<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_03_0247228</id>
	<title>FCC Lets Radar Company See Through Walls</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1259844900000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>DesertNomad writes <i>"Attorney Mitchell Lazarus over at CommLawBlog gives a good overview of <a href="http://www.commlawblog.com/2009/12/articles/unlicensed-operations-and-emer/fcc-lets-radar-company-see-through-walls/index.html">a new radar technology</a> and the challenges of getting regulatory approval, which seemingly can be just as difficult as developing the technology itself."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>DesertNomad writes " Attorney Mitchell Lazarus over at CommLawBlog gives a good overview of a new radar technology and the challenges of getting regulatory approval , which seemingly can be just as difficult as developing the technology itself .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DesertNomad writes "Attorney Mitchell Lazarus over at CommLawBlog gives a good overview of a new radar technology and the challenges of getting regulatory approval, which seemingly can be just as difficult as developing the technology itself.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309440</id>
	<title>Resolution</title>
	<author>worip</author>
	<datestamp>1259850540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>3.5GHz translates to a ~8cm wavelength (maybe a bit less with the speed of light being slower in air). Resolving features that vary in amplitude of say less than 2cm (breathing and swaying) requires VERY accurate phase detection and time measurement equipment. Which translates to some very fast hardware doing phase correlation etc.

From the article: <p><div class="quote"><p>Instead, the L-3 CyTerra device sends pulses on 200 different frequencies, one at a time, ranging in sequence from 3101 to 3499 MHz at 2 MHz intervals.</p></div><p> and </p><p><div class="quote"><p>The system is sensitive enough to detect the chest motions of a person who is unconscious but breathing, or the slight swaying of a person trying to stand perfectly still</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>3.5GHz translates to a ~ 8cm wavelength ( maybe a bit less with the speed of light being slower in air ) .
Resolving features that vary in amplitude of say less than 2cm ( breathing and swaying ) requires VERY accurate phase detection and time measurement equipment .
Which translates to some very fast hardware doing phase correlation etc .
From the article : Instead , the L-3 CyTerra device sends pulses on 200 different frequencies , one at a time , ranging in sequence from 3101 to 3499 MHz at 2 MHz intervals .
and The system is sensitive enough to detect the chest motions of a person who is unconscious but breathing , or the slight swaying of a person trying to stand perfectly still</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3.5GHz translates to a ~8cm wavelength (maybe a bit less with the speed of light being slower in air).
Resolving features that vary in amplitude of say less than 2cm (breathing and swaying) requires VERY accurate phase detection and time measurement equipment.
Which translates to some very fast hardware doing phase correlation etc.
From the article: Instead, the L-3 CyTerra device sends pulses on 200 different frequencies, one at a time, ranging in sequence from 3101 to 3499 MHz at 2 MHz intervals.
and The system is sensitive enough to detect the chest motions of a person who is unconscious but breathing, or the slight swaying of a person trying to stand perfectly still
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309922</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>njen</author>
	<datestamp>1259854500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah! I hate the fact that I am not allowed the tech to build a nuclear reactor in my apartment! Damn those rich people and their rich, seclusive laws.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah !
I hate the fact that I am not allowed the tech to build a nuclear reactor in my apartment !
Damn those rich people and their rich , seclusive laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah!
I hate the fact that I am not allowed the tech to build a nuclear reactor in my apartment!
Damn those rich people and their rich, seclusive laws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313188</id>
	<title>Re:how many watts of power</title>
	<author>Muad'Dave</author>
	<datestamp>1259866260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All right, how about this one:</p><p>This thing emits a maximum of 0.0316 Watts, which is nearly 19 times less than a cell phone that no one thinks twice about using jammed 24x7 against the side of their brain.</p><p>Better?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All right , how about this one : This thing emits a maximum of 0.0316 Watts , which is nearly 19 times less than a cell phone that no one thinks twice about using jammed 24x7 against the side of their brain.Better ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All right, how about this one:This thing emits a maximum of 0.0316 Watts, which is nearly 19 times less than a cell phone that no one thinks twice about using jammed 24x7 against the side of their brain.Better?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>brxndxn</author>
	<datestamp>1259850360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think a lot of people are just afraid that the 'law' is becoming too proactive. Our society (at least in the US) likes the idea of treating a house as a 'black box' where only the external features are noticed. If there is a problem inside the box, people come out and interact. Now, law enforcement can peer into that private box whenever they want..</p><p>Even though the technology has a lot of non-scary uses (rescue), it is easy to imagine it being used by every cop to peer right into the very center of our private lives while we are in our homes. So ya.. it is scary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think a lot of people are just afraid that the 'law ' is becoming too proactive .
Our society ( at least in the US ) likes the idea of treating a house as a 'black box ' where only the external features are noticed .
If there is a problem inside the box , people come out and interact .
Now , law enforcement can peer into that private box whenever they want..Even though the technology has a lot of non-scary uses ( rescue ) , it is easy to imagine it being used by every cop to peer right into the very center of our private lives while we are in our homes .
So ya.. it is scary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think a lot of people are just afraid that the 'law' is becoming too proactive.
Our society (at least in the US) likes the idea of treating a house as a 'black box' where only the external features are noticed.
If there is a problem inside the box, people come out and interact.
Now, law enforcement can peer into that private box whenever they want..Even though the technology has a lot of non-scary uses (rescue), it is easy to imagine it being used by every cop to peer right into the very center of our private lives while we are in our homes.
So ya.. it is scary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313046</id>
	<title>Re:do not want</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259865780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lead based paint will become popular again. Make your own with dibasic lead phosphite (block high energy photons) and antimony trioxide (absorbs IR).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lead based paint will become popular again .
Make your own with dibasic lead phosphite ( block high energy photons ) and antimony trioxide ( absorbs IR ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lead based paint will become popular again.
Make your own with dibasic lead phosphite (block high energy photons) and antimony trioxide (absorbs IR).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309514</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259851320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>the article itself is nothing less than enthusiastic about the range of uses for it.</i></p><p>Sad, isn't it? At least I think so. Like someone's sig said, Orwell was an optimist.</p><p><i>What I see happening more and more is that people are fearing technology because of what "bad people" will do with it</i></p><p>Unfortunately the very worst people run the world's governments. Tech that the powerful can have but I can't have IS <a href="http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/3/19/10456/6589" title="kuro5hin.org">bad tech</a> [kuro5hin.org]. You don't think your government will let you build one of these to look through your governor's walls, do you? Hell, many governments won't even let the population have firearms. The fault isn't technology, it's technology that you posess and I can't.</p><p>I'd only embrace this technology if legal safeguards are in place, and considering that my government is a whooly-owned subsidiary of the corporations, I doubt that will happen. If you say "tech is tech" you're wrong. No irony, just your own misunderstanding of the bigger picture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the article itself is nothing less than enthusiastic about the range of uses for it.Sad , is n't it ?
At least I think so .
Like someone 's sig said , Orwell was an optimist.What I see happening more and more is that people are fearing technology because of what " bad people " will do with itUnfortunately the very worst people run the world 's governments .
Tech that the powerful can have but I ca n't have IS bad tech [ kuro5hin.org ] .
You do n't think your government will let you build one of these to look through your governor 's walls , do you ?
Hell , many governments wo n't even let the population have firearms .
The fault is n't technology , it 's technology that you posess and I ca n't.I 'd only embrace this technology if legal safeguards are in place , and considering that my government is a whooly-owned subsidiary of the corporations , I doubt that will happen .
If you say " tech is tech " you 're wrong .
No irony , just your own misunderstanding of the bigger picture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the article itself is nothing less than enthusiastic about the range of uses for it.Sad, isn't it?
At least I think so.
Like someone's sig said, Orwell was an optimist.What I see happening more and more is that people are fearing technology because of what "bad people" will do with itUnfortunately the very worst people run the world's governments.
Tech that the powerful can have but I can't have IS bad tech [kuro5hin.org].
You don't think your government will let you build one of these to look through your governor's walls, do you?
Hell, many governments won't even let the population have firearms.
The fault isn't technology, it's technology that you posess and I can't.I'd only embrace this technology if legal safeguards are in place, and considering that my government is a whooly-owned subsidiary of the corporations, I doubt that will happen.
If you say "tech is tech" you're wrong.
No irony, just your own misunderstanding of the bigger picture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30319660</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>c6gunner</author>
	<datestamp>1259850540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Another step closer to a bloody second American revolution.</p></div><p>Yah.  A handful of low IQ militia hicks and paranoid conspiracy theorists vs. a military force which can roll over entire nations in roughly 2 weeks.  That'd be one heck of a contest!  For some reason I'm getting the mental image of a sloth being tossed into a cage full of tigers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p><p>On the other hand, if you taped it and called it "Survivor America", your ratings would be off the charts!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another step closer to a bloody second American revolution.Yah .
A handful of low IQ militia hicks and paranoid conspiracy theorists vs. a military force which can roll over entire nations in roughly 2 weeks .
That 'd be one heck of a contest !
For some reason I 'm getting the mental image of a sloth being tossed into a cage full of tigers ....On the other hand , if you taped it and called it " Survivor America " , your ratings would be off the charts !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another step closer to a bloody second American revolution.Yah.
A handful of low IQ militia hicks and paranoid conspiracy theorists vs. a military force which can roll over entire nations in roughly 2 weeks.
That'd be one heck of a contest!
For some reason I'm getting the mental image of a sloth being tossed into a cage full of tigers ....On the other hand, if you taped it and called it "Survivor America", your ratings would be off the charts!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312290</id>
	<title>Re:Fuzzbuster</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259863200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Best Radar Detector is the Valentine V1</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Best Radar Detector is the Valentine V1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Best Radar Detector is the Valentine V1</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309906</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1259854380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a simple answer to that : I live out in the exurbs where there is basically no real crime. And, yet, the police helicopters (at a cost of so many hundred dollars per hour) buzz by all of the time. I don't think they are looking for donuts. And you think it is luddism to worry about exactly how they are wasting the taxpayer money, and whether it is a threat to the ordinary citizen ? Exactly what century do you think you are living in ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a simple answer to that : I live out in the exurbs where there is basically no real crime .
And , yet , the police helicopters ( at a cost of so many hundred dollars per hour ) buzz by all of the time .
I do n't think they are looking for donuts .
And you think it is luddism to worry about exactly how they are wasting the taxpayer money , and whether it is a threat to the ordinary citizen ?
Exactly what century do you think you are living in ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a simple answer to that : I live out in the exurbs where there is basically no real crime.
And, yet, the police helicopters (at a cost of so many hundred dollars per hour) buzz by all of the time.
I don't think they are looking for donuts.
And you think it is luddism to worry about exactly how they are wasting the taxpayer money, and whether it is a threat to the ordinary citizen ?
Exactly what century do you think you are living in ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310946</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>cyn1c77</author>
	<datestamp>1259859060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A technology site filled with Luddites. Irony at its finest.</p></div><p>You've got it totally wrong.  </p><p>We're not Luddites, but rather paranoids whose fears have been justified by questionable government actions in the last 8 years.</p><p>No one here is unhappy about the technology itself (in fact we are excited), we just know that the government will attempt to abuse our rights under their perverted interpretations of "freedom" and "national security."  </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A technology site filled with Luddites .
Irony at its finest.You 've got it totally wrong .
We 're not Luddites , but rather paranoids whose fears have been justified by questionable government actions in the last 8 years.No one here is unhappy about the technology itself ( in fact we are excited ) , we just know that the government will attempt to abuse our rights under their perverted interpretations of " freedom " and " national security .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A technology site filled with Luddites.
Irony at its finest.You've got it totally wrong.
We're not Luddites, but rather paranoids whose fears have been justified by questionable government actions in the last 8 years.No one here is unhappy about the technology itself (in fact we are excited), we just know that the government will attempt to abuse our rights under their perverted interpretations of "freedom" and "national security.
"  
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309486</id>
	<title>Can it detect plants (or herbs)  ?</title>
	<author>yossarianuk</author>
	<datestamp>1259850960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does this work entirely on movement?

i.e could it detect for example a certain (ahem) plant / herb ?

And how thick does the tinfoil need to be to block it ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this work entirely on movement ?
i.e could it detect for example a certain ( ahem ) plant / herb ?
And how thick does the tinfoil need to be to block it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this work entirely on movement?
i.e could it detect for example a certain (ahem) plant / herb ?
And how thick does the tinfoil need to be to block it ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30319690</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>c6gunner</author>
	<datestamp>1259850900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're going to be commenting on legal matters, you should really consider changing your sig.  Otherwise, anyone who didn't vote for Ron Paul will immediately dismiss your opinions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're going to be commenting on legal matters , you should really consider changing your sig .
Otherwise , anyone who did n't vote for Ron Paul will immediately dismiss your opinions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're going to be commenting on legal matters, you should really consider changing your sig.
Otherwise, anyone who didn't vote for Ron Paul will immediately dismiss your opinions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312376</id>
	<title>Re:how many watts of power</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1259863500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well there's our solution. Suppose this tech gets adopted and, eventually, used. All we have to do is convince mothers in America that this device gives babies cancer or some other ludicrous thing like that and before you know it a whole flaming movement of pissed of activists will have this banned permanently.
<br> <br>
And before anyone calls me an immoral wanker for suggesting using FUD and BS to propel a movement, take a look at the things that our congress critters and media try to rile us up about on a daily basis and how effective it is. My dad taught me one very important thing when I was young: Fighting 'honorably' and getting stabbed or beat to death is not nearly as smart or effective as fighting dirty and walking away from a brawl alive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well there 's our solution .
Suppose this tech gets adopted and , eventually , used .
All we have to do is convince mothers in America that this device gives babies cancer or some other ludicrous thing like that and before you know it a whole flaming movement of pissed of activists will have this banned permanently .
And before anyone calls me an immoral wanker for suggesting using FUD and BS to propel a movement , take a look at the things that our congress critters and media try to rile us up about on a daily basis and how effective it is .
My dad taught me one very important thing when I was young : Fighting 'honorably ' and getting stabbed or beat to death is not nearly as smart or effective as fighting dirty and walking away from a brawl alive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well there's our solution.
Suppose this tech gets adopted and, eventually, used.
All we have to do is convince mothers in America that this device gives babies cancer or some other ludicrous thing like that and before you know it a whole flaming movement of pissed of activists will have this banned permanently.
And before anyone calls me an immoral wanker for suggesting using FUD and BS to propel a movement, take a look at the things that our congress critters and media try to rile us up about on a daily basis and how effective it is.
My dad taught me one very important thing when I was young: Fighting 'honorably' and getting stabbed or beat to death is not nearly as smart or effective as fighting dirty and walking away from a brawl alive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312024</id>
	<title>Re:Must be deployed only with court orders.</title>
	<author>Haven'tAClue</author>
	<datestamp>1259862480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is no more than shining a flashlight through your windows and taking pictures. It should be treated as the privacy violation that it is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is no more than shining a flashlight through your windows and taking pictures .
It should be treated as the privacy violation that it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is no more than shining a flashlight through your windows and taking pictures.
It should be treated as the privacy violation that it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310820</id>
	<title>They seem to have "feared" this long ago...</title>
	<author>hazydave</author>
	<datestamp>1259858640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The basic idea of using high frequencies across a wide spectrum as well penetrating radar of a sort has been known for quite awhile, even if the "simple matter of an implementation" may have lagged behind. The FCC was really worried about this becoming possible over approved UWB (Ultra WideBand) frequencies... thus, they put really serious power level limitations on UWB radios approved so far. Not that strictly nefarious use of such technology necessarily follows FCC guidelines anyway. But if nothing else, it's an effective means of ensuring that the "see through your apartment walls" device doesn't show up in SkyMall anytime soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The basic idea of using high frequencies across a wide spectrum as well penetrating radar of a sort has been known for quite awhile , even if the " simple matter of an implementation " may have lagged behind .
The FCC was really worried about this becoming possible over approved UWB ( Ultra WideBand ) frequencies... thus , they put really serious power level limitations on UWB radios approved so far .
Not that strictly nefarious use of such technology necessarily follows FCC guidelines anyway .
But if nothing else , it 's an effective means of ensuring that the " see through your apartment walls " device does n't show up in SkyMall anytime soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The basic idea of using high frequencies across a wide spectrum as well penetrating radar of a sort has been known for quite awhile, even if the "simple matter of an implementation" may have lagged behind.
The FCC was really worried about this becoming possible over approved UWB (Ultra WideBand) frequencies... thus, they put really serious power level limitations on UWB radios approved so far.
Not that strictly nefarious use of such technology necessarily follows FCC guidelines anyway.
But if nothing else, it's an effective means of ensuring that the "see through your apartment walls" device doesn't show up in SkyMall anytime soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309462</id>
	<title>Land of the Free?</title>
	<author>Voulnet</author>
	<datestamp>1259850780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>More like Police State.<br><br>Americans will cling firmly to their freedom of speech (or is it freedom to say stupid things?) but will gladly give away their other (more important) freedoms, slowly but surely.<br><br>Get a grip, guys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>More like Police State.Americans will cling firmly to their freedom of speech ( or is it freedom to say stupid things ?
) but will gladly give away their other ( more important ) freedoms , slowly but surely.Get a grip , guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More like Police State.Americans will cling firmly to their freedom of speech (or is it freedom to say stupid things?
) but will gladly give away their other (more important) freedoms, slowly but surely.Get a grip, guys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309790</id>
	<title>Radar Company can see through walls</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think they need more than a company, they should train and equip a couple of battalions at least. Then send them to Iraq and Afganistan, they shpuld be able to find the Al Quaeda and Taliban terrorists easily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think they need more than a company , they should train and equip a couple of battalions at least .
Then send them to Iraq and Afganistan , they shpuld be able to find the Al Quaeda and Taliban terrorists easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think they need more than a company, they should train and equip a couple of battalions at least.
Then send them to Iraq and Afganistan, they shpuld be able to find the Al Quaeda and Taliban terrorists easily.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310266</id>
	<title>Re:do not want</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1259856300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just don't do anything in the "privacy" of your own home that could be construed as indecent exposure, and you'll be fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just do n't do anything in the " privacy " of your own home that could be construed as indecent exposure , and you 'll be fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just don't do anything in the "privacy" of your own home that could be construed as indecent exposure, and you'll be fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309598</id>
	<title>My home is my castle.</title>
	<author>wurp</author>
	<datestamp>1259851980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I said, "nt".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I said , " nt " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I said, "nt".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30316208</id>
	<title>This is going to get a hard look by USSC</title>
	<author>FlyingGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1259835000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Supreme Court is not going to let this just slide on by.  This type of technology has been dealt with.   See <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-8508.ZO.html" title="cornell.edu">KYLLO V. UNITED STATES (99-8508) 533 U.S. 27 (2001) </a> [cornell.edu]. The decision was summarized as:</p><p><div class="quote"><p> Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a &ldquo;search&rdquo; and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.</p><p>Since we hold the Thermovision imaging to have been an unlawful search, it will remain for the District Court to determine whether, without the evidence it provided, the search warrant issued in this case was supported by probable cause&ndash;and if not, whether there is any other basis for supporting admission of the evidence that the search pursuant to the warrant produced.</p><p>The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed; the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.</p><p>

It is so ordered.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Supreme Court is not going to let this just slide on by .
This type of technology has been dealt with .
See KYLLO V. UNITED STATES ( 99-8508 ) 533 U.S. 27 ( 2001 ) [ cornell.edu ] .
The decision was summarized as : Where , as here , the Government uses a device that is not in general public use , to explore details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion , the surveillance is a    search    and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.Since we hold the Thermovision imaging to have been an unlawful search , it will remain for the District Court to determine whether , without the evidence it provided , the search warrant issued in this case was supported by probable cause    and if not , whether there is any other basis for supporting admission of the evidence that the search pursuant to the warrant produced.The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed ; the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion .
It is so ordered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Supreme Court is not going to let this just slide on by.
This type of technology has been dealt with.
See KYLLO V. UNITED STATES (99-8508) 533 U.S. 27 (2001)  [cornell.edu].
The decision was summarized as: Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a “search” and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.Since we hold the Thermovision imaging to have been an unlawful search, it will remain for the District Court to determine whether, without the evidence it provided, the search warrant issued in this case was supported by probable cause–and if not, whether there is any other basis for supporting admission of the evidence that the search pursuant to the warrant produced.The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed; the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310702</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259858220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Any evidence collected using this device without a warrant would probably get thrown out due to a 4th amendment violation.</p></div><p>Not "probably" - almost certainly. See Kyllo v. United States (2001).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any evidence collected using this device without a warrant would probably get thrown out due to a 4th amendment violation.Not " probably " - almost certainly .
See Kyllo v. United States ( 2001 ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any evidence collected using this device without a warrant would probably get thrown out due to a 4th amendment violation.Not "probably" - almost certainly.
See Kyllo v. United States (2001).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309920</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>violasvegas</author>
	<datestamp>1259854500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Being informed about new technology and being aware of the possible negative/intrusive/liberty restricting uses of that technology is not scaremongering, it's called being a good citizen. Let's not put our heads in the sand just because the device has some positives. It also has negatives. To loosely quote Ben Franklin, Those who are willing to give up freedom to gain security will gain neither. The job of a good citizen to to be informed and engage in useful debate, not to try to sound witty or hipper than thou by tossing around terms like luddite and scaremongering to try and intimidate people. Perhaps that's the irony here, the use of the term scaremongering to, well, scare and intimidate people. Nice job.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Being informed about new technology and being aware of the possible negative/intrusive/liberty restricting uses of that technology is not scaremongering , it 's called being a good citizen .
Let 's not put our heads in the sand just because the device has some positives .
It also has negatives .
To loosely quote Ben Franklin , Those who are willing to give up freedom to gain security will gain neither .
The job of a good citizen to to be informed and engage in useful debate , not to try to sound witty or hipper than thou by tossing around terms like luddite and scaremongering to try and intimidate people .
Perhaps that 's the irony here , the use of the term scaremongering to , well , scare and intimidate people .
Nice job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being informed about new technology and being aware of the possible negative/intrusive/liberty restricting uses of that technology is not scaremongering, it's called being a good citizen.
Let's not put our heads in the sand just because the device has some positives.
It also has negatives.
To loosely quote Ben Franklin, Those who are willing to give up freedom to gain security will gain neither.
The job of a good citizen to to be informed and engage in useful debate, not to try to sound witty or hipper than thou by tossing around terms like luddite and scaremongering to try and intimidate people.
Perhaps that's the irony here, the use of the term scaremongering to, well, scare and intimidate people.
Nice job.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30314052</id>
	<title>Waiting for the last shoe to drop</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1259869500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any day now, we'll start to read about all the economic and environmental advantages of monitoring residential wastewater streams.  Then the encirclement wil be complete: everything coming into the home, everything occuring in the home, and everything leaving the home will readily be available for analysis, moral judgement, and prosecution.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any day now , we 'll start to read about all the economic and environmental advantages of monitoring residential wastewater streams .
Then the encirclement wil be complete : everything coming into the home , everything occuring in the home , and everything leaving the home will readily be available for analysis , moral judgement , and prosecution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any day now, we'll start to read about all the economic and environmental advantages of monitoring residential wastewater streams.
Then the encirclement wil be complete: everything coming into the home, everything occuring in the home, and everything leaving the home will readily be available for analysis, moral judgement, and prosecution.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310338</id>
	<title>Article is misleading on primary use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article is misleading with regard to the primary use of this device.  The device was developed for military use in urban combat situations.</p><p> <a href="http://www.cyterra.com/products/through-wall.html" title="cyterra.com">EMMDAR: ElectroMagnetic Motion-Detection
And Ranging</a> [cyterra.com] </p><p>It was developed because infantry were holding up standard handheld mine detectors (<a href="http://www.cyterra.com/products/handheld-cm.html" title="cyterra.com">AN/PSS-14</a> [cyterra.com]) that use ground penetrating radar against walls trying to determine threat levels in neighbouring buildings or rooms.  Troops would then interpret the audio tones to determine rooms contents.</p><p>This device simply makes that technology smaller and more accessible and includes DSP algorithms to display potential threats (i.e. movement) on a graphical display.</p><p>Other common uses for this device is search and rescue, both military and civilian.  Of course the FBI and SWAT is going to want this technology.  Any time law enforcement is going to assualt a building, this device is going to prove invaluable in saving lives.</p><p>Nobody is going to pratically use this device for random checking of homes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article is misleading with regard to the primary use of this device .
The device was developed for military use in urban combat situations .
EMMDAR : ElectroMagnetic Motion-Detection And Ranging [ cyterra.com ] It was developed because infantry were holding up standard handheld mine detectors ( AN/PSS-14 [ cyterra.com ] ) that use ground penetrating radar against walls trying to determine threat levels in neighbouring buildings or rooms .
Troops would then interpret the audio tones to determine rooms contents.This device simply makes that technology smaller and more accessible and includes DSP algorithms to display potential threats ( i.e .
movement ) on a graphical display.Other common uses for this device is search and rescue , both military and civilian .
Of course the FBI and SWAT is going to want this technology .
Any time law enforcement is going to assualt a building , this device is going to prove invaluable in saving lives.Nobody is going to pratically use this device for random checking of homes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article is misleading with regard to the primary use of this device.
The device was developed for military use in urban combat situations.
EMMDAR: ElectroMagnetic Motion-Detection
And Ranging [cyterra.com] It was developed because infantry were holding up standard handheld mine detectors (AN/PSS-14 [cyterra.com]) that use ground penetrating radar against walls trying to determine threat levels in neighbouring buildings or rooms.
Troops would then interpret the audio tones to determine rooms contents.This device simply makes that technology smaller and more accessible and includes DSP algorithms to display potential threats (i.e.
movement) on a graphical display.Other common uses for this device is search and rescue, both military and civilian.
Of course the FBI and SWAT is going to want this technology.
Any time law enforcement is going to assualt a building, this device is going to prove invaluable in saving lives.Nobody is going to pratically use this device for random checking of homes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311440</id>
	<title>At least I'll know when the cops are at my door...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259860800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... when my wireless network disconnects.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... when my wireless network disconnects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... when my wireless network disconnects.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309318</id>
	<title>Probably not first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259848620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do people who write "first" know if other people have posted while they were writing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do people who write " first " know if other people have posted while they were writing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do people who write "first" know if other people have posted while they were writing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309414</id>
	<title>Gonna be expensive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259850240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>All that tinfoil for the walls...</htmltext>
<tokenext>All that tinfoil for the walls.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All that tinfoil for the walls...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310022</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>Bakkster</author>
	<datestamp>1259855040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Let's not mention FLIR (forward looking infra-red) allows law enforcement to see through walls anyway with remarkable resolution.</p><p> <strong>They still need a warrant to use it</strong> </p></div><p>Here's the trick, isn't it?  As far as I can tell, our justice system for criminal offenses is still relatively transparent.  People still get cases dismissed because the cops did something wrong, such as not obtaining a warrant.  If they're busting into your house with a warrant already, I see no sense in complaining about what technology they may or may not use to prepare.  Especially with the potential benefits against being surprised by the visitor to your house, or the ability to detect weapons before they're encountered (preventing unintended injuries).  Or even just the ability to make sure you're home before busting in your door thinking you're avoiding them.
</p><p>Basically, complain about the search and seizure, complain about not obtaining warrants, but don't complain about the specific technology used unless there are concerns about safety (taser) or efficacy (too many false-positives).
</p><p>Of course, the big reason why fire departments want this is because FLIR doesn't work on a burning building, this will let them identify breathing victims to minimize their risk and let them rescue as many as possible.  The benefit for police is more marginal, though still significant.  But if you're worried about cops having the capability to lok into your house, they already do (and SCOTUS have said it requires a warrant).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's not mention FLIR ( forward looking infra-red ) allows law enforcement to see through walls anyway with remarkable resolution .
They still need a warrant to use it Here 's the trick , is n't it ?
As far as I can tell , our justice system for criminal offenses is still relatively transparent .
People still get cases dismissed because the cops did something wrong , such as not obtaining a warrant .
If they 're busting into your house with a warrant already , I see no sense in complaining about what technology they may or may not use to prepare .
Especially with the potential benefits against being surprised by the visitor to your house , or the ability to detect weapons before they 're encountered ( preventing unintended injuries ) .
Or even just the ability to make sure you 're home before busting in your door thinking you 're avoiding them .
Basically , complain about the search and seizure , complain about not obtaining warrants , but do n't complain about the specific technology used unless there are concerns about safety ( taser ) or efficacy ( too many false-positives ) .
Of course , the big reason why fire departments want this is because FLIR does n't work on a burning building , this will let them identify breathing victims to minimize their risk and let them rescue as many as possible .
The benefit for police is more marginal , though still significant .
But if you 're worried about cops having the capability to lok into your house , they already do ( and SCOTUS have said it requires a warrant ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's not mention FLIR (forward looking infra-red) allows law enforcement to see through walls anyway with remarkable resolution.
They still need a warrant to use it Here's the trick, isn't it?
As far as I can tell, our justice system for criminal offenses is still relatively transparent.
People still get cases dismissed because the cops did something wrong, such as not obtaining a warrant.
If they're busting into your house with a warrant already, I see no sense in complaining about what technology they may or may not use to prepare.
Especially with the potential benefits against being surprised by the visitor to your house, or the ability to detect weapons before they're encountered (preventing unintended injuries).
Or even just the ability to make sure you're home before busting in your door thinking you're avoiding them.
Basically, complain about the search and seizure, complain about not obtaining warrants, but don't complain about the specific technology used unless there are concerns about safety (taser) or efficacy (too many false-positives).
Of course, the big reason why fire departments want this is because FLIR doesn't work on a burning building, this will let them identify breathing victims to minimize their risk and let them rescue as many as possible.
The benefit for police is more marginal, though still significant.
But if you're worried about cops having the capability to lok into your house, they already do (and SCOTUS have said it requires a warrant).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309354</id>
	<title>do not want</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259849100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here comes my tax dollars, with a new technology to help arrest me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here comes my tax dollars , with a new technology to help arrest me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here comes my tax dollars, with a new technology to help arrest me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310036</id>
	<title>Re:Must be deployed only with court orders.</title>
	<author>srollyson</author>
	<datestamp>1259855100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Supreme Court ruled that thermal devices require a warrant in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo\_v.\_United\_States" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Kyllo v. United States</a> [wikipedia.org]. I'm sure this radar system will follow precedent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Supreme Court ruled that thermal devices require a warrant in Kyllo v. United States [ wikipedia.org ] .
I 'm sure this radar system will follow precedent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Supreme Court ruled that thermal devices require a warrant in Kyllo v. United States [wikipedia.org].
I'm sure this radar system will follow precedent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310396</id>
	<title>Re:Probably not first</title>
	<author>Pulse\_Instance</author>
	<datestamp>1259856900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They had access to the demo of the radar that lets people see through walls and use that to see if anyone was posting before them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They had access to the demo of the radar that lets people see through walls and use that to see if anyone was posting before them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They had access to the demo of the radar that lets people see through walls and use that to see if anyone was posting before them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309344</id>
	<title>What are the chances</title>
	<author>jnmontario</author>
	<datestamp>1259848920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any guesses that clients of this company include the NSA, FBI....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any guesses that clients of this company include the NSA , FBI... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any guesses that clients of this company include the NSA, FBI....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309904</id>
	<title>A radar question for the informed</title>
	<author>professorguy</author>
	<datestamp>1259854380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My walls are between 6 to 8 inches of solid soft wood with no hollows.  I live in a log cabin made from balsam.  How well does a half foot of solid wood block this tech?  The cabin also has small (1' x 3') and few windows because it is cold and dark here.
<br> <br>
I also wonder how well my walls would stop an accidental rifle bullet from 100 meters (closer and you can see the house), as I hear hunters in the woods this time of year.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My walls are between 6 to 8 inches of solid soft wood with no hollows .
I live in a log cabin made from balsam .
How well does a half foot of solid wood block this tech ?
The cabin also has small ( 1 ' x 3 ' ) and few windows because it is cold and dark here .
I also wonder how well my walls would stop an accidental rifle bullet from 100 meters ( closer and you can see the house ) , as I hear hunters in the woods this time of year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My walls are between 6 to 8 inches of solid soft wood with no hollows.
I live in a log cabin made from balsam.
How well does a half foot of solid wood block this tech?
The cabin also has small (1' x 3') and few windows because it is cold and dark here.
I also wonder how well my walls would stop an accidental rifle bullet from 100 meters (closer and you can see the house), as I hear hunters in the woods this time of year.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309484</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259850960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another step closer to a bloody second American revolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another step closer to a bloody second American revolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another step closer to a bloody second American revolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309656</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>sertsa</author>
	<datestamp>1259852400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't characterize us as Luddites. Rather, I would say understanding the technology we have a healthy respect and even enthusiasm for its potential but well-informed concern for its liabilities.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't characterize us as Luddites .
Rather , I would say understanding the technology we have a healthy respect and even enthusiasm for its potential but well-informed concern for its liabilities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't characterize us as Luddites.
Rather, I would say understanding the technology we have a healthy respect and even enthusiasm for its potential but well-informed concern for its liabilities.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309560</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259851680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The proles will never revolt.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The proles will never revolt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The proles will never revolt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309572</id>
	<title>Re:Gonna be expensive</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1259851800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>All that tinfoil for the walls...</i> <br> <br>Assuming it's not already built in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>All that tinfoil for the walls... Assuming it 's not already built in : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All that tinfoil for the walls...  Assuming it's not already built in :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311486</id>
	<title>Re:A radar question for the informed</title>
	<author>TheLink</author>
	<datestamp>1259860920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe this and other "see through wall tech" (UWB radar) can filter out most stationary stuff (doppler effect).</p><p>So if you want a wall that blocks it, keep it moving enough.</p><p>Or shake/flap/wave a solid/film enough or have moving liquids in the way e.g. water walls at an angle with big bubbles going up all the time, and/or "waterfall" walls. Not sure which is cheaper to run.</p><p>Or have big fans spinning slowly all the time. Or any cool stuff that shows up as a false blip in the motion detectors in those Alien movies<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;).</p><p>Lastly, I'm no expert but 6 inches of soft wood is unlikely to stop a rifle bullet. Get some kevlar and line important bits of your walls<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:).</p><p>See: <a href="http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/rifle.htm" title="globalsecurity.org">http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/rifle.htm</a> [globalsecurity.org]</p><p>And note that the figures are for 5.56mm rounds which I guess won't normally penetrate as well as hunter rifle rounds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe this and other " see through wall tech " ( UWB radar ) can filter out most stationary stuff ( doppler effect ) .So if you want a wall that blocks it , keep it moving enough.Or shake/flap/wave a solid/film enough or have moving liquids in the way e.g .
water walls at an angle with big bubbles going up all the time , and/or " waterfall " walls .
Not sure which is cheaper to run.Or have big fans spinning slowly all the time .
Or any cool stuff that shows up as a false blip in the motion detectors in those Alien movies ; ) .Lastly , I 'm no expert but 6 inches of soft wood is unlikely to stop a rifle bullet .
Get some kevlar and line important bits of your walls : ) .See : http : //www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/rifle.htm [ globalsecurity.org ] And note that the figures are for 5.56mm rounds which I guess wo n't normally penetrate as well as hunter rifle rounds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe this and other "see through wall tech" (UWB radar) can filter out most stationary stuff (doppler effect).So if you want a wall that blocks it, keep it moving enough.Or shake/flap/wave a solid/film enough or have moving liquids in the way e.g.
water walls at an angle with big bubbles going up all the time, and/or "waterfall" walls.
Not sure which is cheaper to run.Or have big fans spinning slowly all the time.
Or any cool stuff that shows up as a false blip in the motion detectors in those Alien movies ;).Lastly, I'm no expert but 6 inches of soft wood is unlikely to stop a rifle bullet.
Get some kevlar and line important bits of your walls :).See: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/rifle.htm [globalsecurity.org]And note that the figures are for 5.56mm rounds which I guess won't normally penetrate as well as hunter rifle rounds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30317854</id>
	<title>Good thing....</title>
	<author>ZosX</author>
	<datestamp>1259840460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just put the finishing touches on my tinfoil lined apartment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just put the finishing touches on my tinfoil lined apartment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just put the finishing touches on my tinfoil lined apartment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30314874</id>
	<title>Illegal Sodomy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259872920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait till they arrest you for Sodomy. Until now there was no way to prove it, now they have you on camera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait till they arrest you for Sodomy .
Until now there was no way to prove it , now they have you on camera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait till they arrest you for Sodomy.
Until now there was no way to prove it, now they have you on camera.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310170</id>
	<title>Re:how many watts of power</title>
	<author>BlueStrat</author>
	<datestamp>1259855640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Radar isn't the kind of radiation that causes damage. It passes harmlessly through you.</i></p><p>I'm sure that's what a few Darwin-Award-winning Amana RadaRange owners thought, too, when they decided to defeat the door interlock to "watch the food cook". The poor blind SOB's. Radar energy can cause your cornea to heat and become cataract-like.</p><p>No, as a former civilian avionics tech that worked on radar, it can cause blindness/serious injury/death (depending on TX power and exposure time) if you're close to the business end of the antenna/dish of a radar transmitter.</p><p>Strat</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Radar is n't the kind of radiation that causes damage .
It passes harmlessly through you.I 'm sure that 's what a few Darwin-Award-winning Amana RadaRange owners thought , too , when they decided to defeat the door interlock to " watch the food cook " .
The poor blind SOB 's .
Radar energy can cause your cornea to heat and become cataract-like.No , as a former civilian avionics tech that worked on radar , it can cause blindness/serious injury/death ( depending on TX power and exposure time ) if you 're close to the business end of the antenna/dish of a radar transmitter.Strat</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Radar isn't the kind of radiation that causes damage.
It passes harmlessly through you.I'm sure that's what a few Darwin-Award-winning Amana RadaRange owners thought, too, when they decided to defeat the door interlock to "watch the food cook".
The poor blind SOB's.
Radar energy can cause your cornea to heat and become cataract-like.No, as a former civilian avionics tech that worked on radar, it can cause blindness/serious injury/death (depending on TX power and exposure time) if you're close to the business end of the antenna/dish of a radar transmitter.Strat</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310034</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>cigawoot</author>
	<datestamp>1259855100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any evidence collected using this device without a warrant would probably get thrown out due to a 4th amendment violation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any evidence collected using this device without a warrant would probably get thrown out due to a 4th amendment violation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any evidence collected using this device without a warrant would probably get thrown out due to a 4th amendment violation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309998</id>
	<title>Re:Must be deployed only with court orders.</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1259854920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The system described is an active device, not passive. An active device emits radiation and listens to echo. A passive device just listens to naturally occurring radiation emanating from a source. Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion. But an active device, that actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision. It should be treated like wiretapping, no need to inform the targets but the police should not be able to use the technology willy-nilly at their own discretion.</i></p><p>So, I give you a couple of black box cameras, each able to take pictures of the same resolution inside an (unprotected) house. The one that is passive, and works at 300 GHz, is OK for unrestricted police use, but the one that is active, and works at 3 GHz, requires a (secret) search warrant.</p><p>Well, this is reasoning, of a sort, but not any that I would personally want to be associated with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The system described is an active device , not passive .
An active device emits radiation and listens to echo .
A passive device just listens to naturally occurring radiation emanating from a source .
Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion .
But an active device , that actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision .
It should be treated like wiretapping , no need to inform the targets but the police should not be able to use the technology willy-nilly at their own discretion.So , I give you a couple of black box cameras , each able to take pictures of the same resolution inside an ( unprotected ) house .
The one that is passive , and works at 300 GHz , is OK for unrestricted police use , but the one that is active , and works at 3 GHz , requires a ( secret ) search warrant.Well , this is reasoning , of a sort , but not any that I would personally want to be associated with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The system described is an active device, not passive.
An active device emits radiation and listens to echo.
A passive device just listens to naturally occurring radiation emanating from a source.
Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion.
But an active device, that actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision.
It should be treated like wiretapping, no need to inform the targets but the police should not be able to use the technology willy-nilly at their own discretion.So, I give you a couple of black box cameras, each able to take pictures of the same resolution inside an (unprotected) house.
The one that is passive, and works at 300 GHz, is OK for unrestricted police use, but the one that is active, and works at 3 GHz, requires a (secret) search warrant.Well, this is reasoning, of a sort, but not any that I would personally want to be associated with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310174</id>
	<title>Re:What are the chances</title>
	<author>mitchelllazarus</author>
	<datestamp>1259855700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is radar, people, not TV.  It does not provide an image -- just a dot to show something is moving.  And the range is short.  Personally I share your concerns about technology invading privacy.  But in the real world, this particular device is not a threat.  Mitchell Lazarus</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is radar , people , not TV .
It does not provide an image -- just a dot to show something is moving .
And the range is short .
Personally I share your concerns about technology invading privacy .
But in the real world , this particular device is not a threat .
Mitchell Lazarus</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is radar, people, not TV.
It does not provide an image -- just a dot to show something is moving.
And the range is short.
Personally I share your concerns about technology invading privacy.
But in the real world, this particular device is not a threat.
Mitchell Lazarus</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309342</id>
	<title>"Go 'way, 'batin!"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259848920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>*knock knock*</i> <br>
"Go 'way, 'batin!" <br>
"Sir, we are well aware of your current status, we can see through your walls.  However, that's not why we're here--we would like to discuss the illegal transmitter you are running on your roof right now."</htmltext>
<tokenext>* knock knock * " Go 'way , 'batin !
" " Sir , we are well aware of your current status , we can see through your walls .
However , that 's not why we 're here--we would like to discuss the illegal transmitter you are running on your roof right now .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*knock knock* 
"Go 'way, 'batin!
" 
"Sir, we are well aware of your current status, we can see through your walls.
However, that's not why we're here--we would like to discuss the illegal transmitter you are running on your roof right now.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309388</id>
	<title>Fuzzbuster</title>
	<author>snspdaarf</author>
	<datestamp>1259849880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>How long before someone markets a radar detector for the home or office?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How long before someone markets a radar detector for the home or office ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long before someone markets a radar detector for the home or office?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310096</id>
	<title>Re:how many watts of power</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1259855400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, radar bounces accusingly off of you, otherwise this system wouldn't work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , radar bounces accusingly off of you , otherwise this system would n't work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, radar bounces accusingly off of you, otherwise this system wouldn't work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311622</id>
	<title>I forsee...</title>
	<author>sycodon</author>
	<datestamp>1259861340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A new category on www.pornhub.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A new category on www.pornhub.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A new category on www.pornhub.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309678</id>
	<title>An easy to block 3 GHz radar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259852580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a 3 GHz or 9 cm radar (3.101 to 3.499 GHz using frequency stepping), and would be very easy to block. It would not, for example, go through most screen doors.<br>That makes it less of a threat than the 100 GHz radars also used to "see through walls."</p><p>When will we be able to get drywall and ceiling tiles with imprinted or embedded dipoles to block this foolishness ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a 3 GHz or 9 cm radar ( 3.101 to 3.499 GHz using frequency stepping ) , and would be very easy to block .
It would not , for example , go through most screen doors.That makes it less of a threat than the 100 GHz radars also used to " see through walls .
" When will we be able to get drywall and ceiling tiles with imprinted or embedded dipoles to block this foolishness ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a 3 GHz or 9 cm radar (3.101 to 3.499 GHz using frequency stepping), and would be very easy to block.
It would not, for example, go through most screen doors.That makes it less of a threat than the 100 GHz radars also used to "see through walls.
"When will we be able to get drywall and ceiling tiles with imprinted or embedded dipoles to block this foolishness ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312512</id>
	<title>Every "problem" is an opportunity</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1259863920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Come on geeks... there must be some way of shielding buildings from this device, as well as criminals who are willing to pay top dollar to have that shielding installed! I'm gonna start advertising Faraday cages at all the hydroponic gardening equipment suppliers...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Come on geeks... there must be some way of shielding buildings from this device , as well as criminals who are willing to pay top dollar to have that shielding installed !
I 'm gon na start advertising Faraday cages at all the hydroponic gardening equipment suppliers.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come on geeks... there must be some way of shielding buildings from this device, as well as criminals who are willing to pay top dollar to have that shielding installed!
I'm gonna start advertising Faraday cages at all the hydroponic gardening equipment suppliers...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310450</id>
	<title>They'll call it 'Patriot Radar'</title>
	<author>citab</author>
	<datestamp>1259857140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That way you're a traitor if you talk against it...</p><p>The article says it will filter out unmoving objects in a room<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... however the justification for it is "immobile hostages or unconscious fire victims"</p><p>Well the first one is by definition "immobile" and the second... unless you are still in the burning , you're not going to be moving much either. Although, how does one unconsciously run around on fire waving their arms everywhere.</p><p>I think the tech is cool, but it's going to be misused by law enforcement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That way you 're a traitor if you talk against it...The article says it will filter out unmoving objects in a room ... however the justification for it is " immobile hostages or unconscious fire victims " Well the first one is by definition " immobile " and the second... unless you are still in the burning , you 're not going to be moving much either .
Although , how does one unconsciously run around on fire waving their arms everywhere.I think the tech is cool , but it 's going to be misused by law enforcement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That way you're a traitor if you talk against it...The article says it will filter out unmoving objects in a room ... however the justification for it is "immobile hostages or unconscious fire victims"Well the first one is by definition "immobile" and the second... unless you are still in the burning , you're not going to be moving much either.
Although, how does one unconsciously run around on fire waving their arms everywhere.I think the tech is cool, but it's going to be misused by law enforcement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309408</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259850180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any time they list the Department of Homeland Security as a client...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any time they list the Department of Homeland Security as a client.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any time they list the Department of Homeland Security as a client...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311070</id>
	<title>Re:Gonna be expensive</title>
	<author>Corbets</author>
	<datestamp>1259859540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Tinfoil may work, but radar-disrupting radio waves would work better. Dollars to donuts it'll be illegal.</p></div><p>That expression might not be the best idea anymore. Bought a donut lately? I haven't seen a good one under a buck in a long time!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tinfoil may work , but radar-disrupting radio waves would work better .
Dollars to donuts it 'll be illegal.That expression might not be the best idea anymore .
Bought a donut lately ?
I have n't seen a good one under a buck in a long time !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tinfoil may work, but radar-disrupting radio waves would work better.
Dollars to donuts it'll be illegal.That expression might not be the best idea anymore.
Bought a donut lately?
I haven't seen a good one under a buck in a long time!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362</id>
	<title>Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259849460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are already many civilian radar devices that are used frequently by law enforcement and fire fighters. This is a better version of it, and the article itself is nothing less than enthusiastic about the range of uses for it.</p><p>What I see happening more and more is that people are fearing technology because of what "bad people" will do with it instead of embracing new technology and the possibilities it brings.</p><p>A technology site filled with Luddites. Irony at its finest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are already many civilian radar devices that are used frequently by law enforcement and fire fighters .
This is a better version of it , and the article itself is nothing less than enthusiastic about the range of uses for it.What I see happening more and more is that people are fearing technology because of what " bad people " will do with it instead of embracing new technology and the possibilities it brings.A technology site filled with Luddites .
Irony at its finest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are already many civilian radar devices that are used frequently by law enforcement and fire fighters.
This is a better version of it, and the article itself is nothing less than enthusiastic about the range of uses for it.What I see happening more and more is that people are fearing technology because of what "bad people" will do with it instead of embracing new technology and the possibilities it brings.A technology site filled with Luddites.
Irony at its finest.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30318264</id>
	<title>Re:What are the chances</title>
	<author>AmiMoJo</author>
	<datestamp>1259842260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget low budget porn outfits specialising in "amateur" couples.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget low budget porn outfits specialising in " amateur " couples .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget low budget porn outfits specialising in "amateur" couples.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309450</id>
	<title>Re:how many watts of power</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259850660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Radar isn't the kind of radiation that causes damage.  It passes harmlessly through you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Radar is n't the kind of radiation that causes damage .
It passes harmlessly through you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Radar isn't the kind of radiation that causes damage.
It passes harmlessly through you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309364</id>
	<title>how many watts of power</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259849520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>does this thing use lots of power? is it going to give me cancer or fry me like a chicken pot pie in the microwave?</htmltext>
<tokenext>does this thing use lots of power ?
is it going to give me cancer or fry me like a chicken pot pie in the microwave ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>does this thing use lots of power?
is it going to give me cancer or fry me like a chicken pot pie in the microwave?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309522</id>
	<title>Re:It's time to buy stock ...</title>
	<author>backbyter</author>
	<datestamp>1259851320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Talk about planning... the government banned that in homes years ago...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Talk about planning... the government banned that in homes years ago.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Talk about planning... the government banned that in homes years ago...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310360</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1259856720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can I get root access to your servers?  I promise I won't turn over the contents to the cops!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I get root access to your servers ?
I promise I wo n't turn over the contents to the cops !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I get root access to your servers?
I promise I won't turn over the contents to the cops!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310104</id>
	<title>Re:how many watts of power</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259855460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, that's not true. Radar is a variety of wavelengths. They're obviously not using the ones that pass through you, since the whole point is to SEE YOU. That can only be done if the radar scatters off you. IE, doesn't pass harmlessly through you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , that 's not true .
Radar is a variety of wavelengths .
They 're obviously not using the ones that pass through you , since the whole point is to SEE YOU .
That can only be done if the radar scatters off you .
IE , does n't pass harmlessly through you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, that's not true.
Radar is a variety of wavelengths.
They're obviously not using the ones that pass through you, since the whole point is to SEE YOU.
That can only be done if the radar scatters off you.
IE, doesn't pass harmlessly through you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311004</id>
	<title>Re:Article is misleading on primary use</title>
	<author>professorguy</author>
	<datestamp>1259859360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nobody is going to pratically use this device for random checking of homes.</p></div><p>
Well, as long as YOU say they won't, I guess we have nothing to worry about.  Whew, thanks for providing that iron-clad guarantee that this will not be abused (unlike every other spy device ever constructed by anyone, anywhere).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody is going to pratically use this device for random checking of homes .
Well , as long as YOU say they wo n't , I guess we have nothing to worry about .
Whew , thanks for providing that iron-clad guarantee that this will not be abused ( unlike every other spy device ever constructed by anyone , anywhere ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody is going to pratically use this device for random checking of homes.
Well, as long as YOU say they won't, I guess we have nothing to worry about.
Whew, thanks for providing that iron-clad guarantee that this will not be abused (unlike every other spy device ever constructed by anyone, anywhere).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309662</id>
	<title>Re:Must be deployed only with court orders.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259852460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion. But an active device, that actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision.</p></div><p>What the fuck?  Even the use of a passive device violates expectations of privacy.  We don't live in glass houses, nobody expects to be visible through solid walls.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>These devices should be legal. And since the idea has been posted publicly, (i.e. here in slashdot by yours truly) any patent to such devices should specific to that device, not a broad based patent like one-click. Unless patent application for such a device has already been filed.</p></div><p>Uh, no.  Radar jamming is as old as radar.  Ain't no way it should be patentable - and any patent for jamming specific kinds of radar systems is just as bogus because the overall idea isn't patentable, so narrowing it down a specific frequency or a specific pattern of transmission doesn't make the idea any more unique.  A subset of the obvious isn't any less obvious.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion .
But an active device , that actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision.What the fuck ?
Even the use of a passive device violates expectations of privacy .
We do n't live in glass houses , nobody expects to be visible through solid walls.These devices should be legal .
And since the idea has been posted publicly , ( i.e .
here in slashdot by yours truly ) any patent to such devices should specific to that device , not a broad based patent like one-click .
Unless patent application for such a device has already been filed.Uh , no .
Radar jamming is as old as radar .
Ai n't no way it should be patentable - and any patent for jamming specific kinds of radar systems is just as bogus because the overall idea is n't patentable , so narrowing it down a specific frequency or a specific pattern of transmission does n't make the idea any more unique .
A subset of the obvious is n't any less obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion.
But an active device, that actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision.What the fuck?
Even the use of a passive device violates expectations of privacy.
We don't live in glass houses, nobody expects to be visible through solid walls.These devices should be legal.
And since the idea has been posted publicly, (i.e.
here in slashdot by yours truly) any patent to such devices should specific to that device, not a broad based patent like one-click.
Unless patent application for such a device has already been filed.Uh, no.
Radar jamming is as old as radar.
Ain't no way it should be patentable - and any patent for jamming specific kinds of radar systems is just as bogus because the overall idea isn't patentable, so narrowing it down a specific frequency or a specific pattern of transmission doesn't make the idea any more unique.
A subset of the obvious isn't any less obvious.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444</id>
	<title>Must be deployed only with court orders.</title>
	<author>140Mandak262Jamuna</author>
	<datestamp>1259850540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The system described is an active device, not passive. An active device emits radiation and listens to echo. A passive device just listens to naturally occurring radiation emanating from a source. Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion. But an active device, that  actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision. It should be treated like wiretapping, no need to inform the targets but the police should not be able to use the technology willy-nilly at their own discretion.<p>

Also we could create devices that look for patterns of radiation and emit jamming or stealth or confusing radiation in response to thwart being seen through the walls. Something like the radar detectors. These devices should be legal. And since the idea has been posted publicly, (i.e. here in slashdot by yours truly)  any patent to such devices should specific to that device, not a broad based patent like one-click. Unless patent application for such a device has already been filed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The system described is an active device , not passive .
An active device emits radiation and listens to echo .
A passive device just listens to naturally occurring radiation emanating from a source .
Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion .
But an active device , that actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision .
It should be treated like wiretapping , no need to inform the targets but the police should not be able to use the technology willy-nilly at their own discretion .
Also we could create devices that look for patterns of radiation and emit jamming or stealth or confusing radiation in response to thwart being seen through the walls .
Something like the radar detectors .
These devices should be legal .
And since the idea has been posted publicly , ( i.e .
here in slashdot by yours truly ) any patent to such devices should specific to that device , not a broad based patent like one-click .
Unless patent application for such a device has already been filed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The system described is an active device, not passive.
An active device emits radiation and listens to echo.
A passive device just listens to naturally occurring radiation emanating from a source.
Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion.
But an active device, that  actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision.
It should be treated like wiretapping, no need to inform the targets but the police should not be able to use the technology willy-nilly at their own discretion.
Also we could create devices that look for patterns of radiation and emit jamming or stealth or confusing radiation in response to thwart being seen through the walls.
Something like the radar detectors.
These devices should be legal.
And since the idea has been posted publicly, (i.e.
here in slashdot by yours truly)  any patent to such devices should specific to that device, not a broad based patent like one-click.
Unless patent application for such a device has already been filed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313088</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>syncrotic</author>
	<datestamp>1259865900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thermal IR imaging isn't magic.</p><p>First off, "FLIR" is kind of a misnomer. It stands for "Forward Looking InfraRed," but that just means that it, well, looks forward... like a camera. When thermal IR detectors were first invented, they were expensive, bulky, cryogenically cooled devices. As a result, making a high resolution grid of them was impractical. Instead they made a single row of them, mounted them to the bottom of an airplane, pointed them downward, and used the forward motion of plane itself to form a 2D image. It's sort of like how a flatbed scanner works: a 2D scanning element moved over the area or interest.</p><p>When thermal infrared detectors advanced enough to form a proper 2D grid at a semi-reasonable cost, you could aim them straight ahead as you would any other camera; thus, they became known as forward-looking infrared, a designation that persists to this day.</p><p>Further confusing the matter is that there's a company called FLIR that makes and sells thermal imaging equipment. But it's important to keep in mind that they're just far-infrared cameras. They detect thermal IR, emitted by every surface at a frequency and intensity proportional to its temperature. Thermal IR is emitted by everything and absorbed by pretty much everything: there are very few materials transparent to it. Let's put it this way: nothing your house is made of is transparent to IR at thermal wavelengths.</p><p>Bottom line, you can't use thermal IR to look inside anything. It's a tool for measuring surface temperatures, and that's it. Put another way, if you properly insulate your grow-op, thermal IR won't see it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thermal IR imaging is n't magic.First off , " FLIR " is kind of a misnomer .
It stands for " Forward Looking InfraRed , " but that just means that it , well , looks forward... like a camera .
When thermal IR detectors were first invented , they were expensive , bulky , cryogenically cooled devices .
As a result , making a high resolution grid of them was impractical .
Instead they made a single row of them , mounted them to the bottom of an airplane , pointed them downward , and used the forward motion of plane itself to form a 2D image .
It 's sort of like how a flatbed scanner works : a 2D scanning element moved over the area or interest.When thermal infrared detectors advanced enough to form a proper 2D grid at a semi-reasonable cost , you could aim them straight ahead as you would any other camera ; thus , they became known as forward-looking infrared , a designation that persists to this day.Further confusing the matter is that there 's a company called FLIR that makes and sells thermal imaging equipment .
But it 's important to keep in mind that they 're just far-infrared cameras .
They detect thermal IR , emitted by every surface at a frequency and intensity proportional to its temperature .
Thermal IR is emitted by everything and absorbed by pretty much everything : there are very few materials transparent to it .
Let 's put it this way : nothing your house is made of is transparent to IR at thermal wavelengths.Bottom line , you ca n't use thermal IR to look inside anything .
It 's a tool for measuring surface temperatures , and that 's it .
Put another way , if you properly insulate your grow-op , thermal IR wo n't see it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thermal IR imaging isn't magic.First off, "FLIR" is kind of a misnomer.
It stands for "Forward Looking InfraRed," but that just means that it, well, looks forward... like a camera.
When thermal IR detectors were first invented, they were expensive, bulky, cryogenically cooled devices.
As a result, making a high resolution grid of them was impractical.
Instead they made a single row of them, mounted them to the bottom of an airplane, pointed them downward, and used the forward motion of plane itself to form a 2D image.
It's sort of like how a flatbed scanner works: a 2D scanning element moved over the area or interest.When thermal infrared detectors advanced enough to form a proper 2D grid at a semi-reasonable cost, you could aim them straight ahead as you would any other camera; thus, they became known as forward-looking infrared, a designation that persists to this day.Further confusing the matter is that there's a company called FLIR that makes and sells thermal imaging equipment.
But it's important to keep in mind that they're just far-infrared cameras.
They detect thermal IR, emitted by every surface at a frequency and intensity proportional to its temperature.
Thermal IR is emitted by everything and absorbed by pretty much everything: there are very few materials transparent to it.
Let's put it this way: nothing your house is made of is transparent to IR at thermal wavelengths.Bottom line, you can't use thermal IR to look inside anything.
It's a tool for measuring surface temperatures, and that's it.
Put another way, if you properly insulate your grow-op, thermal IR won't see it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310284</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The can (kinda) already do this.<br>you know the Odesa cops, that busted down a house for pot when it was a lawyer, Pine trees and some grow laps?<br>hope the court rules using this tech with out a warrant unreasonable as well.<br>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHmP\_KtmcB4</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The can ( kinda ) already do this.you know the Odesa cops , that busted down a house for pot when it was a lawyer , Pine trees and some grow laps ? hope the court rules using this tech with out a warrant unreasonable as well.http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = EHmP \ _KtmcB4</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The can (kinda) already do this.you know the Odesa cops, that busted down a house for pot when it was a lawyer, Pine trees and some grow laps?hope the court rules using this tech with out a warrant unreasonable as well.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHmP\_KtmcB4</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30314746</id>
	<title>Re:do not want</title>
	<author>Fbelch</author>
	<datestamp>1259872380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are you worried? Are you doing something illegal?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are you worried ?
Are you doing something illegal ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are you worried?
Are you doing something illegal?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310630</id>
	<title>Re:Must be deployed only with court orders.</title>
	<author>baKanale</author>
	<datestamp>1259857800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion.</p></div></blockquote><p>The case of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo\_v.\_United\_States" title="wikipedia.org">Kyllo v. United States</a> [wikipedia.org] "held that the use of a thermal imaging device from a public vantage point to monitor the radiation of heat from a person's home was a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and thus required a warrant."  Presumably the ruling would hold true for other forms of electromagnetic radiation as well, such as radar.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion.The case of Kyllo v. United States [ wikipedia.org ] " held that the use of a thermal imaging device from a public vantage point to monitor the radiation of heat from a person 's home was a " search " within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment , and thus required a warrant .
" Presumably the ruling would hold true for other forms of electromagnetic radiation as well , such as radar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion.The case of Kyllo v. United States [wikipedia.org] "held that the use of a thermal imaging device from a public vantage point to monitor the radiation of heat from a person's home was a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and thus required a warrant.
"  Presumably the ruling would hold true for other forms of electromagnetic radiation as well, such as radar.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309492</id>
	<title>It's time to buy stock ...</title>
	<author>Gravitron 5000</author>
	<datestamp>1259851080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... in lead paint.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... in lead paint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... in lead paint.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311956</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>worip</author>
	<datestamp>1259862240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mod parent up: *rant* Hollywood has totally violated the laws of physics with fictional law enforcement agencies that can use IR to see through walls. Unless the walls are transparent to IR (and not even glass is transparent to micrometer range IR), there is no way to peer through walls with FLIR.*rant over*</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent up : * rant * Hollywood has totally violated the laws of physics with fictional law enforcement agencies that can use IR to see through walls .
Unless the walls are transparent to IR ( and not even glass is transparent to micrometer range IR ) , there is no way to peer through walls with FLIR .
* rant over *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent up: *rant* Hollywood has totally violated the laws of physics with fictional law enforcement agencies that can use IR to see through walls.
Unless the walls are transparent to IR (and not even glass is transparent to micrometer range IR), there is no way to peer through walls with FLIR.
*rant over*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312098</id>
	<title>I can not wait...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259862660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for the mind reading radar.  Then they can really see what I think of them.  And I would not have to take off my jacket to type.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for the mind reading radar .
Then they can really see what I think of them .
And I would not have to take off my jacket to type .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for the mind reading radar.
Then they can really see what I think of them.
And I would not have to take off my jacket to type.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311886</id>
	<title>X-Ray Specs</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1259862060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We won't get a flying car, but this may be the next best sci-fi prophecy to come true:</p><p><a href="http://plainview.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/xray-specs.jpg" title="wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://plainview.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/xray-specs.jpg</a> [wordpress.com]</p><p>That dude is a dead-ringer for a slashdotter also.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We wo n't get a flying car , but this may be the next best sci-fi prophecy to come true : http : //plainview.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/xray-specs.jpg [ wordpress.com ] That dude is a dead-ringer for a slashdotter also .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We won't get a flying car, but this may be the next best sci-fi prophecy to come true:http://plainview.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/xray-specs.jpg [wordpress.com]That dude is a dead-ringer for a slashdotter also.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309508</id>
	<title>Foil strips and a fan.</title>
	<author>backbyter</author>
	<datestamp>1259851260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Order your party supplies now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Order your party supplies now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Order your party supplies now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311012</id>
	<title>New FCC Building Sticker</title>
	<author>skrimp</author>
	<datestamp>1259859360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This structure complies with part ## of the FCC Rules.  Occupancy is subject to the following two conditions: (1) This structure may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this structure must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.

BTW, Popular Science did a review on a new wallpaper that was comprised of Kevlar strands to help withstand explosions and such.  They tested a brick wall with this stuff on one side and hit it on the other with a wrecking ball.  The wall survived.  Now if they can just add copper strands to the weave so that it can be a Faraday cage as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This structure complies with part # # of the FCC Rules .
Occupancy is subject to the following two conditions : ( 1 ) This structure may not cause harmful interference , and ( 2 ) this structure must accept any interference received , including interference that may cause undesired operation .
BTW , Popular Science did a review on a new wallpaper that was comprised of Kevlar strands to help withstand explosions and such .
They tested a brick wall with this stuff on one side and hit it on the other with a wrecking ball .
The wall survived .
Now if they can just add copper strands to the weave so that it can be a Faraday cage as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This structure complies with part ## of the FCC Rules.
Occupancy is subject to the following two conditions: (1) This structure may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this structure must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.
BTW, Popular Science did a review on a new wallpaper that was comprised of Kevlar strands to help withstand explosions and such.
They tested a brick wall with this stuff on one side and hit it on the other with a wrecking ball.
The wall survived.
Now if they can just add copper strands to the weave so that it can be a Faraday cage as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313578</id>
	<title>Impostor</title>
	<author>LinuxWhore</author>
	<datestamp>1259867700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did this news story make anyone else immediately think of the movie <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor\_(film)" title="wikipedia.org">Impostor</a> [wikipedia.org]?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did this news story make anyone else immediately think of the movie Impostor [ wikipedia.org ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did this news story make anyone else immediately think of the movie Impostor [wikipedia.org]?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313974</id>
	<title>Re:Can it detect plants (or herbs) ?</title>
	<author>Datamonstar</author>
	<datestamp>1259869140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, so NOW you wanna jump on the tin-foil bandwagon. Well, sorry. I've got news for ya. You're too late. They started making tin-foil so that it actually TRANSMITS the signal now man, and that's all they sell. You can't GET the good old tin-foil anymore, unless you stocked up back when we were telling you to. I ain't sellin' mine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , so NOW you wan na jump on the tin-foil bandwagon .
Well , sorry .
I 've got news for ya .
You 're too late .
They started making tin-foil so that it actually TRANSMITS the signal now man , and that 's all they sell .
You ca n't GET the good old tin-foil anymore , unless you stocked up back when we were telling you to .
I ai n't sellin ' mine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, so NOW you wanna jump on the tin-foil bandwagon.
Well, sorry.
I've got news for ya.
You're too late.
They started making tin-foil so that it actually TRANSMITS the signal now man, and that's all they sell.
You can't GET the good old tin-foil anymore, unless you stocked up back when we were telling you to.
I ain't sellin' mine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309812</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>troll8901</author>
	<datestamp>1259853780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>law enforcement can peer into that private box whenever they want<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... it is easy to imagine it being used by every cop to peer right into the very center of our private lives while we are in our homes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>When they peer into the basement, chances are, they'll see a hand moving rapidly<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>What?  I'm referring to basement spring-cleaning, in time for the festive season!  After all, we geeks really enjoy doing housework, don't we?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>law enforcement can peer into that private box whenever they want ... it is easy to imagine it being used by every cop to peer right into the very center of our private lives while we are in our homes ...When they peer into the basement , chances are , they 'll see a hand moving rapidly ...What ?
I 'm referring to basement spring-cleaning , in time for the festive season !
After all , we geeks really enjoy doing housework , do n't we ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>law enforcement can peer into that private box whenever they want ... it is easy to imagine it being used by every cop to peer right into the very center of our private lives while we are in our homes ...When they peer into the basement, chances are, they'll see a hand moving rapidly ...What?
I'm referring to basement spring-cleaning, in time for the festive season!
After all, we geeks really enjoy doing housework, don't we?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310124</id>
	<title>4th Amendment in the USA anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259855520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, <b>houses</b>, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."</p><p>If you're a governmental or quasi-governmental entity, and you don't have a warrant to search within the walls of a citizen's house, <b>don't</b>.  Any law written to allow this is patently <i>ultra vires</i> and unconstitutional.</p><p>However, I'm sure the Federal, State, County, and Municipal governments will be happy to try to create a law that enables the use of this technology and will do so until someone with standing challenges them in court, and begins the long, expensive process to get a judgement that's actually in line with the Constitution.  (Seriously, why is this expensive or time consuming?  The Constitution is written in very clear, easy to understand language.  Why the hell is it so hard to force legislators to read, understand, and follow it?)  In the mean time, those wanting to use the technology will justify it under the umbrella of "public safety" or other things that don't change the fact that this simply isn't allowed per the Constitution.</p><p>And other countries' governments outside the United States are probably lining up to buy this technology.  *sighs*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The right of the people to be secure in their persons , houses , papers , and effects , against unreasonable searches and seizures , shall not be violated , and no Warrants shall issue , but upon probable cause , supported by Oath or affirmation , and particularly describing the place to be searched , and the persons or things to be seized .
" If you 're a governmental or quasi-governmental entity , and you do n't have a warrant to search within the walls of a citizen 's house , do n't .
Any law written to allow this is patently ultra vires and unconstitutional.However , I 'm sure the Federal , State , County , and Municipal governments will be happy to try to create a law that enables the use of this technology and will do so until someone with standing challenges them in court , and begins the long , expensive process to get a judgement that 's actually in line with the Constitution .
( Seriously , why is this expensive or time consuming ?
The Constitution is written in very clear , easy to understand language .
Why the hell is it so hard to force legislators to read , understand , and follow it ?
) In the mean time , those wanting to use the technology will justify it under the umbrella of " public safety " or other things that do n't change the fact that this simply is n't allowed per the Constitution.And other countries ' governments outside the United States are probably lining up to buy this technology .
* sighs *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
"If you're a governmental or quasi-governmental entity, and you don't have a warrant to search within the walls of a citizen's house, don't.
Any law written to allow this is patently ultra vires and unconstitutional.However, I'm sure the Federal, State, County, and Municipal governments will be happy to try to create a law that enables the use of this technology and will do so until someone with standing challenges them in court, and begins the long, expensive process to get a judgement that's actually in line with the Constitution.
(Seriously, why is this expensive or time consuming?
The Constitution is written in very clear, easy to understand language.
Why the hell is it so hard to force legislators to read, understand, and follow it?
)  In the mean time, those wanting to use the technology will justify it under the umbrella of "public safety" or other things that don't change the fact that this simply isn't allowed per the Constitution.And other countries' governments outside the United States are probably lining up to buy this technology.
*sighs*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309674</id>
	<title>Re:Gonna be expensive</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1259852520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tinfoil may work, but radar-disrupting radio waves would work better. Dollars to donuts it'll be illegal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tinfoil may work , but radar-disrupting radio waves would work better .
Dollars to donuts it 'll be illegal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tinfoil may work, but radar-disrupting radio waves would work better.
Dollars to donuts it'll be illegal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309404</id>
	<title>Soon..</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1259850060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The server manager will upload a new hack that prevents wallhacking.  In the mean time, keep voting the cheaters off the CS server.</p><p>Oh, wait, this is real life?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The server manager will upload a new hack that prevents wallhacking .
In the mean time , keep voting the cheaters off the CS server.Oh , wait , this is real life ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The server manager will upload a new hack that prevents wallhacking.
In the mean time, keep voting the cheaters off the CS server.Oh, wait, this is real life?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311608</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>Mister Whirly</author>
	<datestamp>1259861280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A technology site filled with Luddites. Irony at its finest.</p></div><p>
Hardly. A technology site full of people who understand the implications and uses of technology better than your average non-techie. A site full of people who understand "Technology is not a panacea."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A technology site filled with Luddites .
Irony at its finest .
Hardly. A technology site full of people who understand the implications and uses of technology better than your average non-techie .
A site full of people who understand " Technology is not a panacea .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A technology site filled with Luddites.
Irony at its finest.
Hardly. A technology site full of people who understand the implications and uses of technology better than your average non-techie.
A site full of people who understand "Technology is not a panacea.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309928</id>
	<title>Re:how many watts of power</title>
	<author>AndrewRUK</author>
	<datestamp>1259854560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the waiver, which was linked to in TFA:</p><p>"The EMMDAR steps through two hundred frequencies, spaced two megahertz apart from 3101 MHz to 3499 MHz, one at a time. It transmits on one frequency for 75 microseconds with a peak instantaneous power of 31.6 milliwatts, followed by a 17.5-microsecond "off time" between frequency steps. The complete cycle repeats every 18.5 milliseconds, resulting in a duty cycle for each frequency of 0.41\%."</p><p>Notice, this things emits a maximum of 0.0316 watts, which is somewhat less that the several hundred watts used to cook your chicken pot pie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the waiver , which was linked to in TFA : " The EMMDAR steps through two hundred frequencies , spaced two megahertz apart from 3101 MHz to 3499 MHz , one at a time .
It transmits on one frequency for 75 microseconds with a peak instantaneous power of 31.6 milliwatts , followed by a 17.5-microsecond " off time " between frequency steps .
The complete cycle repeats every 18.5 milliseconds , resulting in a duty cycle for each frequency of 0.41 \ % .
" Notice , this things emits a maximum of 0.0316 watts , which is somewhat less that the several hundred watts used to cook your chicken pot pie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the waiver, which was linked to in TFA:"The EMMDAR steps through two hundred frequencies, spaced two megahertz apart from 3101 MHz to 3499 MHz, one at a time.
It transmits on one frequency for 75 microseconds with a peak instantaneous power of 31.6 milliwatts, followed by a 17.5-microsecond "off time" between frequency steps.
The complete cycle repeats every 18.5 milliseconds, resulting in a duty cycle for each frequency of 0.41\%.
"Notice, this things emits a maximum of 0.0316 watts, which is somewhat less that the several hundred watts used to cook your chicken pot pie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310318</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>tibman</author>
	<datestamp>1259856540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FLIR can't see through walls, only heat differences.  I have used several heat based targetting systems, it can only show you temperature differences of what you see.  There are some things you can see through.. like fog, camouflage, stuff like that.  But step behind a tree and *poof* gone from view.  Not sure why anyone would need a warrant to use FLIR?  Is it illegal to own a system for personal use?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FLIR ca n't see through walls , only heat differences .
I have used several heat based targetting systems , it can only show you temperature differences of what you see .
There are some things you can see through.. like fog , camouflage , stuff like that .
But step behind a tree and * poof * gone from view .
Not sure why anyone would need a warrant to use FLIR ?
Is it illegal to own a system for personal use ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FLIR can't see through walls, only heat differences.
I have used several heat based targetting systems, it can only show you temperature differences of what you see.
There are some things you can see through.. like fog, camouflage, stuff like that.
But step behind a tree and *poof* gone from view.
Not sure why anyone would need a warrant to use FLIR?
Is it illegal to own a system for personal use?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309516</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>plasmacutter</author>
	<datestamp>1259851320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's not mention FLIR (forward looking infra-red) allows law enforcement to see through walls anyway with remarkable resolution.</p><p>They still need a warrant to use it, but let's just say there's a possibility that what goes on in your bathroom won't just be between you and god.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's not mention FLIR ( forward looking infra-red ) allows law enforcement to see through walls anyway with remarkable resolution.They still need a warrant to use it , but let 's just say there 's a possibility that what goes on in your bathroom wo n't just be between you and god .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's not mention FLIR (forward looking infra-red) allows law enforcement to see through walls anyway with remarkable resolution.They still need a warrant to use it, but let's just say there's a possibility that what goes on in your bathroom won't just be between you and god.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312670</id>
	<title>And they all called me crazy...</title>
	<author>pla</author>
	<datestamp>1259864460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...When I insisted on lining the walls of my house with grounded copper flashing.<br>
<br>
'Course, I only wanted a basic Faraday cage to block RF snooping, but it will work just fine for this as well.<br>
<br>
Who gets the last laugh <i>now</i>, Inspector?<br>
<br>
<br>
/ Not serious.<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>// Wishes I really did have a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEMPEST" title="wikipedia.org">Tempested</a> [wikipedia.org] home, though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...When I insisted on lining the walls of my house with grounded copper flashing .
'Course , I only wanted a basic Faraday cage to block RF snooping , but it will work just fine for this as well .
Who gets the last laugh now , Inspector ?
/ Not serious .
// Wishes I really did have a Tempested [ wikipedia.org ] home , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...When I insisted on lining the walls of my house with grounded copper flashing.
'Course, I only wanted a basic Faraday cage to block RF snooping, but it will work just fine for this as well.
Who gets the last laugh now, Inspector?
/ Not serious.
// Wishes I really did have a Tempested [wikipedia.org] home, though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310756</id>
	<title>Re:What are the chances</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259858400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hopefully it will be one of the hardware stud finders companies.  None of those work very well (on anything but simple unfilled walls) and I would love to have a device that gives a true "picture" of what is in the wall.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully it will be one of the hardware stud finders companies .
None of those work very well ( on anything but simple unfilled walls ) and I would love to have a device that gives a true " picture " of what is in the wall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully it will be one of the hardware stud finders companies.
None of those work very well (on anything but simple unfilled walls) and I would love to have a device that gives a true "picture" of what is in the wall.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309858</id>
	<title>Re:Stop scaremongering</title>
	<author>irondonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1259854080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But will it be televised?</htmltext>
<tokenext>But will it be televised ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But will it be televised?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312018</id>
	<title>Re:Resolution</title>
	<author>bkr1\_2k</author>
	<datestamp>1259862420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>3.5GHz translates to a ~8cm wavelength (maybe a bit less with the speed of light being slower in air). Resolving features that vary in amplitude of say less than 2cm (breathing and swaying) requires VERY accurate phase detection and time measurement equipment. Which translates to some very fast hardware doing phase correlation etc.</i></p><p>That doesn't require particularly fast hardware for phase correlation at all.  It's all relatively easily done in a small FPGA.  Not cheap (if you consider a few thousand dollars per chip expensive--- L-3 does not, I guarantee that) but it doesn't require a lot of work to design.  L-3 has very good FPGA design teams and has been doing phase correlation and time measurement for decades for use in radar systems.  The only thing new about this is the frequency hopping that they're using to do it, and that's not too far out of normal for them either...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3.5GHz translates to a ~ 8cm wavelength ( maybe a bit less with the speed of light being slower in air ) .
Resolving features that vary in amplitude of say less than 2cm ( breathing and swaying ) requires VERY accurate phase detection and time measurement equipment .
Which translates to some very fast hardware doing phase correlation etc.That does n't require particularly fast hardware for phase correlation at all .
It 's all relatively easily done in a small FPGA .
Not cheap ( if you consider a few thousand dollars per chip expensive--- L-3 does not , I guarantee that ) but it does n't require a lot of work to design .
L-3 has very good FPGA design teams and has been doing phase correlation and time measurement for decades for use in radar systems .
The only thing new about this is the frequency hopping that they 're using to do it , and that 's not too far out of normal for them either.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3.5GHz translates to a ~8cm wavelength (maybe a bit less with the speed of light being slower in air).
Resolving features that vary in amplitude of say less than 2cm (breathing and swaying) requires VERY accurate phase detection and time measurement equipment.
Which translates to some very fast hardware doing phase correlation etc.That doesn't require particularly fast hardware for phase correlation at all.
It's all relatively easily done in a small FPGA.
Not cheap (if you consider a few thousand dollars per chip expensive--- L-3 does not, I guarantee that) but it doesn't require a lot of work to design.
L-3 has very good FPGA design teams and has been doing phase correlation and time measurement for decades for use in radar systems.
The only thing new about this is the frequency hopping that they're using to do it, and that's not too far out of normal for them either...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309440</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30318264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312290
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30319690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30314874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30319660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309440
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30314746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_03_0247228_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312290
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30318264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310174
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310124
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309674
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309572
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313974
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309678
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311486
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309364
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309928
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309450
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310096
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310104
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310170
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30314746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313046
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309440
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312018
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30314874
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30319690
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309430
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309598
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310034
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310702
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310360
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310284
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309812
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309484
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30319660
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309560
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309516
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310318
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311956
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30313088
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309906
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309662
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30309998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30312024
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30311004
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30316208
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_03_0247228.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_03_0247228.30310450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
