : " well that 's because you can put anything on there... " Boyfriend : " how long have you know these so called friends ?
" Girlfriend : " Well not long , most are people that invited me to be their friend " Boyfriend : " Why is this guy keep writing on your wall how hot you are....I am not sure i really like this... " Girlfriend : " You always make such a big deal about nothing... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This right after they announced they were going public.
This will definitely boost their stock price.I think facebook has some good merit, however I am an avid anti facebook poster boy when it comes to destroyingrelationships.
If you thought it was easy before to hook up online and cheat on your spouse, well imagine now!!
!Girlfriend: "Hey, i got over 5000 friends online, isn't it wonderful???
"Boyfriend: "ummm...why are they all pictures of young good looking dudes wearing no shirts....?
"Girlfriend: "well that's because you can put anything on there..."Boyfriend: "how long have you know these so called friends?
"Girlfriend: "Well not long, most are people that invited me to be their friend"Boyfriend: "Why is this guy keep writing on your wall how hot you are....I am not sure i really like this..."Girlfriend: "You always make such a big deal about nothing..."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248386</id>
	<title>Re:maintenance nightmare - NOT!</title>
	<author>jackb\_guppy</author>
	<datestamp>1259313360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This has been common place on IBM equipment for years.</p><p>That last machine had batteries on each of i/o controllers (RAID) with dual memory cards so that card system can take a "hit" and even half the i/o controller could go, and you can still change the I/O controller and KEEP the data in transaction.</p><p>The cabinet itself had dual power supplies with batteries, each board used dual power from dual supplies.  The cabinet took two 30A 480V 3-phase feeds, and supplied 400V DC to the boards, which then dropped the power down need rates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This has been common place on IBM equipment for years.That last machine had batteries on each of i/o controllers ( RAID ) with dual memory cards so that card system can take a " hit " and even half the i/o controller could go , and you can still change the I/O controller and KEEP the data in transaction.The cabinet itself had dual power supplies with batteries , each board used dual power from dual supplies .
The cabinet took two 30A 480V 3-phase feeds , and supplied 400V DC to the boards , which then dropped the power down need rates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has been common place on IBM equipment for years.That last machine had batteries on each of i/o controllers (RAID) with dual memory cards so that card system can take a "hit" and even half the i/o controller could go, and you can still change the I/O controller and KEEP the data in transaction.The cabinet itself had dual power supplies with batteries, each board used dual power from dual supplies.
The cabinet took two 30A 480V 3-phase feeds, and supplied 400V DC to the boards, which then dropped the power down need rates.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30252470</id>
	<title>Re:I'm sure this looks great on Powerpoint</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259343180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...This is just another hot/stupid trend; just because Google is doing it, doesn't make it brilliant...</p></div><p>Maybe this IS brilliant. In the same way that Reagan's Star Wars was brilliant.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...This is just another hot/stupid trend ; just because Google is doing it , does n't make it brilliant...Maybe this IS brilliant .
In the same way that Reagan 's Star Wars was brilliant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...This is just another hot/stupid trend; just because Google is doing it, doesn't make it brilliant...Maybe this IS brilliant.
In the same way that Reagan's Star Wars was brilliant.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30251762</id>
	<title>Quite common in China to be honest</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259334060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually this is quite common in China as they have a shitty electrical grid which frequently have brown outs and government mandated power cuts. Each desktop PC has a lead acid battery inside. Just gives you enough juice to save your stuff and power down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually this is quite common in China as they have a shitty electrical grid which frequently have brown outs and government mandated power cuts .
Each desktop PC has a lead acid battery inside .
Just gives you enough juice to save your stuff and power down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually this is quite common in China as they have a shitty electrical grid which frequently have brown outs and government mandated power cuts.
Each desktop PC has a lead acid battery inside.
Just gives you enough juice to save your stuff and power down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248288</id>
	<title>Re:"mesh" thinking</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259312700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Because it's easier to upgrade a dozen power plants than a few hundred thousand cars, to take advantage of the latest technology.</p></div></blockquote><p>Wouldn't the relatively high-use and light-weight cars have shorter life cycles, and thus be the better half of the system to have your upgrades? Power plants don't have the same sort of power-weight restrictions, and are seldom replaced for fashion reasons. Also the market size for cars is larger, and the capital cost smaller, meaning you have more manufacturers competing and developing new tech.</p><p>(I am<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/so/ resisting using a personal computer analogy for a car example here.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because it 's easier to upgrade a dozen power plants than a few hundred thousand cars , to take advantage of the latest technology.Would n't the relatively high-use and light-weight cars have shorter life cycles , and thus be the better half of the system to have your upgrades ?
Power plants do n't have the same sort of power-weight restrictions , and are seldom replaced for fashion reasons .
Also the market size for cars is larger , and the capital cost smaller , meaning you have more manufacturers competing and developing new tech .
( I am /so/ resisting using a personal computer analogy for a car example here .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because it's easier to upgrade a dozen power plants than a few hundred thousand cars, to take advantage of the latest technology.Wouldn't the relatively high-use and light-weight cars have shorter life cycles, and thus be the better half of the system to have your upgrades?
Power plants don't have the same sort of power-weight restrictions, and are seldom replaced for fashion reasons.
Also the market size for cars is larger, and the capital cost smaller, meaning you have more manufacturers competing and developing new tech.
(I am /so/ resisting using a personal computer analogy for a car example here.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247994</id>
	<title>Wait until they find out...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259353740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...that the central switch that goes out of the net, and some other small devices, have no internal UPS... ^^</p><p>No use having all the servers still running, if the &ldquo;glue&rdquo; between them dies anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...that the central switch that goes out of the net , and some other small devices , have no internal UPS... ^ ^ No use having all the servers still running , if the    glue    between them dies anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...that the central switch that goes out of the net, and some other small devices, have no internal UPS... ^^No use having all the servers still running, if the “glue” between them dies anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247542</id>
	<title>This may be a better solution than a regular UPS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259351100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to work at a company that decided to install large, monolithic UPS systems after the power company hit them with a spike that took the entire system down for over a half hour. As they're a broadcasting company, they (rightly) felt that feeding their network affiliates nothing was not a good idea.</p><p>As a result, they have these UPS "rooms" that hum like the dickens when you're passing them in the hall, all with batteries that will need to be replaced regularly (just like the Google server battery systems, so it's the same problem no matter what). Reason for the hum?</p><p>The hum is caused by these giant transformers that step the power from DC to AC and create 110 volts of AC current at whatever amperage is required for normal devices. But there is a lot of wasted energy in doing that.</p><p>Computers and servers all run off of DC power. They plug into AC power and then run that AC through a "power supply" that converts that to DC that the computer can use. That takes power, but power is plentiful when it comes from the power company and you pay your bill on time. But when you take the power from the power company, then change it to DC to charge batteries and then take power from those batteries to change it to AC to power normal wall outlets only to take that through a server's power supply to change it to DC again for the computer to use it, you're looking at lots of wasted energy in just changing from AC to DC, back and then back again, as well as changing to the kind of voltage and amperage needed to run the microprocessor, power the memory and power the drive arrays.</p><p>So this is all about lowering consumption. And if you lower consumption, you lower your electricity costs.</p><p>The hobbyist magazines were all aflutter some years ago about using photovoltaic (solar) energy to power a house. But what everyone had to do (early on) was to change their appliances (or order special ones) to run on DC -- not because you couldn't make AC current from the DC output of the photovoltaic systems but because it took a lot of energy to do that and these hobbyists were all about trying to save so much energy that they could take themselves off the grid.</p><p>Here, on a large scale, you see the same idea. It's just more efficient to do this. And one of the big arguments in the early years of electrification was between DC power distribution (Thomas Edison) and AC power distribution (George Westinghouse and Nikola Tesla). We may wind up fighting these battles again in the near future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to work at a company that decided to install large , monolithic UPS systems after the power company hit them with a spike that took the entire system down for over a half hour .
As they 're a broadcasting company , they ( rightly ) felt that feeding their network affiliates nothing was not a good idea.As a result , they have these UPS " rooms " that hum like the dickens when you 're passing them in the hall , all with batteries that will need to be replaced regularly ( just like the Google server battery systems , so it 's the same problem no matter what ) .
Reason for the hum ? The hum is caused by these giant transformers that step the power from DC to AC and create 110 volts of AC current at whatever amperage is required for normal devices .
But there is a lot of wasted energy in doing that.Computers and servers all run off of DC power .
They plug into AC power and then run that AC through a " power supply " that converts that to DC that the computer can use .
That takes power , but power is plentiful when it comes from the power company and you pay your bill on time .
But when you take the power from the power company , then change it to DC to charge batteries and then take power from those batteries to change it to AC to power normal wall outlets only to take that through a server 's power supply to change it to DC again for the computer to use it , you 're looking at lots of wasted energy in just changing from AC to DC , back and then back again , as well as changing to the kind of voltage and amperage needed to run the microprocessor , power the memory and power the drive arrays.So this is all about lowering consumption .
And if you lower consumption , you lower your electricity costs.The hobbyist magazines were all aflutter some years ago about using photovoltaic ( solar ) energy to power a house .
But what everyone had to do ( early on ) was to change their appliances ( or order special ones ) to run on DC -- not because you could n't make AC current from the DC output of the photovoltaic systems but because it took a lot of energy to do that and these hobbyists were all about trying to save so much energy that they could take themselves off the grid.Here , on a large scale , you see the same idea .
It 's just more efficient to do this .
And one of the big arguments in the early years of electrification was between DC power distribution ( Thomas Edison ) and AC power distribution ( George Westinghouse and Nikola Tesla ) .
We may wind up fighting these battles again in the near future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to work at a company that decided to install large, monolithic UPS systems after the power company hit them with a spike that took the entire system down for over a half hour.
As they're a broadcasting company, they (rightly) felt that feeding their network affiliates nothing was not a good idea.As a result, they have these UPS "rooms" that hum like the dickens when you're passing them in the hall, all with batteries that will need to be replaced regularly (just like the Google server battery systems, so it's the same problem no matter what).
Reason for the hum?The hum is caused by these giant transformers that step the power from DC to AC and create 110 volts of AC current at whatever amperage is required for normal devices.
But there is a lot of wasted energy in doing that.Computers and servers all run off of DC power.
They plug into AC power and then run that AC through a "power supply" that converts that to DC that the computer can use.
That takes power, but power is plentiful when it comes from the power company and you pay your bill on time.
But when you take the power from the power company, then change it to DC to charge batteries and then take power from those batteries to change it to AC to power normal wall outlets only to take that through a server's power supply to change it to DC again for the computer to use it, you're looking at lots of wasted energy in just changing from AC to DC, back and then back again, as well as changing to the kind of voltage and amperage needed to run the microprocessor, power the memory and power the drive arrays.So this is all about lowering consumption.
And if you lower consumption, you lower your electricity costs.The hobbyist magazines were all aflutter some years ago about using photovoltaic (solar) energy to power a house.
But what everyone had to do (early on) was to change their appliances (or order special ones) to run on DC -- not because you couldn't make AC current from the DC output of the photovoltaic systems but because it took a lot of energy to do that and these hobbyists were all about trying to save so much energy that they could take themselves off the grid.Here, on a large scale, you see the same idea.
It's just more efficient to do this.
And one of the big arguments in the early years of electrification was between DC power distribution (Thomas Edison) and AC power distribution (George Westinghouse and Nikola Tesla).
We may wind up fighting these battles again in the near future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247364</id>
	<title>On the surface...</title>
	<author>garg0yle</author>
	<datestamp>1259350140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...this makes sense.  If you distribute the UPS responsibility across all the servers, then a single failure will only take down one server, rather than a whole block.</p><p>On the other hand, they're probably going to need to hire a full-time person eventually just to go around and change all the batteries.  They do go bad eventually and need to be changed.</p><p>(As for the people wondering why 12 volts - your computer at home may be plugged into a 110 or 220V household circuit, but the CPU, and everything else on the MoBo, doesn't use anywhere near as much.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...this makes sense .
If you distribute the UPS responsibility across all the servers , then a single failure will only take down one server , rather than a whole block.On the other hand , they 're probably going to need to hire a full-time person eventually just to go around and change all the batteries .
They do go bad eventually and need to be changed .
( As for the people wondering why 12 volts - your computer at home may be plugged into a 110 or 220V household circuit , but the CPU , and everything else on the MoBo , does n't use anywhere near as much .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...this makes sense.
If you distribute the UPS responsibility across all the servers, then a single failure will only take down one server, rather than a whole block.On the other hand, they're probably going to need to hire a full-time person eventually just to go around and change all the batteries.
They do go bad eventually and need to be changed.
(As for the people wondering why 12 volts - your computer at home may be plugged into a 110 or 220V household circuit, but the CPU, and everything else on the MoBo, doesn't use anywhere near as much.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30253552</id>
	<title>Re:"mesh" thinking</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259407980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You analogy proven wrong:
<a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/11/27/1330213/NRC-Relicensing-Old-Zombie-Nuclear-Plants?art\_pos=20" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/11/27/1330213/NRC-Relicensing-Old-Zombie-Nuclear-Plants?art\_pos=20</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>You analogy proven wrong : http : //news.slashdot.org/story/09/11/27/1330213/NRC-Relicensing-Old-Zombie-Nuclear-Plants ? art \ _pos = 20 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You analogy proven wrong:
http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/11/27/1330213/NRC-Relicensing-Old-Zombie-Nuclear-Plants?art\_pos=20 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249014</id>
	<title>Re:New wheels, same cycle....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259316840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Distributed!<br>Centralized!<br>Distributed!<br>Centralized!<br>Distr...</p><p>ad infinitum</p></div><p>Duck season!<br>Wabbit season!<br>Duck season!<br>Wabbit....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Distributed ! Centralized ! Distributed ! Centralized ! Distr...ad infinitumDuck season ! Wabbit season ! Duck season ! Wabbit... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Distributed!Centralized!Distributed!Centralized!Distr...ad infinitumDuck season!Wabbit season!Duck season!Wabbit....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247760</id>
	<title>Re:This right after...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259352360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Girlfriend: "You always make such a big deal about nothing..."</p></div><p>Yeah, why? I wonder too...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Girlfriend : " You always make such a big deal about nothing... " Yeah , why ?
I wonder too.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Girlfriend: "You always make such a big deal about nothing..."Yeah, why?
I wonder too...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247504</id>
	<title>Re:The best solution?</title>
	<author>tecmec</author>
	<datestamp>1259350920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>One power supply for the whole rack may very well work, but not for the whole datacenter. If you start trying to send that much power to all those servers at 12V DC, you're going to be pushing a LOT of amps and require very thick wires to avoid transmission losses. And if you're not useing low voltage DC, you're going to need some sort of PSU at the server level anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One power supply for the whole rack may very well work , but not for the whole datacenter .
If you start trying to send that much power to all those servers at 12V DC , you 're going to be pushing a LOT of amps and require very thick wires to avoid transmission losses .
And if you 're not useing low voltage DC , you 're going to need some sort of PSU at the server level anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One power supply for the whole rack may very well work, but not for the whole datacenter.
If you start trying to send that much power to all those servers at 12V DC, you're going to be pushing a LOT of amps and require very thick wires to avoid transmission losses.
And if you're not useing low voltage DC, you're going to need some sort of PSU at the server level anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248478</id>
	<title>Re:This right after...</title>
	<author>Monolith1</author>
	<datestamp>1259314020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Girlfriend: "Hey, i got over 5000 friends online</p></div><p>I wish I had a girlfriend that hot!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Girlfriend : " Hey , i got over 5000 friends onlineI wish I had a girlfriend that hot !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Girlfriend: "Hey, i got over 5000 friends onlineI wish I had a girlfriend that hot!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247700</id>
	<title>Why is this limited to big institutions?</title>
	<author>jandrese</author>
	<datestamp>1259352060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I for one would be very interested in a standard for consumer UPSes that has them output 12v DC, and an ATX (or BTX) motherboard extension that allows it to take 12v DC in for its power needs.  Failing that, a DC-DC power supply could be used.
<br> <br>
The point being that it's dumb that a UPS has to invert the power coming out of it just so the power supply can rectify it back to DC.  I'd much prefer saving the step and running DC straight from the UPS to the motherboard.
<br> <br>
Come to think of it, the standard isn't necessary, a UPS manufacturer could do this today, although they would have to bundle the dummy power supply with the UPS.  The cost could even be kept somewhat reasonable if you factor in the savings from not having to buy a power supply.  The only major sticking point is that most UPS vendors put out a lot of distressingly bad products and the consumer trust issue will be a problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one would be very interested in a standard for consumer UPSes that has them output 12v DC , and an ATX ( or BTX ) motherboard extension that allows it to take 12v DC in for its power needs .
Failing that , a DC-DC power supply could be used .
The point being that it 's dumb that a UPS has to invert the power coming out of it just so the power supply can rectify it back to DC .
I 'd much prefer saving the step and running DC straight from the UPS to the motherboard .
Come to think of it , the standard is n't necessary , a UPS manufacturer could do this today , although they would have to bundle the dummy power supply with the UPS .
The cost could even be kept somewhat reasonable if you factor in the savings from not having to buy a power supply .
The only major sticking point is that most UPS vendors put out a lot of distressingly bad products and the consumer trust issue will be a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one would be very interested in a standard for consumer UPSes that has them output 12v DC, and an ATX (or BTX) motherboard extension that allows it to take 12v DC in for its power needs.
Failing that, a DC-DC power supply could be used.
The point being that it's dumb that a UPS has to invert the power coming out of it just so the power supply can rectify it back to DC.
I'd much prefer saving the step and running DC straight from the UPS to the motherboard.
Come to think of it, the standard isn't necessary, a UPS manufacturer could do this today, although they would have to bundle the dummy power supply with the UPS.
The cost could even be kept somewhat reasonable if you factor in the savings from not having to buy a power supply.
The only major sticking point is that most UPS vendors put out a lot of distressingly bad products and the consumer trust issue will be a problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30250432</id>
	<title>Re:On board batteries fine, but 277 volt?</title>
	<author>jbengt</author>
	<datestamp>1259324220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The major disadvantage of using 480 (V) to power a server, is you can't use a UPS. UPS on 480 (V) systems are rare and expensive, hence the reason why Facebook wants the batteries inside the server.</p></div><p>Rare and expensive for small systems maybe, but 480V UPSs are fairly common on the construction projects I've worked on, at least for larger systems.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>i'm pretty certain you really don't want to run servers from the 277 (V) line to neutral voltage of a 480 (V), 4 wire system (3 lives, one neutral). On a 4 wire system, you have 4 wires and you can lose any one of them. If you lose the neutral, your servers could be running of 480 (V) instead of 277 (V). They will be destroyed.</p></div><p>Maybe I'm not that certain (being a mechanical engineer and not an electrical engineer), but if you lose the neutral on a circuit, you'll open the circuit and won't destroy anything.  Anyway, 277V is pretty common for single phase loads like lighting in buildings where 480V 3Ph is available, why not for data centers?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The major disadvantage of using 480 ( V ) to power a server , is you ca n't use a UPS .
UPS on 480 ( V ) systems are rare and expensive , hence the reason why Facebook wants the batteries inside the server.Rare and expensive for small systems maybe , but 480V UPSs are fairly common on the construction projects I 've worked on , at least for larger systems.i 'm pretty certain you really do n't want to run servers from the 277 ( V ) line to neutral voltage of a 480 ( V ) , 4 wire system ( 3 lives , one neutral ) .
On a 4 wire system , you have 4 wires and you can lose any one of them .
If you lose the neutral , your servers could be running of 480 ( V ) instead of 277 ( V ) .
They will be destroyed.Maybe I 'm not that certain ( being a mechanical engineer and not an electrical engineer ) , but if you lose the neutral on a circuit , you 'll open the circuit and wo n't destroy anything .
Anyway , 277V is pretty common for single phase loads like lighting in buildings where 480V 3Ph is available , why not for data centers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The major disadvantage of using 480 (V) to power a server, is you can't use a UPS.
UPS on 480 (V) systems are rare and expensive, hence the reason why Facebook wants the batteries inside the server.Rare and expensive for small systems maybe, but 480V UPSs are fairly common on the construction projects I've worked on, at least for larger systems.i'm pretty certain you really don't want to run servers from the 277 (V) line to neutral voltage of a 480 (V), 4 wire system (3 lives, one neutral).
On a 4 wire system, you have 4 wires and you can lose any one of them.
If you lose the neutral, your servers could be running of 480 (V) instead of 277 (V).
They will be destroyed.Maybe I'm not that certain (being a mechanical engineer and not an electrical engineer), but if you lose the neutral on a circuit, you'll open the circuit and won't destroy anything.
Anyway, 277V is pretty common for single phase loads like lighting in buildings where 480V 3Ph is available, why not for data centers?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247434</id>
	<title>I'd like to see more servers that can reduce power</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1259350560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most servers sit there at 3\% cpu until something strenuous occurs. You've still got the big fans blowing, drives spinning like mad, and lots of power getting sucked down. I'd like to be able to see these units able to reduce power in low-use times and seamlessly ramp up when demand hits. It bugs me that we leave servers running overnight at full clip simply because we don't want to come in early to turn them on for the early workers, don't trust they'll come back on after a powerdown due to IT voodoo, etc. It really drives me nuts when IT policy says desktops are to remain on overnight for patching at 3am. Waste of power.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most servers sit there at 3 \ % cpu until something strenuous occurs .
You 've still got the big fans blowing , drives spinning like mad , and lots of power getting sucked down .
I 'd like to be able to see these units able to reduce power in low-use times and seamlessly ramp up when demand hits .
It bugs me that we leave servers running overnight at full clip simply because we do n't want to come in early to turn them on for the early workers , do n't trust they 'll come back on after a powerdown due to IT voodoo , etc .
It really drives me nuts when IT policy says desktops are to remain on overnight for patching at 3am .
Waste of power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most servers sit there at 3\% cpu until something strenuous occurs.
You've still got the big fans blowing, drives spinning like mad, and lots of power getting sucked down.
I'd like to be able to see these units able to reduce power in low-use times and seamlessly ramp up when demand hits.
It bugs me that we leave servers running overnight at full clip simply because we don't want to come in early to turn them on for the early workers, don't trust they'll come back on after a powerdown due to IT voodoo, etc.
It really drives me nuts when IT policy says desktops are to remain on overnight for patching at 3am.
Waste of power.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247212</id>
	<title>Re:12 Volt?</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1259349060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Car batteries are 12 volts, you can run a laptop on one for a long time.</p><p>Wouldn't want to carry it, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Car batteries are 12 volts , you can run a laptop on one for a long time.Would n't want to carry it , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Car batteries are 12 volts, you can run a laptop on one for a long time.Wouldn't want to carry it, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248114</id>
	<title>the practical effect of this....</title>
	<author>Tumbleweed</author>
	<datestamp>1259354520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My Farmville will be much more efficient!</p><p>Not exactly sure what this will do to my vampire clan, though. Hmm...more energy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My Farmville will be much more efficient ! Not exactly sure what this will do to my vampire clan , though .
Hmm...more energy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Farmville will be much more efficient!Not exactly sure what this will do to my vampire clan, though.
Hmm...more energy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248196</id>
	<title>Re:What about disposal?</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1259355180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Batteries should be replaced every few years as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Batteries should be replaced every few years as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Batteries should be replaced every few years as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249364</id>
	<title>Why not just use notebooks?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259318700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obviously notebook CPUs are not as powerful as desktop systems but so what?  If people really care about raw processing for specific jobs they wouldn't be using commodity processors on such a large scale.  Your really doing it because your problems are such that you need/can easily distribute storage and memory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obviously notebook CPUs are not as powerful as desktop systems but so what ?
If people really care about raw processing for specific jobs they would n't be using commodity processors on such a large scale .
Your really doing it because your problems are such that you need/can easily distribute storage and memory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obviously notebook CPUs are not as powerful as desktop systems but so what?
If people really care about raw processing for specific jobs they wouldn't be using commodity processors on such a large scale.
Your really doing it because your problems are such that you need/can easily distribute storage and memory.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30250940</id>
	<title>Is it time to drop the 12V rail and use 5V in a DC</title>
	<author>WoTG</author>
	<datestamp>1259327220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they're going to redesign the PSU and put it together again, maybe it's time to drop 12V.  What components still require 12V other than optical drives, 3.5inch HDDs, and high end video cards?  Those are all pretty much optional in servers like FB's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they 're going to redesign the PSU and put it together again , maybe it 's time to drop 12V .
What components still require 12V other than optical drives , 3.5inch HDDs , and high end video cards ?
Those are all pretty much optional in servers like FB 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they're going to redesign the PSU and put it together again, maybe it's time to drop 12V.
What components still require 12V other than optical drives, 3.5inch HDDs, and high end video cards?
Those are all pretty much optional in servers like FB's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247386</id>
	<title>Re:This right after...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259350260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I am an avid anti facebook poster boy when it comes to destroying<br>relationships.</p></div><p>You didn't hear Facebook bought out Ashley-Maddison?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am an avid anti facebook poster boy when it comes to destroyingrelationships.You did n't hear Facebook bought out Ashley-Maddison ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am an avid anti facebook poster boy when it comes to destroyingrelationships.You didn't hear Facebook bought out Ashley-Maddison?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156</id>
	<title>12 Volt?</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1259348700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How long is twelve volts going to keep a server running? A UPS would guarantee that you have enough time to finish transfers and close connections before shutting down into a safe mode, even give clients a warning before shutting down.</p><p>I'm imagining an A23 battery keeping a computer running for about 30 seconds, basically long enough for it to go "SHUTTING DOWN NOW KTHXBAI" and all your clients go WTF?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How long is twelve volts going to keep a server running ?
A UPS would guarantee that you have enough time to finish transfers and close connections before shutting down into a safe mode , even give clients a warning before shutting down.I 'm imagining an A23 battery keeping a computer running for about 30 seconds , basically long enough for it to go " SHUTTING DOWN NOW KTHXBAI " and all your clients go WTF ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long is twelve volts going to keep a server running?
A UPS would guarantee that you have enough time to finish transfers and close connections before shutting down into a safe mode, even give clients a warning before shutting down.I'm imagining an A23 battery keeping a computer running for about 30 seconds, basically long enough for it to go "SHUTTING DOWN NOW KTHXBAI" and all your clients go WTF?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248968</id>
	<title>Fuck facebook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259316600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/14/facebook" title="guardian.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/14/facebook</a> [guardian.co.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/14/facebook [ guardian.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/14/facebook [guardian.co.uk]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30257354</id>
	<title>Re:This may be a better solution than a regular UP</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1259410680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The hum is caused by these giant transformers that step the power from DC to AC and create 110 volts of AC current at whatever amperage is required for normal devices. But there is a lot of wasted energy in doing that.</p></div></blockquote><p>That may be true in your case, however, there's no reason for AC/DC conversion to be inefficient.  Shop around for AC inverters for solar installations and you'll find ~97\% efficient units.</p><p>APC did a study on the efficiency of AC vs. DC as well, which shows a bare minimum of extra efficiency to be had:<br><a href="http://www.apcmedia.com/salestools/SADE-5TNRLG\_R5\_EN.pdf" title="apcmedia.com">http://www.apcmedia.com/salestools/SADE-5TNRLG\_R5\_EN.pdf</a> [apcmedia.com]</p><p>The reason this works with large companies has NOTHING to do with efficiency.  It's the flexibility to add new servers, one-by-one, without having to upgrade a central UPS, or taking a number of systems offline when a UPS fails.  It's the compartmentalization, combined with the unimportance of any one server in a distributed environment, that makes it work.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The hum is caused by these giant transformers that step the power from DC to AC and create 110 volts of AC current at whatever amperage is required for normal devices .
But there is a lot of wasted energy in doing that.That may be true in your case , however , there 's no reason for AC/DC conversion to be inefficient .
Shop around for AC inverters for solar installations and you 'll find ~ 97 \ % efficient units.APC did a study on the efficiency of AC vs. DC as well , which shows a bare minimum of extra efficiency to be had : http : //www.apcmedia.com/salestools/SADE-5TNRLG \ _R5 \ _EN.pdf [ apcmedia.com ] The reason this works with large companies has NOTHING to do with efficiency .
It 's the flexibility to add new servers , one-by-one , without having to upgrade a central UPS , or taking a number of systems offline when a UPS fails .
It 's the compartmentalization , combined with the unimportance of any one server in a distributed environment , that makes it work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hum is caused by these giant transformers that step the power from DC to AC and create 110 volts of AC current at whatever amperage is required for normal devices.
But there is a lot of wasted energy in doing that.That may be true in your case, however, there's no reason for AC/DC conversion to be inefficient.
Shop around for AC inverters for solar installations and you'll find ~97\% efficient units.APC did a study on the efficiency of AC vs. DC as well, which shows a bare minimum of extra efficiency to be had:http://www.apcmedia.com/salestools/SADE-5TNRLG\_R5\_EN.pdf [apcmedia.com]The reason this works with large companies has NOTHING to do with efficiency.
It's the flexibility to add new servers, one-by-one, without having to upgrade a central UPS, or taking a number of systems offline when a UPS fails.
It's the compartmentalization, combined with the unimportance of any one server in a distributed environment, that makes it work.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247652</id>
	<title>routers/switches?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259351700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't they require power too? It's all very well keeping your server up in the event of a power failure but unless you keep your routers (and the routers all the way to the backbone) up, what's the point?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't they require power too ?
It 's all very well keeping your server up in the event of a power failure but unless you keep your routers ( and the routers all the way to the backbone ) up , what 's the point ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't they require power too?
It's all very well keeping your server up in the event of a power failure but unless you keep your routers (and the routers all the way to the backbone) up, what's the point?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247244</id>
	<title>Re:12 Volt?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259349240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clearly you're pretty clueless about electronics and hosting.</p><p>Most computers require no more than 12 V to operate. Modern CPUs require at most, 5 V. RAM, NICs, and most other hardware requires less. Only hard drives with platters require 12 V.</p><p>Don't forget that power = voltage * current. So if enough current is provided and sustained, even a low voltage is sufficient to power computers for a long period of time.</p><p>Large-scale deployments of low-end servers typically don't include hard drives in each system. Any file accesses are to some sort of networked storage. So the main consumer of power is eliminated, leaving ample power for the rest of the system, which uses significantly less.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clearly you 're pretty clueless about electronics and hosting.Most computers require no more than 12 V to operate .
Modern CPUs require at most , 5 V. RAM , NICs , and most other hardware requires less .
Only hard drives with platters require 12 V.Do n't forget that power = voltage * current .
So if enough current is provided and sustained , even a low voltage is sufficient to power computers for a long period of time.Large-scale deployments of low-end servers typically do n't include hard drives in each system .
Any file accesses are to some sort of networked storage .
So the main consumer of power is eliminated , leaving ample power for the rest of the system , which uses significantly less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clearly you're pretty clueless about electronics and hosting.Most computers require no more than 12 V to operate.
Modern CPUs require at most, 5 V. RAM, NICs, and most other hardware requires less.
Only hard drives with platters require 12 V.Don't forget that power = voltage * current.
So if enough current is provided and sustained, even a low voltage is sufficient to power computers for a long period of time.Large-scale deployments of low-end servers typically don't include hard drives in each system.
Any file accesses are to some sort of networked storage.
So the main consumer of power is eliminated, leaving ample power for the rest of the system, which uses significantly less.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249166</id>
	<title>Re:I'm sure this looks great on Powerpoint</title>
	<author>Metalloy</author>
	<datestamp>1259317680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree with SuperBanana 100\% in his "just because Google is doing it, doesn't make it brilliant", and actually the broad statement that "Google pioneered" is very vexing.
The whole thing is sheer ignorance, since battery backup constitutes no more than 1\% of the real function of the UPS, while 99\% is voltage REGULATION and clean-up.
Feeding servers directly from municipal power is disaster.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with SuperBanana 100 \ % in his " just because Google is doing it , does n't make it brilliant " , and actually the broad statement that " Google pioneered " is very vexing .
The whole thing is sheer ignorance , since battery backup constitutes no more than 1 \ % of the real function of the UPS , while 99 \ % is voltage REGULATION and clean-up .
Feeding servers directly from municipal power is disaster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with SuperBanana 100\% in his "just because Google is doing it, doesn't make it brilliant", and actually the broad statement that "Google pioneered" is very vexing.
The whole thing is sheer ignorance, since battery backup constitutes no more than 1\% of the real function of the UPS, while 99\% is voltage REGULATION and clean-up.
Feeding servers directly from municipal power is disaster.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247220</id>
	<title>maintenance nightmare</title>
	<author>v1</author>
	<datestamp>1259349120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since batteries have to be replaced every few years that will not be any fun taking those servers out of the racks one by one to replace their batteries.  One would hope they'd be changeable from the back or front, but I wouldn't bet on it.</p><p>Also, UPSs can be retained when you buy upgraded servers.  But if it's built in, you get to buy it again.</p><p>And capacity?  You can't just get a bigger UPS to run longer on battery.  Although if you have true external (genny) power you just need something to hold for the cutover blip I suppose.   I'd be in agreement that any server could benefit from an internal UPS that could hold it for say, 10 seconds.</p><p>Not a good idea on several fronts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since batteries have to be replaced every few years that will not be any fun taking those servers out of the racks one by one to replace their batteries .
One would hope they 'd be changeable from the back or front , but I would n't bet on it.Also , UPSs can be retained when you buy upgraded servers .
But if it 's built in , you get to buy it again.And capacity ?
You ca n't just get a bigger UPS to run longer on battery .
Although if you have true external ( genny ) power you just need something to hold for the cutover blip I suppose .
I 'd be in agreement that any server could benefit from an internal UPS that could hold it for say , 10 seconds.Not a good idea on several fronts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since batteries have to be replaced every few years that will not be any fun taking those servers out of the racks one by one to replace their batteries.
One would hope they'd be changeable from the back or front, but I wouldn't bet on it.Also, UPSs can be retained when you buy upgraded servers.
But if it's built in, you get to buy it again.And capacity?
You can't just get a bigger UPS to run longer on battery.
Although if you have true external (genny) power you just need something to hold for the cutover blip I suppose.
I'd be in agreement that any server could benefit from an internal UPS that could hold it for say, 10 seconds.Not a good idea on several fronts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30250814</id>
	<title>Re:Doing it wrong....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259326320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Home PCs may typically use 5V for the primary voltage, but <a href="http://supermicro.com/products/system/2U/6026/SYS-6026TT-HDTRF.cfm?INF=IBQ" title="supermicro.com" rel="nofollow">servers</a> [supermicro.com] with redundant supplies frequently use 12V input.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Home PCs may typically use 5V for the primary voltage , but servers [ supermicro.com ] with redundant supplies frequently use 12V input .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Home PCs may typically use 5V for the primary voltage, but servers [supermicro.com] with redundant supplies frequently use 12V input.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248232</id>
	<title>Telecoms</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1259355480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... already do this. There are power supplies available in various PC and rack form factors designed to run off of the 48Vdc CO battery.
</p><p>One thing to consider (and I'm sure Google and others have worked the economics) is the maintenance costs of a centralized battery bank vs distributed batteries. Batteries don't last forever and some types require periodic attention (topping off the electrolyte in lead acid cells comes to mind). Although monitoring functions have become increasingly automated, someone still has to weight the costs of chasing hundreds or thousands of individual batteries around in a data center vs a couple of centralized battery rooms.
</p><p>One great example of battery maintenance comes to mind: near my house, Comcast has a pole-mounted battery cabinet that I drive by a couple of times a week. Its on a main arterial, so the probability that service personnel are passing by it frequently should be pretty high. For about 6 months, I've noticed that this one box has a red warning light flashing. Distribute batteries all over the place and make their maintenance a small part of some technician's job description and some are sure to be missed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... already do this .
There are power supplies available in various PC and rack form factors designed to run off of the 48Vdc CO battery .
One thing to consider ( and I 'm sure Google and others have worked the economics ) is the maintenance costs of a centralized battery bank vs distributed batteries .
Batteries do n't last forever and some types require periodic attention ( topping off the electrolyte in lead acid cells comes to mind ) .
Although monitoring functions have become increasingly automated , someone still has to weight the costs of chasing hundreds or thousands of individual batteries around in a data center vs a couple of centralized battery rooms .
One great example of battery maintenance comes to mind : near my house , Comcast has a pole-mounted battery cabinet that I drive by a couple of times a week .
Its on a main arterial , so the probability that service personnel are passing by it frequently should be pretty high .
For about 6 months , I 've noticed that this one box has a red warning light flashing .
Distribute batteries all over the place and make their maintenance a small part of some technician 's job description and some are sure to be missed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... already do this.
There are power supplies available in various PC and rack form factors designed to run off of the 48Vdc CO battery.
One thing to consider (and I'm sure Google and others have worked the economics) is the maintenance costs of a centralized battery bank vs distributed batteries.
Batteries don't last forever and some types require periodic attention (topping off the electrolyte in lead acid cells comes to mind).
Although monitoring functions have become increasingly automated, someone still has to weight the costs of chasing hundreds or thousands of individual batteries around in a data center vs a couple of centralized battery rooms.
One great example of battery maintenance comes to mind: near my house, Comcast has a pole-mounted battery cabinet that I drive by a couple of times a week.
Its on a main arterial, so the probability that service personnel are passing by it frequently should be pretty high.
For about 6 months, I've noticed that this one box has a red warning light flashing.
Distribute batteries all over the place and make their maintenance a small part of some technician's job description and some are sure to be missed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247210</id>
	<title>Re:On board batteries fine, but 277 volt?</title>
	<author>Mage Powers</author>
	<datestamp>1259349060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Higher voltage means less amperage to run a server.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Higher voltage means less amperage to run a server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Higher voltage means less amperage to run a server.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247198</id>
	<title>Re:12 Volt?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259349000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>thats longer than it takes to start a Deezle generator.

of course running on Biodiesel to create a feel-good buzz for all the yuppie modern urbanite Web 2.0 media students that make up 90\% of all active Faecesbook users</htmltext>
<tokenext>thats longer than it takes to start a Deezle generator .
of course running on Biodiesel to create a feel-good buzz for all the yuppie modern urbanite Web 2.0 media students that make up 90 \ % of all active Faecesbook users</tokentext>
<sentencetext>thats longer than it takes to start a Deezle generator.
of course running on Biodiesel to create a feel-good buzz for all the yuppie modern urbanite Web 2.0 media students that make up 90\% of all active Faecesbook users</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247942</id>
	<title>Re:Oh good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259353440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't worry. They'll set you up a memorial page when the service comes back up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry .
They 'll set you up a memorial page when the service comes back up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry.
They'll set you up a memorial page when the service comes back up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247310</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe if this was any other company I'd be exci</title>
	<author>asdf7890</author>
	<datestamp>1259349660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've found facebook chat relatively stable. Then again, I use it via Pidgin more often than not, rather then through FB itself, so maybe the problems you are seeing symptoms of lie in the client end. Try Pidgin's FB plugin )or other IM clients that have one) and see if you have any more luck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've found facebook chat relatively stable .
Then again , I use it via Pidgin more often than not , rather then through FB itself , so maybe the problems you are seeing symptoms of lie in the client end .
Try Pidgin 's FB plugin ) or other IM clients that have one ) and see if you have any more luck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've found facebook chat relatively stable.
Then again, I use it via Pidgin more often than not, rather then through FB itself, so maybe the problems you are seeing symptoms of lie in the client end.
Try Pidgin's FB plugin )or other IM clients that have one) and see if you have any more luck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248194</id>
	<title>New?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259355120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's nothing new. I've seen these kind of developments for years. There is even an extended Wikipedia article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laptop</p><p>That saved me a few times, by using my laptop when power went down, I was able to</p><p>[network connection lost, router is down]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's nothing new .
I 've seen these kind of developments for years .
There is even an extended Wikipedia article on it : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaptopThat saved me a few times , by using my laptop when power went down , I was able to [ network connection lost , router is down ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's nothing new.
I've seen these kind of developments for years.
There is even an extended Wikipedia article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaptopThat saved me a few times, by using my laptop when power went down, I was able to[network connection lost, router is down]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247782</id>
	<title>Re:On board batteries fine, but 277 volt?</title>
	<author>davester666</author>
	<datestamp>1259352480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because it'll totally kick Google's lame 250 volt system!  Facebook rulz.  Google is so last century.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because it 'll totally kick Google 's lame 250 volt system !
Facebook rulz .
Google is so last century .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because it'll totally kick Google's lame 250 volt system!
Facebook rulz.
Google is so last century.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140</id>
	<title>On board batteries fine, but 277 volt?</title>
	<author>TheLink</author>
	<datestamp>1259348640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the article: "Facebook's new distribution scheme calls for 277 volt power to the servers. "We're working with power supply vendors to create a (server) power supply that will accept 277 volts on the input," said Michael."<br><br>Why 277 volts?</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article : " Facebook 's new distribution scheme calls for 277 volt power to the servers .
" We 're working with power supply vendors to create a ( server ) power supply that will accept 277 volts on the input , " said Michael .
" Why 277 volts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article: "Facebook's new distribution scheme calls for 277 volt power to the servers.
"We're working with power supply vendors to create a (server) power supply that will accept 277 volts on the input," said Michael.
"Why 277 volts?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247384</id>
	<title>I told 'im so...</title>
	<author>ckaminski</author>
	<datestamp>1259350200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I told the APC CEO this at a dinner about 7 or 8 years ago.  This could have been a significant part of their wildly successful NetShelter product line, but no... too smart for their own good, those APC engineers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I told the APC CEO this at a dinner about 7 or 8 years ago .
This could have been a significant part of their wildly successful NetShelter product line , but no... too smart for their own good , those APC engineers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I told the APC CEO this at a dinner about 7 or 8 years ago.
This could have been a significant part of their wildly successful NetShelter product line, but no... too smart for their own good, those APC engineers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247360</id>
	<title>I'm sure this looks great on Powerpoint</title>
	<author>SuperBanana</author>
	<datestamp>1259350080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Facebook says the move will slash its power bill and save millions in capital expenses on UPS systems and PDUs.</i>

</p><p>And it'll move the complexity and unreliability to the server.  The whole idea behind centralized UPS's (and by the way, you still need PDUs) is that you have reliability, serviceability, and economies of scale and efficiency.  Now you have to monitor and service the batteries in thousands of pieces of equipment.  And guess what happens when one of those batteries fails by getting cooked?  Sulfuric acid all over the place (yes, even the "sealed" lead acid batteries can fail and leak) instead of the batteries being in, say, a battery room.  God help us if they use lithium-ion, which would introduce us to a world of server fires and water damage, since a lot of datacenters are now dry-pipe to save costs.  Nevermind that batteries and their associated electronics take up space, and that space has to come from somewhere.

</p><p>So, now you have each server getting more expensive, more complex with both hardware and software (server now needs its own battery power management) heavier, bigger, featuring toxic materials, and now non-standard, non-commodity design which vendors will charge more for as they specialize the equipment.

</p><p>I'm sure this all looks great on a powerpoint slide simplified into "if we put batteries in our servers, we can throw out our expensive UPS and save money!"  This is just another hot/stupid trend; just because Google is doing it, doesn't make it brilliant.  I stopped believing everything google was doing was a Best Practice around the same time gmail started going down for hours (and for some users, more than a day) at a time <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=gmail+fail" title="google.com">on a regular basis.</a> [google.com]

</p><p>I tuned out of the article around the point where the guy from Facebook complains about cosmetic features interfering with airflow.  Uh, guess what, bud?  Dell's pretty front panel has been optional (saving you a few bucks sometimes) for years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook says the move will slash its power bill and save millions in capital expenses on UPS systems and PDUs .
And it 'll move the complexity and unreliability to the server .
The whole idea behind centralized UPS 's ( and by the way , you still need PDUs ) is that you have reliability , serviceability , and economies of scale and efficiency .
Now you have to monitor and service the batteries in thousands of pieces of equipment .
And guess what happens when one of those batteries fails by getting cooked ?
Sulfuric acid all over the place ( yes , even the " sealed " lead acid batteries can fail and leak ) instead of the batteries being in , say , a battery room .
God help us if they use lithium-ion , which would introduce us to a world of server fires and water damage , since a lot of datacenters are now dry-pipe to save costs .
Nevermind that batteries and their associated electronics take up space , and that space has to come from somewhere .
So , now you have each server getting more expensive , more complex with both hardware and software ( server now needs its own battery power management ) heavier , bigger , featuring toxic materials , and now non-standard , non-commodity design which vendors will charge more for as they specialize the equipment .
I 'm sure this all looks great on a powerpoint slide simplified into " if we put batteries in our servers , we can throw out our expensive UPS and save money !
" This is just another hot/stupid trend ; just because Google is doing it , does n't make it brilliant .
I stopped believing everything google was doing was a Best Practice around the same time gmail started going down for hours ( and for some users , more than a day ) at a time on a regular basis .
[ google.com ] I tuned out of the article around the point where the guy from Facebook complains about cosmetic features interfering with airflow .
Uh , guess what , bud ?
Dell 's pretty front panel has been optional ( saving you a few bucks sometimes ) for years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Facebook says the move will slash its power bill and save millions in capital expenses on UPS systems and PDUs.
And it'll move the complexity and unreliability to the server.
The whole idea behind centralized UPS's (and by the way, you still need PDUs) is that you have reliability, serviceability, and economies of scale and efficiency.
Now you have to monitor and service the batteries in thousands of pieces of equipment.
And guess what happens when one of those batteries fails by getting cooked?
Sulfuric acid all over the place (yes, even the "sealed" lead acid batteries can fail and leak) instead of the batteries being in, say, a battery room.
God help us if they use lithium-ion, which would introduce us to a world of server fires and water damage, since a lot of datacenters are now dry-pipe to save costs.
Nevermind that batteries and their associated electronics take up space, and that space has to come from somewhere.
So, now you have each server getting more expensive, more complex with both hardware and software (server now needs its own battery power management) heavier, bigger, featuring toxic materials, and now non-standard, non-commodity design which vendors will charge more for as they specialize the equipment.
I'm sure this all looks great on a powerpoint slide simplified into "if we put batteries in our servers, we can throw out our expensive UPS and save money!
"  This is just another hot/stupid trend; just because Google is doing it, doesn't make it brilliant.
I stopped believing everything google was doing was a Best Practice around the same time gmail started going down for hours (and for some users, more than a day) at a time on a regular basis.
[google.com]

I tuned out of the article around the point where the guy from Facebook complains about cosmetic features interfering with airflow.
Uh, guess what, bud?
Dell's pretty front panel has been optional (saving you a few bucks sometimes) for years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248260</id>
	<title>Re:The best solution?</title>
	<author>hannson</author>
	<datestamp>1259312460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001\_3-10209580-92.html" title="cnet.com">Google did it with good results</a> [cnet.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google did it with good results [ cnet.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google did it with good results [cnet.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30253146</id>
	<title>Re:Oh good</title>
	<author>ZerdZerd</author>
	<datestamp>1259441820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If a Facebook server goes down, you could possibly lose your friends!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If a Facebook server goes down , you could possibly lose your friends !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a Facebook server goes down, you could possibly lose your friends!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247266</id>
	<title>Batteries are Possible on Servers.</title>
	<author>Hari Kant</author>
	<datestamp>1259349420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Voltage is not the problem, it is the Ampere Hours(AH). It can be achieved but there is a hidden problem of replacing the batteries after their Charge/Discharge cycle makes them ready for replacement. Say in about 3-4 Years, Facebook will die because of their Servers crashing out, one by one, if Battery condition is not monitored? Google may help, i definitely can.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Voltage is not the problem , it is the Ampere Hours ( AH ) .
It can be achieved but there is a hidden problem of replacing the batteries after their Charge/Discharge cycle makes them ready for replacement .
Say in about 3-4 Years , Facebook will die because of their Servers crashing out , one by one , if Battery condition is not monitored ?
Google may help , i definitely can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Voltage is not the problem, it is the Ampere Hours(AH).
It can be achieved but there is a hidden problem of replacing the batteries after their Charge/Discharge cycle makes them ready for replacement.
Say in about 3-4 Years, Facebook will die because of their Servers crashing out, one by one, if Battery condition is not monitored?
Google may help, i definitely can.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247664</id>
	<title>Re:Oh good</title>
	<author>al.caughey</author>
	<datestamp>1259351820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What would the world be like if facebook went offline... I'm not sure I could continue living</i></p><p>I'm quite sure I wouldn't notice</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What would the world be like if facebook went offline... I 'm not sure I could continue livingI 'm quite sure I would n't notice</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would the world be like if facebook went offline... I'm not sure I could continue livingI'm quite sure I wouldn't notice</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247486</id>
	<title>Re:On board batteries fine, but 277 volt?</title>
	<author>Cassini2</author>
	<datestamp>1259350860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>277 (V) corresponds to the line to neutral voltage of a 480 (V), 4 wire power distribution system.  480 (V) systems are fairly common in industrial settings in the United States.  The major disadvantage of using 480 (V) to power a server, is you can't use a UPS.  UPS on 480 (V) systems are rare and expensive, hence the reason why Facebook wants the batteries inside the server.
</p><p>I'm pretty certain you really don't want to run servers from the 277 (V) line to neutral voltage of a 480 (V), 4 wire system (3 lives, one neutral).  On a 4 wire system, you have 4 wires and you can lose any one of them.  If you lose the neutral, your servers could be running of 480 (V) instead of 277 (V).  They will be destroyed.
</p><p>Losing the neutral is a relatively common failure in 3 phase systems, as many 3 phase systems are 3 phase, 3 wire with a fake neutral/ground connection that is often mistaken for a neutral.  This central connection is purely to prevent the 3-wire system from drifting off of off ground, like when lightening strikes, which is common in a big high-voltage system.  When operating a 10,000 (V) to 480 (V) step down transformer (the transformers inside the metal fenced enclosures), a small amount of electric slippage to occur between the windings.  1\% of 10,000 (V) is 100 (V).  Faults can also occur in big loads, like motors.  A 10\% ground fault on a 480 (V) 400 (A) motor, could be 200 (V) at 40 (A).  These voltages/powers are nothing for a 480 (V) motor, but are enough to cause significant damage in a computer with a 1.2 (V) processor.  This mismatch is why you should never trust the ground/neutral connection on a high-voltage supply line.  It is for safety, not for powering computer equipment, electronic equipment, and electronic motor drives.  After having replaced tens of thousands of dollars of electronic motor drives, my rule is: make the supply 480 (V) 4 wire, and all the loads 480 (V) 3 wire.  A 3 wire load with no neutral can withstand problems with the neutral.  A 4-wire load powering electronics line-to-neutral will not withstand neutral failures.
</p><p> <b>If you are going to use 480 (V), you really want to use 480 (V) 3 wire AC (3 live wires, no neutral).</b>  If any one power circuit is lost, nothing really bad happens.  Also, power semiconductors are readily available for 480 (V), because all the industrial motor drives require them.  As such, your power supply will be cheaper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>277 ( V ) corresponds to the line to neutral voltage of a 480 ( V ) , 4 wire power distribution system .
480 ( V ) systems are fairly common in industrial settings in the United States .
The major disadvantage of using 480 ( V ) to power a server , is you ca n't use a UPS .
UPS on 480 ( V ) systems are rare and expensive , hence the reason why Facebook wants the batteries inside the server .
I 'm pretty certain you really do n't want to run servers from the 277 ( V ) line to neutral voltage of a 480 ( V ) , 4 wire system ( 3 lives , one neutral ) .
On a 4 wire system , you have 4 wires and you can lose any one of them .
If you lose the neutral , your servers could be running of 480 ( V ) instead of 277 ( V ) .
They will be destroyed .
Losing the neutral is a relatively common failure in 3 phase systems , as many 3 phase systems are 3 phase , 3 wire with a fake neutral/ground connection that is often mistaken for a neutral .
This central connection is purely to prevent the 3-wire system from drifting off of off ground , like when lightening strikes , which is common in a big high-voltage system .
When operating a 10,000 ( V ) to 480 ( V ) step down transformer ( the transformers inside the metal fenced enclosures ) , a small amount of electric slippage to occur between the windings .
1 \ % of 10,000 ( V ) is 100 ( V ) .
Faults can also occur in big loads , like motors .
A 10 \ % ground fault on a 480 ( V ) 400 ( A ) motor , could be 200 ( V ) at 40 ( A ) .
These voltages/powers are nothing for a 480 ( V ) motor , but are enough to cause significant damage in a computer with a 1.2 ( V ) processor .
This mismatch is why you should never trust the ground/neutral connection on a high-voltage supply line .
It is for safety , not for powering computer equipment , electronic equipment , and electronic motor drives .
After having replaced tens of thousands of dollars of electronic motor drives , my rule is : make the supply 480 ( V ) 4 wire , and all the loads 480 ( V ) 3 wire .
A 3 wire load with no neutral can withstand problems with the neutral .
A 4-wire load powering electronics line-to-neutral will not withstand neutral failures .
If you are going to use 480 ( V ) , you really want to use 480 ( V ) 3 wire AC ( 3 live wires , no neutral ) .
If any one power circuit is lost , nothing really bad happens .
Also , power semiconductors are readily available for 480 ( V ) , because all the industrial motor drives require them .
As such , your power supply will be cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>277 (V) corresponds to the line to neutral voltage of a 480 (V), 4 wire power distribution system.
480 (V) systems are fairly common in industrial settings in the United States.
The major disadvantage of using 480 (V) to power a server, is you can't use a UPS.
UPS on 480 (V) systems are rare and expensive, hence the reason why Facebook wants the batteries inside the server.
I'm pretty certain you really don't want to run servers from the 277 (V) line to neutral voltage of a 480 (V), 4 wire system (3 lives, one neutral).
On a 4 wire system, you have 4 wires and you can lose any one of them.
If you lose the neutral, your servers could be running of 480 (V) instead of 277 (V).
They will be destroyed.
Losing the neutral is a relatively common failure in 3 phase systems, as many 3 phase systems are 3 phase, 3 wire with a fake neutral/ground connection that is often mistaken for a neutral.
This central connection is purely to prevent the 3-wire system from drifting off of off ground, like when lightening strikes, which is common in a big high-voltage system.
When operating a 10,000 (V) to 480 (V) step down transformer (the transformers inside the metal fenced enclosures), a small amount of electric slippage to occur between the windings.
1\% of 10,000 (V) is 100 (V).
Faults can also occur in big loads, like motors.
A 10\% ground fault on a 480 (V) 400 (A) motor, could be 200 (V) at 40 (A).
These voltages/powers are nothing for a 480 (V) motor, but are enough to cause significant damage in a computer with a 1.2 (V) processor.
This mismatch is why you should never trust the ground/neutral connection on a high-voltage supply line.
It is for safety, not for powering computer equipment, electronic equipment, and electronic motor drives.
After having replaced tens of thousands of dollars of electronic motor drives, my rule is: make the supply 480 (V) 4 wire, and all the loads 480 (V) 3 wire.
A 3 wire load with no neutral can withstand problems with the neutral.
A 4-wire load powering electronics line-to-neutral will not withstand neutral failures.
If you are going to use 480 (V), you really want to use 480 (V) 3 wire AC (3 live wires, no neutral).
If any one power circuit is lost, nothing really bad happens.
Also, power semiconductors are readily available for 480 (V), because all the industrial motor drives require them.
As such, your power supply will be cheaper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247430</id>
	<title>Re:New wheels, same cycle....</title>
	<author>dave420</author>
	<datestamp>1259350560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because technology changes frequently.  It's the same with parallel versus serial - at some points in history technology leans towards on being superior for given uses, and at other times the other is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because technology changes frequently .
It 's the same with parallel versus serial - at some points in history technology leans towards on being superior for given uses , and at other times the other is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because technology changes frequently.
It's the same with parallel versus serial - at some points in history technology leans towards on being superior for given uses, and at other times the other is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248512</id>
	<title>Why Keep Batteries At All ?</title>
	<author>eyeota</author>
	<datestamp>1259314140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My company is in the process of designing our new/next data center and we're highly considering a non-battery based UPS solution from Active Power.  It's the old 'fly wheel' technology of the past, upgraded to the 21st century.  The idea is that the mechanical flywheel can sustain the load for 10-14seconds while the generator kicks on.  The theory is that if your generators can't start up and switch over within 10-14 seconds (because of a failure), then they're probably not going to start up/switchover within 45mins--the usually battery backup time in a data center.  Some people are using this technology to supplement their traditional battery arrays and make them last longer.  The jury is still out on the solution, but looks promising.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My company is in the process of designing our new/next data center and we 're highly considering a non-battery based UPS solution from Active Power .
It 's the old 'fly wheel ' technology of the past , upgraded to the 21st century .
The idea is that the mechanical flywheel can sustain the load for 10-14seconds while the generator kicks on .
The theory is that if your generators ca n't start up and switch over within 10-14 seconds ( because of a failure ) , then they 're probably not going to start up/switchover within 45mins--the usually battery backup time in a data center .
Some people are using this technology to supplement their traditional battery arrays and make them last longer .
The jury is still out on the solution , but looks promising .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My company is in the process of designing our new/next data center and we're highly considering a non-battery based UPS solution from Active Power.
It's the old 'fly wheel' technology of the past, upgraded to the 21st century.
The idea is that the mechanical flywheel can sustain the load for 10-14seconds while the generator kicks on.
The theory is that if your generators can't start up and switch over within 10-14 seconds (because of a failure), then they're probably not going to start up/switchover within 45mins--the usually battery backup time in a data center.
Some people are using this technology to supplement their traditional battery arrays and make them last longer.
The jury is still out on the solution, but looks promising.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248580</id>
	<title>Re:The best solution?</title>
	<author>ghostis</author>
	<datestamp>1259314500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google is already doing server+plus battery in their shipping container-based data centers.  They claim that their research shows that larger power supplies (rack or row or bigger) are much more efficient.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google is already doing server + plus battery in their shipping container-based data centers .
They claim that their research shows that larger power supplies ( rack or row or bigger ) are much more efficient .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google is already doing server+plus battery in their shipping container-based data centers.
They claim that their research shows that larger power supplies (rack or row or bigger) are much more efficient.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248380</id>
	<title>Re:maintenance nightmare</title>
	<author>ckaminski</author>
	<datestamp>1259313240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most decent servers today come with hot-swap power supplies.  Simply put your battery into that, and off you go.  And if you've already switched to 12V DC in the datacenter, it's even better!  No costly AC/DC conversion at the 100's of points of use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most decent servers today come with hot-swap power supplies .
Simply put your battery into that , and off you go .
And if you 've already switched to 12V DC in the datacenter , it 's even better !
No costly AC/DC conversion at the 100 's of points of use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most decent servers today come with hot-swap power supplies.
Simply put your battery into that, and off you go.
And if you've already switched to 12V DC in the datacenter, it's even better!
No costly AC/DC conversion at the 100's of points of use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248756</id>
	<title>In other news  . . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous Poodle</author>
	<datestamp>1259315640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other news, Energizer announces a purchase of 20\% of Facebook's outstanding stock.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news , Energizer announces a purchase of 20 \ % of Facebook 's outstanding stock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news, Energizer announces a purchase of 20\% of Facebook's outstanding stock.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247930</id>
	<title>Re:On board batteries fine, but 277 volt?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259353320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All* power factor corrected power supplies boost that 120VRms sine wave to around 350 volts DC, and it is this dc bus that is sent to the SMPS.</p><p>In the case of non power-factor corrected supplies, this 120VRms Ac is doubled with the help of 2 diodes and two capacitors. (The selector switch on the back makes the transition from full bridge to full wave doubler.)</p><p>Centralized AC to DC conversion is less than half the cost of doing so at each server, and power factor correction costs only a third when fed with 3 phase, as compared with single phase.</p><p>They used 270 volts because that is a standard, I would roll my own voltage converter, optimized for the voltage at which the server power supplies is most efficient.</p><p>*more like 90\% but who is counting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All * power factor corrected power supplies boost that 120VRms sine wave to around 350 volts DC , and it is this dc bus that is sent to the SMPS.In the case of non power-factor corrected supplies , this 120VRms Ac is doubled with the help of 2 diodes and two capacitors .
( The selector switch on the back makes the transition from full bridge to full wave doubler .
) Centralized AC to DC conversion is less than half the cost of doing so at each server , and power factor correction costs only a third when fed with 3 phase , as compared with single phase.They used 270 volts because that is a standard , I would roll my own voltage converter , optimized for the voltage at which the server power supplies is most efficient .
* more like 90 \ % but who is counting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All* power factor corrected power supplies boost that 120VRms sine wave to around 350 volts DC, and it is this dc bus that is sent to the SMPS.In the case of non power-factor corrected supplies, this 120VRms Ac is doubled with the help of 2 diodes and two capacitors.
(The selector switch on the back makes the transition from full bridge to full wave doubler.
)Centralized AC to DC conversion is less than half the cost of doing so at each server, and power factor correction costs only a third when fed with 3 phase, as compared with single phase.They used 270 volts because that is a standard, I would roll my own voltage converter, optimized for the voltage at which the server power supplies is most efficient.
*more like 90\% but who is counting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298</id>
	<title>The best solution?</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1259349600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is interesting to me in a couple of ways.<br>The idea is that it is cheaper to have just a battery instead of a UPS. A UPS will also have to have an inverter.<br>Okay I can see this but they why have it at the server level?<br>Remove the power supply from the server and put it at the rack level? Have a big redundant power supply for each rack and batteries for each rack?<br>Or why not use DC for the entire data center and put the battery at the Data Center level?<br>Seems to me that there may be more than one way to skin this cat and each have it's pluses. If you are using a large number of low load balanced servers where having any one go down isn't a disaster then putting the battery on the server would give you a good trade off. You are probably more likely to have a single server to fail than a more centralized system would but the odds of taking down the system would be tiny.<br>I would love to see a study of the benefits of each type of system with the trade offs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is interesting to me in a couple of ways.The idea is that it is cheaper to have just a battery instead of a UPS .
A UPS will also have to have an inverter.Okay I can see this but they why have it at the server level ? Remove the power supply from the server and put it at the rack level ?
Have a big redundant power supply for each rack and batteries for each rack ? Or why not use DC for the entire data center and put the battery at the Data Center level ? Seems to me that there may be more than one way to skin this cat and each have it 's pluses .
If you are using a large number of low load balanced servers where having any one go down is n't a disaster then putting the battery on the server would give you a good trade off .
You are probably more likely to have a single server to fail than a more centralized system would but the odds of taking down the system would be tiny.I would love to see a study of the benefits of each type of system with the trade offs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is interesting to me in a couple of ways.The idea is that it is cheaper to have just a battery instead of a UPS.
A UPS will also have to have an inverter.Okay I can see this but they why have it at the server level?Remove the power supply from the server and put it at the rack level?
Have a big redundant power supply for each rack and batteries for each rack?Or why not use DC for the entire data center and put the battery at the Data Center level?Seems to me that there may be more than one way to skin this cat and each have it's pluses.
If you are using a large number of low load balanced servers where having any one go down isn't a disaster then putting the battery on the server would give you a good trade off.
You are probably more likely to have a single server to fail than a more centralized system would but the odds of taking down the system would be tiny.I would love to see a study of the benefits of each type of system with the trade offs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30254984</id>
	<title>Re:The best solution?</title>
	<author>Agripa</author>
	<datestamp>1259428920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>12VDC, each unit needs 300W at least... That's 25 amps per unit. Think wire gauge. That's the reason, long and short. That, and you can't run 12VDC very far before power loss becomes a significant consideration.</p></div></blockquote><p>DC distribution for telecommunication tends to be -48 volts DC and is designed to run with a 48 volt battery in a wired-or configuration.</p><p>The most significant DC distribution systems for computers are based on 370 volts DC which allows low power operation directly from a 120/240 volt AC rectifier producing 340 volts DC or high power operation at 370 volts DC produced from a boost switching regulator used for active power factor correction.  Battery operation in this case would probably involve boosting 48 volts to 370 volts instead of a wired-or configuration because having a series connected battery at 370 volts is not a good idea if you can avoid it.</p><blockquote><div><p>Tesla figured this out over a hundred years ago -- AC powers and transformers = more efficient.</p></div></blockquote><p>Tesla did not have high efficiency, power, and density DC to DC converter technology available.  AC is still more economical in applications outside of computer power distribution and very long distance power transmission.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>12VDC , each unit needs 300W at least... That 's 25 amps per unit .
Think wire gauge .
That 's the reason , long and short .
That , and you ca n't run 12VDC very far before power loss becomes a significant consideration.DC distribution for telecommunication tends to be -48 volts DC and is designed to run with a 48 volt battery in a wired-or configuration.The most significant DC distribution systems for computers are based on 370 volts DC which allows low power operation directly from a 120/240 volt AC rectifier producing 340 volts DC or high power operation at 370 volts DC produced from a boost switching regulator used for active power factor correction .
Battery operation in this case would probably involve boosting 48 volts to 370 volts instead of a wired-or configuration because having a series connected battery at 370 volts is not a good idea if you can avoid it.Tesla figured this out over a hundred years ago -- AC powers and transformers = more efficient.Tesla did not have high efficiency , power , and density DC to DC converter technology available .
AC is still more economical in applications outside of computer power distribution and very long distance power transmission .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>12VDC, each unit needs 300W at least... That's 25 amps per unit.
Think wire gauge.
That's the reason, long and short.
That, and you can't run 12VDC very far before power loss becomes a significant consideration.DC distribution for telecommunication tends to be -48 volts DC and is designed to run with a 48 volt battery in a wired-or configuration.The most significant DC distribution systems for computers are based on 370 volts DC which allows low power operation directly from a 120/240 volt AC rectifier producing 340 volts DC or high power operation at 370 volts DC produced from a boost switching regulator used for active power factor correction.
Battery operation in this case would probably involve boosting 48 volts to 370 volts instead of a wired-or configuration because having a series connected battery at 370 volts is not a good idea if you can avoid it.Tesla figured this out over a hundred years ago -- AC powers and transformers = more efficient.Tesla did not have high efficiency, power, and density DC to DC converter technology available.
AC is still more economical in applications outside of computer power distribution and very long distance power transmission.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247670</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30257354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30254984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30250528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30253552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30250432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30250814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30253146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30252470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_1612211_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30253146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247942
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248550
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248554
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30253552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248288
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247244
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247310
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248080
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247818
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247670
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30254984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249694
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248260
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30250814
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30250528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247486
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30250432
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30257354
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248380
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249166
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30249078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30248376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30252470
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_1612211.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_1612211.30247994
</commentlist>
</conversation>
