<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_07_1529231</id>
	<title>How Does the New Google DNS Perform? (and Why?)</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1260202620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Tarinth writes <i>"Google just <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/12/03/1814238/Google-Launches-Public-DNS-Resolver">announced its new Google DNS platform</a>.  Many have viewed this as a move to increase ad revenue, or maybe capture more data.  This article explores those questions, as well as <a href="http://radoff.com/blog/2009/12/07/google-dns-benchmarking-and-rationale/">the actual benchmarking results</a> for Google DNS &mdash; showing that it is faster than many, but not nearly as fast as many others."</i>  We also recently discussed <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/12/04/1532258/A-Look-At-the-Safety-of-Google-Public-DNS">security implications of the Google Public DNS</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tarinth writes " Google just announced its new Google DNS platform .
Many have viewed this as a move to increase ad revenue , or maybe capture more data .
This article explores those questions , as well as the actual benchmarking results for Google DNS    showing that it is faster than many , but not nearly as fast as many others .
" We also recently discussed security implications of the Google Public DNS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tarinth writes "Google just announced its new Google DNS platform.
Many have viewed this as a move to increase ad revenue, or maybe capture more data.
This article explores those questions, as well as the actual benchmarking results for Google DNS — showing that it is faster than many, but not nearly as fast as many others.
"  We also recently discussed security implications of the Google Public DNS.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354184</id>
	<title>Re:Pointless hype</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1260206700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't trust my ISP -- I use them because I have no other option where I live.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't trust my ISP -- I use them because I have no other option where I live .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't trust my ISP -- I use them because I have no other option where I live.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356140</id>
	<title>Great for international users</title>
	<author>acid06</author>
	<datestamp>1260215460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For international users (I'm from Brazil), the new Google DNS is awesome. There are no such services around here and we usually need to rely on our ISPs DNS servers, which can't be trusted to be updated and with security holes fixed.</p><p>I used OpenDNS, but the response times were around 140ms, which is noticeably slower than my own ISPs DNS servers.</p><p>Now it seems Google has local DNS servers in Brazil, so I get 20-30ms response times which is much better. Actually, it's better than a lot of you are getting from Google's DNS servers, which makes me think Google has room for improvement in the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For international users ( I 'm from Brazil ) , the new Google DNS is awesome .
There are no such services around here and we usually need to rely on our ISPs DNS servers , which ca n't be trusted to be updated and with security holes fixed.I used OpenDNS , but the response times were around 140ms , which is noticeably slower than my own ISPs DNS servers.Now it seems Google has local DNS servers in Brazil , so I get 20-30ms response times which is much better .
Actually , it 's better than a lot of you are getting from Google 's DNS servers , which makes me think Google has room for improvement in the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For international users (I'm from Brazil), the new Google DNS is awesome.
There are no such services around here and we usually need to rely on our ISPs DNS servers, which can't be trusted to be updated and with security holes fixed.I used OpenDNS, but the response times were around 140ms, which is noticeably slower than my own ISPs DNS servers.Now it seems Google has local DNS servers in Brazil, so I get 20-30ms response times which is much better.
Actually, it's better than a lot of you are getting from Google's DNS servers, which makes me think Google has room for improvement in the US.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357206</id>
	<title>Google: turning shit into gold</title>
	<author>cycoj</author>
	<datestamp>1260177360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's funny how a lot of people are falling all over themselves because google introduces something new. Now they've introduced a new DNS service and say it's to make the internet experience faster. Turns out in benchmarks they are slower than peoples ISP DNS servers (not really surprising), but also significantly slower than services like OpenDNS, which does the same thing. So why are people switching to google??? It's not better than existing services, there's serious privacy and security concerns (it's a lot easier to force one company to change their DNS records than forcing thousands of companies in lots of different countries to change their records), but still everybody is suddenly declaring "I'm switching to googleDNS". The scary thing is the people are not the typical fanboys, but usually sceptical geeks. Somehow though as soon as google does something it switches the scepticism off in a geek brain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's funny how a lot of people are falling all over themselves because google introduces something new .
Now they 've introduced a new DNS service and say it 's to make the internet experience faster .
Turns out in benchmarks they are slower than peoples ISP DNS servers ( not really surprising ) , but also significantly slower than services like OpenDNS , which does the same thing .
So why are people switching to google ? ? ?
It 's not better than existing services , there 's serious privacy and security concerns ( it 's a lot easier to force one company to change their DNS records than forcing thousands of companies in lots of different countries to change their records ) , but still everybody is suddenly declaring " I 'm switching to googleDNS " .
The scary thing is the people are not the typical fanboys , but usually sceptical geeks .
Somehow though as soon as google does something it switches the scepticism off in a geek brain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's funny how a lot of people are falling all over themselves because google introduces something new.
Now they've introduced a new DNS service and say it's to make the internet experience faster.
Turns out in benchmarks they are slower than peoples ISP DNS servers (not really surprising), but also significantly slower than services like OpenDNS, which does the same thing.
So why are people switching to google???
It's not better than existing services, there's serious privacy and security concerns (it's a lot easier to force one company to change their DNS records than forcing thousands of companies in lots of different countries to change their records), but still everybody is suddenly declaring "I'm switching to googleDNS".
The scary thing is the people are not the typical fanboys, but usually sceptical geeks.
Somehow though as soon as google does something it switches the scepticism off in a geek brain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30358226</id>
	<title>Re:I'm starting to wear tin foil hats</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1260183180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huge risk?  Where do you get that?  A company has a policy or terms of service that says they assure everyone that they are not doing X, they will never do X and so on and so forth.</p><p>What happens when they decide to change their policy?  Or, simply (gasp!) violate their policy?  Is there any sort of enforcement of published company policies?  Nope.  Maybe a small loss of some sort of credibility.  Maybe.  So I don't see any legal ramifications at all.</p><p>PR ramifications?  Well, maybe.  If the major media decided to run with a story there might be some fallout.  But far more likely is one stockholder attending the annual meeting gets up and yells about it - and is immediately ejected from the room.</p><p>In other words, nothing, nothing at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huge risk ?
Where do you get that ?
A company has a policy or terms of service that says they assure everyone that they are not doing X , they will never do X and so on and so forth.What happens when they decide to change their policy ?
Or , simply ( gasp !
) violate their policy ?
Is there any sort of enforcement of published company policies ?
Nope. Maybe a small loss of some sort of credibility .
Maybe. So I do n't see any legal ramifications at all.PR ramifications ?
Well , maybe .
If the major media decided to run with a story there might be some fallout .
But far more likely is one stockholder attending the annual meeting gets up and yells about it - and is immediately ejected from the room.In other words , nothing , nothing at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huge risk?
Where do you get that?
A company has a policy or terms of service that says they assure everyone that they are not doing X, they will never do X and so on and so forth.What happens when they decide to change their policy?
Or, simply (gasp!
) violate their policy?
Is there any sort of enforcement of published company policies?
Nope.  Maybe a small loss of some sort of credibility.
Maybe.  So I don't see any legal ramifications at all.PR ramifications?
Well, maybe.
If the major media decided to run with a story there might be some fallout.
But far more likely is one stockholder attending the annual meeting gets up and yells about it - and is immediately ejected from the room.In other words, nothing, nothing at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355648</id>
	<title>For whats its worth , its not faster at my end</title>
	<author>snokeloke</author>
	<datestamp>1260213000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>but never tought about it dns performance before and it showed one thing tough and that is that my local crappy router sucks .

for windows users , try this one <a href="http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm" title="grc.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm</a> [grc.com]

The googgle dns servers performs "ok" , but for me atleast i noticed noticable difference by using my isp dns servers directly.( not by just looking what this prog gave me , but cache lookups is faster on my ISP than on my local router( yah i know my router sucks ) )

( oh btw , you cant use ping latency to determine if a dns is faster or not )</htmltext>
<tokenext>but never tought about it dns performance before and it showed one thing tough and that is that my local crappy router sucks .
for windows users , try this one http : //www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm [ grc.com ] The googgle dns servers performs " ok " , but for me atleast i noticed noticable difference by using my isp dns servers directly .
( not by just looking what this prog gave me , but cache lookups is faster on my ISP than on my local router ( yah i know my router sucks ) ) ( oh btw , you cant use ping latency to determine if a dns is faster or not )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but never tought about it dns performance before and it showed one thing tough and that is that my local crappy router sucks .
for windows users , try this one http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm [grc.com]

The googgle dns servers performs "ok" , but for me atleast i noticed noticable difference by using my isp dns servers directly.
( not by just looking what this prog gave me , but cache lookups is faster on my ISP than on my local router( yah i know my router sucks ) )

( oh btw , you cant use ping latency to determine if a dns is faster or not )</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355178</id>
	<title>Multiple, parallel, DNS server settings?</title>
	<author>NevarMore</author>
	<datestamp>1260210660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect this has been asked before. Is there some way to set up multiple DNS servers and simply query them in parallel?</p><p>That way whichever one is fastest gets me the address sooner. It is a little bit rude, but since it would seem that most DNS providers have the opportunity to be shady and feed landing pages or collect usage data, they'd be just as happy to have me make a request and discard the answer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect this has been asked before .
Is there some way to set up multiple DNS servers and simply query them in parallel ? That way whichever one is fastest gets me the address sooner .
It is a little bit rude , but since it would seem that most DNS providers have the opportunity to be shady and feed landing pages or collect usage data , they 'd be just as happy to have me make a request and discard the answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect this has been asked before.
Is there some way to set up multiple DNS servers and simply query them in parallel?That way whichever one is fastest gets me the address sooner.
It is a little bit rude, but since it would seem that most DNS providers have the opportunity to be shady and feed landing pages or collect usage data, they'd be just as happy to have me make a request and discard the answer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355754</id>
	<title>Dumb</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260213600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google still can't get the POP3 protocol to work correctly in Gmail and here they are playing with bind. You know Microsoft must giggle when they hear Google setup their own DNS servers for the public. Give me a break Google hype machine. I feel like going and looking for another search engine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google still ca n't get the POP3 protocol to work correctly in Gmail and here they are playing with bind .
You know Microsoft must giggle when they hear Google setup their own DNS servers for the public .
Give me a break Google hype machine .
I feel like going and looking for another search engine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google still can't get the POP3 protocol to work correctly in Gmail and here they are playing with bind.
You know Microsoft must giggle when they hear Google setup their own DNS servers for the public.
Give me a break Google hype machine.
I feel like going and looking for another search engine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356830</id>
	<title>Re:I'm starting to wear tin foil hats</title>
	<author>PastaLover</author>
	<datestamp>1260218820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google is a public company, not the CIA, which means it's a lot more leaky. They also have a privacy policy that specifically says they won't track the DNS requests (actually something like delete records after several days, if I remember correctly). So it would be a huge risk for them to track it anyway (legal and PR ramifications) and a ton of people would have to know about it and keep it secret anyway (the conspiracy theory litmus test).</p><p>Tinfoil hats indeed. (is that one word or two?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google is a public company , not the CIA , which means it 's a lot more leaky .
They also have a privacy policy that specifically says they wo n't track the DNS requests ( actually something like delete records after several days , if I remember correctly ) .
So it would be a huge risk for them to track it anyway ( legal and PR ramifications ) and a ton of people would have to know about it and keep it secret anyway ( the conspiracy theory litmus test ) .Tinfoil hats indeed .
( is that one word or two ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google is a public company, not the CIA, which means it's a lot more leaky.
They also have a privacy policy that specifically says they won't track the DNS requests (actually something like delete records after several days, if I remember correctly).
So it would be a huge risk for them to track it anyway (legal and PR ramifications) and a ton of people would have to know about it and keep it secret anyway (the conspiracy theory litmus test).Tinfoil hats indeed.
(is that one word or two?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30362996</id>
	<title>A tradeoff, but worthwhile for me</title>
	<author>Whuffo</author>
	<datestamp>1260266460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do I want Google pawing through my DNS lookups to build a better profile of me? No, but I'd rather have that than Charter forcing a page of advertising instead of a NXDOMAIN response. They say you can opt out, but all that does is cause their system to send you a fake IE error page instead of a page of advertising. I switched to Google's DNS a couple of days ago and it's fast and reliable. All in all, it's a good solution.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do I want Google pawing through my DNS lookups to build a better profile of me ?
No , but I 'd rather have that than Charter forcing a page of advertising instead of a NXDOMAIN response .
They say you can opt out , but all that does is cause their system to send you a fake IE error page instead of a page of advertising .
I switched to Google 's DNS a couple of days ago and it 's fast and reliable .
All in all , it 's a good solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do I want Google pawing through my DNS lookups to build a better profile of me?
No, but I'd rather have that than Charter forcing a page of advertising instead of a NXDOMAIN response.
They say you can opt out, but all that does is cause their system to send you a fake IE error page instead of a page of advertising.
I switched to Google's DNS a couple of days ago and it's fast and reliable.
All in all, it's a good solution.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356034</id>
	<title>Google DNA?!</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1260214980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Coming as this did hot on the heels of an article about a new RNA discovery, when I first read the title I thought it was about Google inventing a new type of DNA.  Now that would be newsworthy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Coming as this did hot on the heels of an article about a new RNA discovery , when I first read the title I thought it was about Google inventing a new type of DNA .
Now that would be newsworthy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coming as this did hot on the heels of an article about a new RNA discovery, when I first read the title I thought it was about Google inventing a new type of DNA.
Now that would be newsworthy!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354830</id>
	<title>Surprising benchmarks</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1260209100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Essentially it showed that the ones from verizon (the one that provides him connection) are the fastest ones (not only the fios one, but the 151.202/3 ones too are from verizon), there are a few others faster than Googles (including 4.2.2.*), and then the rest of DNS tested were slower. Much of the speed that matters of a well installed DNS is how "close" is from you (as in i.e. ping time), and your upstream provider have usually the closest one.<br>Could be a speed improvement in the few, rare times when you ask for something that is not cached already, but in massively used DNSs that is something rare and usually one-time hit. If you have to choose them for something, speed should not be the main factor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Essentially it showed that the ones from verizon ( the one that provides him connection ) are the fastest ones ( not only the fios one , but the 151.202/3 ones too are from verizon ) , there are a few others faster than Googles ( including 4.2.2 .
* ) , and then the rest of DNS tested were slower .
Much of the speed that matters of a well installed DNS is how " close " is from you ( as in i.e .
ping time ) , and your upstream provider have usually the closest one.Could be a speed improvement in the few , rare times when you ask for something that is not cached already , but in massively used DNSs that is something rare and usually one-time hit .
If you have to choose them for something , speed should not be the main factor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Essentially it showed that the ones from verizon (the one that provides him connection) are the fastest ones (not only the fios one, but the 151.202/3 ones too are from verizon), there are a few others faster than Googles (including 4.2.2.
*), and then the rest of DNS tested were slower.
Much of the speed that matters of a well installed DNS is how "close" is from you (as in i.e.
ping time), and your upstream provider have usually the closest one.Could be a speed improvement in the few, rare times when you ask for something that is not cached already, but in massively used DNSs that is something rare and usually one-time hit.
If you have to choose them for something, speed should not be the main factor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355556</id>
	<title>For me, OpenDNS is faster</title>
	<author>abhikhurana</author>
	<datestamp>1260212580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For me, like the tester, OpenDNS (17-18ms) performed better than Google (25ms). My ISP (O2 in UK - 22ms) was somewhere in between OpenDNS and Google.</p><p>For those who want to test it themselves, you can do so quite easily under linux. The Command to use is dig<br>e.g.</p><p>dig @server slashdot.org</p><p>Do it a few time to see how fast your DNS server actually is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For me , like the tester , OpenDNS ( 17-18ms ) performed better than Google ( 25ms ) .
My ISP ( O2 in UK - 22ms ) was somewhere in between OpenDNS and Google.For those who want to test it themselves , you can do so quite easily under linux .
The Command to use is dige.g.dig @ server slashdot.orgDo it a few time to see how fast your DNS server actually is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For me, like the tester, OpenDNS (17-18ms) performed better than Google (25ms).
My ISP (O2 in UK - 22ms) was somewhere in between OpenDNS and Google.For those who want to test it themselves, you can do so quite easily under linux.
The Command to use is dige.g.dig @server slashdot.orgDo it a few time to see how fast your DNS server actually is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355294</id>
	<title>Aww comeon!  I can't believe everyone missed this!</title>
	<author>Naatach</author>
	<datestamp>1260211320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well I, for one, welcome our new "Do No Evil" DNS overlords...<br>
In Soviet Russia, Google DNS names YOU!<br>
I wonder if they redirect misspelled entries <a href="http://goatse.cx/" title="goatse.cx" rel="nofollow">here</a> [goatse.cx] <br>
In Korea, only old people use their ISP's DNS.<br>
itsatrap!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I , for one , welcome our new " Do No Evil " DNS overlords.. . In Soviet Russia , Google DNS names YOU !
I wonder if they redirect misspelled entries here [ goatse.cx ] In Korea , only old people use their ISP 's DNS .
itsatrap !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I, for one, welcome our new "Do No Evil" DNS overlords...
In Soviet Russia, Google DNS names YOU!
I wonder if they redirect misspelled entries here [goatse.cx] 
In Korea, only old people use their ISP's DNS.
itsatrap!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30362952</id>
	<title>Finnish Google DNS Benchmark results</title>
	<author>Ux64</author>
	<datestamp>1260266100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nothing new? Why this post is here?

<a href="http://x7.fi/2009/12/04/google-public-dns-benchmarking/" title="x7.fi" rel="nofollow">http://x7.fi/2009/12/04/google-public-dns-benchmarking/</a> [x7.fi]

Check it out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing new ?
Why this post is here ?
http : //x7.fi/2009/12/04/google-public-dns-benchmarking/ [ x7.fi ] Check it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing new?
Why this post is here?
http://x7.fi/2009/12/04/google-public-dns-benchmarking/ [x7.fi]

Check it out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30358432</id>
	<title>Re:Pointless hype</title>
	<author>electrosoccertux</author>
	<datestamp>1260184200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I got money on the fact that this DNS server will be a part of their Android and Chrome OS services.  You know, a default setting.</p></div><p>Eh. I don't care anymore. They want the data they can have it. Having thought about it for two years, I've realized they don't have the time to look into anybody in particular. It's all statistical data. The more they can disseminate that, the more they can provide ads that interest me, which means I'm more likely to buy the stuff, which means I get more free things from google.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I got money on the fact that this DNS server will be a part of their Android and Chrome OS services .
You know , a default setting.Eh .
I do n't care anymore .
They want the data they can have it .
Having thought about it for two years , I 've realized they do n't have the time to look into anybody in particular .
It 's all statistical data .
The more they can disseminate that , the more they can provide ads that interest me , which means I 'm more likely to buy the stuff , which means I get more free things from google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got money on the fact that this DNS server will be a part of their Android and Chrome OS services.
You know, a default setting.Eh.
I don't care anymore.
They want the data they can have it.
Having thought about it for two years, I've realized they don't have the time to look into anybody in particular.
It's all statistical data.
The more they can disseminate that, the more they can provide ads that interest me, which means I'm more likely to buy the stuff, which means I get more free things from google.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356346</id>
	<title>Re:RCN users!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260216420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>except they don't throttle dns queries</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>except they do n't throttle dns queries</tokentext>
<sentencetext>except they don't throttle dns queries</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355072</id>
	<title>Re:One time comcasts DNS servers were down...</title>
	<author>chill</author>
	<datestamp>1260210180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, but just to clarify, your speed-up wasn't because AT&amp;T's faster DNS.  It was because all those other Comcast wankers were still offline and calling tech support. For a few glorious moments, the Comcast tubes were unclogged.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but just to clarify , your speed-up was n't because AT&amp;T 's faster DNS .
It was because all those other Comcast wankers were still offline and calling tech support .
For a few glorious moments , the Comcast tubes were unclogged .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but just to clarify, your speed-up wasn't because AT&amp;T's faster DNS.
It was because all those other Comcast wankers were still offline and calling tech support.
For a few glorious moments, the Comcast tubes were unclogged.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30430264</id>
	<title>Average world-wide performance</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260801900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google's public DNS service is fast, but also exhibits the most time-outs when measuring performance from 42 locations world-wide. When taking these time-outs into account, OpenDNS may well be the best option for your location in terms of total DNS waiting time. Check it out here: <a href="http://labs.watchmouse.com/2009/12/public-dns-servers-performance-worth-the-trouble/" title="watchmouse.com" rel="nofollow">http://labs.watchmouse.com/2009/12/public-dns-servers-performance-worth-the-trouble/</a> [watchmouse.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google 's public DNS service is fast , but also exhibits the most time-outs when measuring performance from 42 locations world-wide .
When taking these time-outs into account , OpenDNS may well be the best option for your location in terms of total DNS waiting time .
Check it out here : http : //labs.watchmouse.com/2009/12/public-dns-servers-performance-worth-the-trouble/ [ watchmouse.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google's public DNS service is fast, but also exhibits the most time-outs when measuring performance from 42 locations world-wide.
When taking these time-outs into account, OpenDNS may well be the best option for your location in terms of total DNS waiting time.
Check it out here: http://labs.watchmouse.com/2009/12/public-dns-servers-performance-worth-the-trouble/ [watchmouse.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30364834</id>
	<title>Re:Pointless hype</title>
	<author>ArAgost</author>
	<datestamp>1260286140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you Italian? if so, it was not a problem of censorship. bwin (and many similar sites) were denied access by ISPs after being instructed by the authorities since those sites were not complying with the italian laws about gambling. Once they complied, access to these sites was promptly re-enabled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you Italian ?
if so , it was not a problem of censorship .
bwin ( and many similar sites ) were denied access by ISPs after being instructed by the authorities since those sites were not complying with the italian laws about gambling .
Once they complied , access to these sites was promptly re-enabled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you Italian?
if so, it was not a problem of censorship.
bwin (and many similar sites) were denied access by ISPs after being instructed by the authorities since those sites were not complying with the italian laws about gambling.
Once they complied, access to these sites was promptly re-enabled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354092</id>
	<title>Pointless hype</title>
	<author>suso</author>
	<datestamp>1260206220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its funny how the Google hype is driving so much talk about something like DNS, a service which probably 95\% of non-tech people don't know exists. Most people<br>wouldn't care about DNS normally, but since its Google it must be something to get excited about. I doubt really that any significant number of people will<br>switch to using 8.8.8.8, but I worry that if they do, one of the the original goals for DNS will be lost. That its distributed.</p><p>Just ask yourself one question, if you don't trust your internet provider enough to do DNS correctly, should you trust them at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its funny how the Google hype is driving so much talk about something like DNS , a service which probably 95 \ % of non-tech people do n't know exists .
Most peoplewould n't care about DNS normally , but since its Google it must be something to get excited about .
I doubt really that any significant number of people willswitch to using 8.8.8.8 , but I worry that if they do , one of the the original goals for DNS will be lost .
That its distributed.Just ask yourself one question , if you do n't trust your internet provider enough to do DNS correctly , should you trust them at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its funny how the Google hype is driving so much talk about something like DNS, a service which probably 95\% of non-tech people don't know exists.
Most peoplewouldn't care about DNS normally, but since its Google it must be something to get excited about.
I doubt really that any significant number of people willswitch to using 8.8.8.8, but I worry that if they do, one of the the original goals for DNS will be lost.
That its distributed.Just ask yourself one question, if you don't trust your internet provider enough to do DNS correctly, should you trust them at all?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354504</id>
	<title>RCN users!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260207900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use google DNS: a good way to beat RCNs DNS throttling.<br>I un-crippled my internet access by using it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use google DNS : a good way to beat RCNs DNS throttling.I un-crippled my internet access by using it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use google DNS: a good way to beat RCNs DNS throttling.I un-crippled my internet access by using it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30364054</id>
	<title>Too much information if you ask me!!!</title>
	<author>karlssberg</author>
	<datestamp>1260281580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They appear to be harvesting ever more information about us.  Where do we draw the line??... "Google CCTV Home Security", "Google Banking Services", "Google Medical Records".  But perhaps they don't need to go this far so long as we all adopt their new Chrome OS!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>They appear to be harvesting ever more information about us .
Where do we draw the line ? ? .. .
" Google CCTV Home Security " , " Google Banking Services " , " Google Medical Records " .
But perhaps they do n't need to go this far so long as we all adopt their new Chrome OS ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They appear to be harvesting ever more information about us.
Where do we draw the line??...
"Google CCTV Home Security", "Google Banking Services", "Google Medical Records".
But perhaps they don't need to go this far so long as we all adopt their new Chrome OS!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355248</id>
	<title>Re:Pointless hype</title>
	<author>Jasonv</author>
	<datestamp>1260211080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I use OpenDNS because in my country they dared to censor the Internet twice using DNS.</p><p>Google DNS could be useful if they don't implement any censorship, considering how much hate P2P sites gets from corporations we will see if they manage to stay neutral.</p></div><p>As a non-American, I may trust Google's ethics, but unfortunately, I don't trusts America's.  I don't want my personal data subject to American DMCA, wiretapping, or other laws any more than I have to.  Fortunately my country hasn't gone that route... yet.   I'll stick to my ISPs DNS and my local privacy laws.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use OpenDNS because in my country they dared to censor the Internet twice using DNS.Google DNS could be useful if they do n't implement any censorship , considering how much hate P2P sites gets from corporations we will see if they manage to stay neutral.As a non-American , I may trust Google 's ethics , but unfortunately , I do n't trusts America 's .
I do n't want my personal data subject to American DMCA , wiretapping , or other laws any more than I have to .
Fortunately my country has n't gone that route... yet. I 'll stick to my ISPs DNS and my local privacy laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use OpenDNS because in my country they dared to censor the Internet twice using DNS.Google DNS could be useful if they don't implement any censorship, considering how much hate P2P sites gets from corporations we will see if they manage to stay neutral.As a non-American, I may trust Google's ethics, but unfortunately, I don't trusts America's.
I don't want my personal data subject to American DMCA, wiretapping, or other laws any more than I have to.
Fortunately my country hasn't gone that route... yet.   I'll stick to my ISPs DNS and my local privacy laws.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354452</id>
	<title>Re:One time comcasts DNS servers were down...</title>
	<author>omnichad</author>
	<datestamp>1260207660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And bittorrent/P2P don't usually use DNS.  Draw your own conclusions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And bittorrent/P2P do n't usually use DNS .
Draw your own conclusions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And bittorrent/P2P don't usually use DNS.
Draw your own conclusions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354652</id>
	<title>Re:Pointless hype</title>
	<author>dacullen</author>
	<datestamp>1260208440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OTOH

Google has demonstrated a willingness to filter/block content for some countries.  If its in their commercial interest would they blackhole sonme sights?</htmltext>
<tokenext>OTOH Google has demonstrated a willingness to filter/block content for some countries .
If its in their commercial interest would they blackhole sonme sights ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OTOH

Google has demonstrated a willingness to filter/block content for some countries.
If its in their commercial interest would they blackhole sonme sights?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355224</id>
	<title>I'm starting to wear tin foil hats</title>
	<author>GodfatherofSoul</author>
	<datestamp>1260210900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is my completely unfounded conspiracy theory, but I'm starting to see Google as a pretty clever rouse to capture user data, perhaps for our government?  They provide great services, but they've got their hooks well sunk into much of our digital lives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is my completely unfounded conspiracy theory , but I 'm starting to see Google as a pretty clever rouse to capture user data , perhaps for our government ?
They provide great services , but they 've got their hooks well sunk into much of our digital lives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is my completely unfounded conspiracy theory, but I'm starting to see Google as a pretty clever rouse to capture user data, perhaps for our government?
They provide great services, but they've got their hooks well sunk into much of our digital lives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354288</id>
	<title>One time comcasts DNS servers were down...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260207180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Around 5 years ago, the internet was down for comcast subscribers in northern Indiana and a good chunk of the midwest-

I figured out it was just their DNS servers that were down and quickly switched over to AT&amp;T's. That evening I saw the fastest internet I've ever seen. It was glorious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Around 5 years ago , the internet was down for comcast subscribers in northern Indiana and a good chunk of the midwest- I figured out it was just their DNS servers that were down and quickly switched over to AT&amp;T 's .
That evening I saw the fastest internet I 've ever seen .
It was glorious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Around 5 years ago, the internet was down for comcast subscribers in northern Indiana and a good chunk of the midwest-

I figured out it was just their DNS servers that were down and quickly switched over to AT&amp;T's.
That evening I saw the fastest internet I've ever seen.
It was glorious.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354170</id>
	<title>Re:Pointless hype</title>
	<author>jhoegl</author>
	<datestamp>1260206640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I got money on the fact that this DNS server will be a part of their Android and Chrome OS services.  You know, a default setting.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I got money on the fact that this DNS server will be a part of their Android and Chrome OS services .
You know , a default setting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got money on the fact that this DNS server will be a part of their Android and Chrome OS services.
You know, a default setting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354278</id>
	<title>It will be interesting to see</title>
	<author>bugs2squash</author>
	<datestamp>1260207120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>if it makes satellite web browsing better. Setting a web proxy is a great way to cut down DNS chatter on a satellite link, perhaps Google have come up with something that is almost as good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>if it makes satellite web browsing better .
Setting a web proxy is a great way to cut down DNS chatter on a satellite link , perhaps Google have come up with something that is almost as good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if it makes satellite web browsing better.
Setting a web proxy is a great way to cut down DNS chatter on a satellite link, perhaps Google have come up with something that is almost as good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357708</id>
	<title>Re:I'm starting to wear tin foil hats</title>
	<author>gujo-odori</author>
	<datestamp>1260180120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you're attributing far too much competence to the government. Not that they don't want to do that sort of thing, of course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're attributing far too much competence to the government .
Not that they do n't want to do that sort of thing , of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're attributing far too much competence to the government.
Not that they don't want to do that sort of thing, of course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354498</id>
	<title>Beat a dead horse much /. ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260207840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh look. It's THIS thread again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh look .
It 's THIS thread again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh look.
It's THIS thread again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354738</id>
	<title>Google one of the slower options for me...</title>
	<author>Scootin159</author>
	<datestamp>1260208800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Was considering a switch (for our locally cached DNS servers parent servers), but glad I ran a benchmark first:</p><p>

Cached relative performance:</p><ul>
<li>Local (backed by ISP)</li><li>ISP (unfiltered results)</li><li>Level 3</li><li>Google</li></ul><p>

Uncached relative performance:</p><ul>
<li>Level 3</li><li>ISP</li><li>Local (backed by ISP)</li><li>Google</li></ul><p>In all cases, Google's one of our slower options.  If anything, it appears I'd be best off using local DNS backed by level 3 for non-cached results.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was considering a switch ( for our locally cached DNS servers parent servers ) , but glad I ran a benchmark first : Cached relative performance : Local ( backed by ISP ) ISP ( unfiltered results ) Level 3Google Uncached relative performance : Level 3ISPLocal ( backed by ISP ) GoogleIn all cases , Google 's one of our slower options .
If anything , it appears I 'd be best off using local DNS backed by level 3 for non-cached results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was considering a switch (for our locally cached DNS servers parent servers), but glad I ran a benchmark first:

Cached relative performance:
Local (backed by ISP)ISP (unfiltered results)Level 3Google

Uncached relative performance:
Level 3ISPLocal (backed by ISP)GoogleIn all cases, Google's one of our slower options.
If anything, it appears I'd be best off using local DNS backed by level 3 for non-cached results.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355934</id>
	<title>Win win situation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260214380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google offering free DNS makes sense for everybody:<br>a) it is a low cost / low bandwidth service Google can integrate into its infrastructure for negligible cost, and the public get free reliable DNS<br>b) ISPs are 'stealing' search traffic by hijacking millions of misspelled domains, Google can try and eliminate this fraud which will more than cover the costs of (a)<br>c) why do people need to invent a (c)?</p><p>At the end of the day, Google's money-spinner is ads on search results. The free DNS is a move to protect this. As people write above, a bonus side-effect is that makes life easier for developers of sites and browsers when ISPs don't corrupt the RFCs.</p><p>Phillip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google offering free DNS makes sense for everybody : a ) it is a low cost / low bandwidth service Google can integrate into its infrastructure for negligible cost , and the public get free reliable DNSb ) ISPs are 'stealing ' search traffic by hijacking millions of misspelled domains , Google can try and eliminate this fraud which will more than cover the costs of ( a ) c ) why do people need to invent a ( c ) ? At the end of the day , Google 's money-spinner is ads on search results .
The free DNS is a move to protect this .
As people write above , a bonus side-effect is that makes life easier for developers of sites and browsers when ISPs do n't corrupt the RFCs.Phillip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google offering free DNS makes sense for everybody:a) it is a low cost / low bandwidth service Google can integrate into its infrastructure for negligible cost, and the public get free reliable DNSb) ISPs are 'stealing' search traffic by hijacking millions of misspelled domains, Google can try and eliminate this fraud which will more than cover the costs of (a)c) why do people need to invent a (c)?At the end of the day, Google's money-spinner is ads on search results.
The free DNS is a move to protect this.
As people write above, a bonus side-effect is that makes life easier for developers of sites and browsers when ISPs don't corrupt the RFCs.Phillip.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30358690</id>
	<title>Faster than many..</title>
	<author>tirnacopu</author>
	<datestamp>1260185580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>..but not faster than the DNS service I run on my computer. It is trivial to install, provides a very simple service, and is as flexible as I might want it to be. A personal note on networking in general: whoever steps into the Internets and does not run a resolver that allows recursive queries should be banned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>..but not faster than the DNS service I run on my computer .
It is trivial to install , provides a very simple service , and is as flexible as I might want it to be .
A personal note on networking in general : whoever steps into the Internets and does not run a resolver that allows recursive queries should be banned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..but not faster than the DNS service I run on my computer.
It is trivial to install, provides a very simple service, and is as flexible as I might want it to be.
A personal note on networking in general: whoever steps into the Internets and does not run a resolver that allows recursive queries should be banned.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354946</id>
	<title>No thanks.</title>
	<author>jim\_v2000</author>
	<datestamp>1260209640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll stick with my ISP's DNS.  One thing I've noticed about using third party DNS services like OpenDNS is that location aware sites that serve up content from different servers depending where you are (like YouTube) don't work well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll stick with my ISP 's DNS .
One thing I 've noticed about using third party DNS services like OpenDNS is that location aware sites that serve up content from different servers depending where you are ( like YouTube ) do n't work well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll stick with my ISP's DNS.
One thing I've noticed about using third party DNS services like OpenDNS is that location aware sites that serve up content from different servers depending where you are (like YouTube) don't work well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357440</id>
	<title>What about using your own?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260178740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know how difficult is to setup on Windows world, but on Linux/Unix world is fairly simple (In Ubuntu, 1 apt-get and modify your dns server to localhost).<br>You will not benefit from the cache of others, but the hit ratio appart of the big ones must be very low anyway. Better roll your own cache with your own browsing habits.<br>What's the problem with that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know how difficult is to setup on Windows world , but on Linux/Unix world is fairly simple ( In Ubuntu , 1 apt-get and modify your dns server to localhost ) .You will not benefit from the cache of others , but the hit ratio appart of the big ones must be very low anyway .
Better roll your own cache with your own browsing habits.What 's the problem with that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know how difficult is to setup on Windows world, but on Linux/Unix world is fairly simple (In Ubuntu, 1 apt-get and modify your dns server to localhost).You will not benefit from the cache of others, but the hit ratio appart of the big ones must be very low anyway.
Better roll your own cache with your own browsing habits.What's the problem with that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30359488</id>
	<title>Re:My own more detailed analysis</title>
	<author>complete loony</author>
	<datestamp>1260189900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Quick thoughts;
<br>For your second and third tests it might be useful to test the TTL you got back to see if it is about to expire.
<br>I wouldn't expect querying the www name to be much different to the domain itself.
<br>Some of those popular sites might have deliberately low TTL's so they can quickly fail over the site to another IP address if something breaks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quick thoughts ; For your second and third tests it might be useful to test the TTL you got back to see if it is about to expire .
I would n't expect querying the www name to be much different to the domain itself .
Some of those popular sites might have deliberately low TTL 's so they can quickly fail over the site to another IP address if something breaks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quick thoughts;
For your second and third tests it might be useful to test the TTL you got back to see if it is about to expire.
I wouldn't expect querying the www name to be much different to the domain itself.
Some of those popular sites might have deliberately low TTL's so they can quickly fail over the site to another IP address if something breaks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30399638</id>
	<title>World-wide DNS performance</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260529080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting! We also ran an experiment, but from 42 locations instead, using the WatchMouse network. In our synthetic score OpenDNS also comes out best:</p><p><a href="http://labs.watchmouse.com/2009/12/public-dns-servers-performance-worth-the-trouble/" title="watchmouse.com" rel="nofollow">http://labs.watchmouse.com/2009/12/public-dns-servers-performance-worth-the-trouble/</a> [watchmouse.com]</p><p>The problem we see is that Google is pretty fast, but they also seem to lose quite some packets in the process, causing retries etc...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting !
We also ran an experiment , but from 42 locations instead , using the WatchMouse network .
In our synthetic score OpenDNS also comes out best : http : //labs.watchmouse.com/2009/12/public-dns-servers-performance-worth-the-trouble/ [ watchmouse.com ] The problem we see is that Google is pretty fast , but they also seem to lose quite some packets in the process , causing retries etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting!
We also ran an experiment, but from 42 locations instead, using the WatchMouse network.
In our synthetic score OpenDNS also comes out best:http://labs.watchmouse.com/2009/12/public-dns-servers-performance-worth-the-trouble/ [watchmouse.com]The problem we see is that Google is pretty fast, but they also seem to lose quite some packets in the process, causing retries etc...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354324</id>
	<title>My own more detailed analysis</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260207240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I ran my own set of experiments benchmarking both Google DNS and OpenDNS as well as two UK ISPs. I showed more detailed results, and infer some information about how these systems are run.

<a href="http://bramp.net/blog/google-dns-benchmarked" title="bramp.net" rel="nofollow">http://bramp.net/blog/google-dns-benchmarked</a> [bramp.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ran my own set of experiments benchmarking both Google DNS and OpenDNS as well as two UK ISPs .
I showed more detailed results , and infer some information about how these systems are run .
http : //bramp.net/blog/google-dns-benchmarked [ bramp.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I ran my own set of experiments benchmarking both Google DNS and OpenDNS as well as two UK ISPs.
I showed more detailed results, and infer some information about how these systems are run.
http://bramp.net/blog/google-dns-benchmarked [bramp.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354622</id>
	<title>Censorship FAIL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260208320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Open DNS servers have been there all along, but they're too obscure for Joe Average. Google is not, and there is embarrassement ahead for <a href="censorshipschemes.http:wwweffiorgblogkai-2008-02-18html" title="censorshipschemes.http" rel="nofollow">several</a> [censorshipschemes.http] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet\_censorship\_in\_Germany" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">national</a> [wikipedia.org] <a href="http://old.saferinternet.org/ww/en/pub/insafe/news/articles/0605/se\_isps.htm" title="saferinternet.org" rel="nofollow">censorship</a> [saferinternet.org] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet\_censorship" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">schemes</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Open DNS servers have been there all along , but they 're too obscure for Joe Average .
Google is not , and there is embarrassement ahead for several [ censorshipschemes.http ] national [ wikipedia.org ] censorship [ saferinternet.org ] schemes [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Open DNS servers have been there all along, but they're too obscure for Joe Average.
Google is not, and there is embarrassement ahead for several [censorshipschemes.http] national [wikipedia.org] censorship [saferinternet.org] schemes [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354436</id>
	<title>Too lazy to read</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260207660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What do they use for software... bind? djbdns?  Something they wrote themselves in python?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What do they use for software... bind ? djbdns ?
Something they wrote themselves in python ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do they use for software... bind? djbdns?
Something they wrote themselves in python?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357482</id>
	<title>Re:One time comcasts DNS servers were down...</title>
	<author>Ephemeriis</author>
	<datestamp>1260178980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Around 5 years ago, the internet was down for comcast subscribers in northern Indiana and a good chunk of the midwest-</p><p>I figured out it was just their DNS servers that were down and quickly switched over to AT&amp;T's. That evening I saw the fastest internet I've ever seen. It was glorious.</p></div><p>That's roughly the same experience I had about a year ago with Charter here.</p><p>The Internet went to hell for the better part of a week...  Slow, had trouble looking up anything, web pages took forever to load, couldn't send mail.  It was awful.  I didn't initially think much of it as we routinely have trouble...  But then one day it just cut out completely.</p><p>I did some basic troubleshooting to make sure it wasn't my own hardware, and found out I could ping pretty much anything by IP address, but Charter's DNS servers just weren't responding.</p><p>So I threw in OpenDNS's servers, and everything started working again.  Actually, faster than it ever had.  I haven't tried my ISP's DNS servers again since then - why switch when OpenDNS works so much better?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Around 5 years ago , the internet was down for comcast subscribers in northern Indiana and a good chunk of the midwest-I figured out it was just their DNS servers that were down and quickly switched over to AT&amp;T 's .
That evening I saw the fastest internet I 've ever seen .
It was glorious.That 's roughly the same experience I had about a year ago with Charter here.The Internet went to hell for the better part of a week... Slow , had trouble looking up anything , web pages took forever to load , could n't send mail .
It was awful .
I did n't initially think much of it as we routinely have trouble... But then one day it just cut out completely.I did some basic troubleshooting to make sure it was n't my own hardware , and found out I could ping pretty much anything by IP address , but Charter 's DNS servers just were n't responding.So I threw in OpenDNS 's servers , and everything started working again .
Actually , faster than it ever had .
I have n't tried my ISP 's DNS servers again since then - why switch when OpenDNS works so much better ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Around 5 years ago, the internet was down for comcast subscribers in northern Indiana and a good chunk of the midwest-I figured out it was just their DNS servers that were down and quickly switched over to AT&amp;T's.
That evening I saw the fastest internet I've ever seen.
It was glorious.That's roughly the same experience I had about a year ago with Charter here.The Internet went to hell for the better part of a week...  Slow, had trouble looking up anything, web pages took forever to load, couldn't send mail.
It was awful.
I didn't initially think much of it as we routinely have trouble...  But then one day it just cut out completely.I did some basic troubleshooting to make sure it wasn't my own hardware, and found out I could ping pretty much anything by IP address, but Charter's DNS servers just weren't responding.So I threw in OpenDNS's servers, and everything started working again.
Actually, faster than it ever had.
I haven't tried my ISP's DNS servers again since then - why switch when OpenDNS works so much better?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357980</id>
	<title>The system provides value to us</title>
	<author>dilvish\_the\_damned</author>
	<datestamp>1260181680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>in the form of easy to remember IP addresses.<br>Additionally its a DNS service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in the form of easy to remember IP addresses.Additionally its a DNS service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in the form of easy to remember IP addresses.Additionally its a DNS service.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354402</id>
	<title>Re:One time comcasts DNS servers were down...</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1260207480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Telus (Canadian Telco) DNS Servers go down for about 12 hours every other month or so. It's handy to have this kind of info online. I also have the Shaw (Canadian Cable Company) DNS servers written down, just in case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Telus ( Canadian Telco ) DNS Servers go down for about 12 hours every other month or so .
It 's handy to have this kind of info online .
I also have the Shaw ( Canadian Cable Company ) DNS servers written down , just in case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Telus (Canadian Telco) DNS Servers go down for about 12 hours every other month or so.
It's handy to have this kind of info online.
I also have the Shaw (Canadian Cable Company) DNS servers written down, just in case.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354202</id>
	<title>Re:Pointless hype</title>
	<author>Krneki</author>
	<datestamp>1260206760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use OpenDNS because in my country they dared to censor the Internet twice using DNS.<br>Once it was for bwin.com and another time it was a leaked political document (both for 1 week). No, I don't bet, but I do not tolerate this political bulling.<br><br>Google DNS could be useful if they don't implement any censorship, considering how much hate P2P sites gets from corporations we will see if they manage to stay neutral.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use OpenDNS because in my country they dared to censor the Internet twice using DNS.Once it was for bwin.com and another time it was a leaked political document ( both for 1 week ) .
No , I do n't bet , but I do not tolerate this political bulling.Google DNS could be useful if they do n't implement any censorship , considering how much hate P2P sites gets from corporations we will see if they manage to stay neutral .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use OpenDNS because in my country they dared to censor the Internet twice using DNS.Once it was for bwin.com and another time it was a leaked political document (both for 1 week).
No, I don't bet, but I do not tolerate this political bulling.Google DNS could be useful if they don't implement any censorship, considering how much hate P2P sites gets from corporations we will see if they manage to stay neutral.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30362228</id>
	<title>tracert</title>
	<author>mahadiga</author>
	<datestamp>1260212880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <tt>I picked DNS after performing this test<br> <br>$tracert 8.8.8.8<br>$tracert 8.8.4.4<br>$tracert 4.2.2.4<br>$tracert 208.67.222.222</tt></p></div> </blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I picked DNS after performing this test $ tracert 8.8.8.8 $ tracert 8.8.4.4 $ tracert 4.2.2.4 $ tracert 208.67.222.222</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I picked DNS after performing this test $tracert 8.8.8.8$tracert 8.8.4.4$tracert 4.2.2.4$tracert 208.67.222.222 
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355348</id>
	<title>switched 2 days ago...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260211500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and am very happy with it. i surf a lot from the console and really am sick of getting redirected to opendns' website instead of a standard compliant answer...it seems to be a little bit faster than opendns, but i'm really too lazy to measure it. i cache with pdnsd localy since three years, because really every isp i had sucked at dns (5 hours dns downtime a month is 5 hours too much for me!). however, the arguments regarding privacy are just masturbation - you know you're security wanker without a web of trust and there's no trust in unencrypted udp connections and you don't own google's (or anybody else's) log server, do you?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and am very happy with it .
i surf a lot from the console and really am sick of getting redirected to opendns ' website instead of a standard compliant answer...it seems to be a little bit faster than opendns , but i 'm really too lazy to measure it .
i cache with pdnsd localy since three years , because really every isp i had sucked at dns ( 5 hours dns downtime a month is 5 hours too much for me ! ) .
however , the arguments regarding privacy are just masturbation - you know you 're security wanker without a web of trust and there 's no trust in unencrypted udp connections and you do n't own google 's ( or anybody else 's ) log server , do you ?
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and am very happy with it.
i surf a lot from the console and really am sick of getting redirected to opendns' website instead of a standard compliant answer...it seems to be a little bit faster than opendns, but i'm really too lazy to measure it.
i cache with pdnsd localy since three years, because really every isp i had sucked at dns (5 hours dns downtime a month is 5 hours too much for me!).
however, the arguments regarding privacy are just masturbation - you know you're security wanker without a web of trust and there's no trust in unencrypted udp connections and you don't own google's (or anybody else's) log server, do you?
:-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30358320</id>
	<title>The Reason Google is doing This.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260183600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just want to point out the obvious reason google is doing this and hoping you will switch DNS to them.<br>Facts:<br>1. Some ISP's return advertisments when you enter a domain that does not exists.<br>2. Google makes money from online advertising.<br>3. There is a specific number of dollars advertisers are willing to budget each year.</p><p>Given the above, it seems clear that google is attempting to remove the advertising dollars spent on domain-misses. By doing so, there is more money spent on other channels of online advertising. Google will likely pick up the majority of that money since they offer one of the best suites for online advertising.</p><p>The ability for a user to get more accurate DNS results... is the cookie that google is holding out in order to get you to switch.</p><p>Also note: about once per year my ISP goes down due to DNS not working. I can get to internet sites via their IP number, but name resolution does not work. The next time this occurs, I will be switching to 8.8.8.8 until my local ISP gets their DNS fixed. I may or may not switch back after that.</p><p>Good luck google<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just want to point out the obvious reason google is doing this and hoping you will switch DNS to them.Facts : 1 .
Some ISP 's return advertisments when you enter a domain that does not exists.2 .
Google makes money from online advertising.3 .
There is a specific number of dollars advertisers are willing to budget each year.Given the above , it seems clear that google is attempting to remove the advertising dollars spent on domain-misses .
By doing so , there is more money spent on other channels of online advertising .
Google will likely pick up the majority of that money since they offer one of the best suites for online advertising.The ability for a user to get more accurate DNS results... is the cookie that google is holding out in order to get you to switch.Also note : about once per year my ISP goes down due to DNS not working .
I can get to internet sites via their IP number , but name resolution does not work .
The next time this occurs , I will be switching to 8.8.8.8 until my local ISP gets their DNS fixed .
I may or may not switch back after that.Good luck google ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just want to point out the obvious reason google is doing this and hoping you will switch DNS to them.Facts:1.
Some ISP's return advertisments when you enter a domain that does not exists.2.
Google makes money from online advertising.3.
There is a specific number of dollars advertisers are willing to budget each year.Given the above, it seems clear that google is attempting to remove the advertising dollars spent on domain-misses.
By doing so, there is more money spent on other channels of online advertising.
Google will likely pick up the majority of that money since they offer one of the best suites for online advertising.The ability for a user to get more accurate DNS results... is the cookie that google is holding out in order to get you to switch.Also note: about once per year my ISP goes down due to DNS not working.
I can get to internet sites via their IP number, but name resolution does not work.
The next time this occurs, I will be switching to 8.8.8.8 until my local ISP gets their DNS fixed.
I may or may not switch back after that.Good luck google ;-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355220</id>
	<title>informative TacoTaco</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260210900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>rea]sons why anyone [mit.edu] found at my frrelance may be hurting the</htmltext>
<tokenext>rea ] sons why anyone [ mit.edu ] found at my frrelance may be hurting the</tokentext>
<sentencetext>rea]sons why anyone [mit.edu] found at my frrelance may be hurting the</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356312</id>
	<title>Actually both good/bad for security and anonimity</title>
	<author>zhilla2</author>
	<datestamp>1260216240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anything can be used for good and evil. Not to sound like a Google fanboy, but by setting default primary/secondary DNS to a hardened, cache poison (and other stuff) secured and properly maintained DNS service, their ChromeOS / Android / people-who-trust-them customers could be better off than relying on some unsecured local ISP DNS.<br>If I was paranoid (or had a reason), I would trust Google more than my ISP - my ISP's DNS belongs to my ISP. Which is subject to my country's law. Google is not, and getting any info from them is at least bit harder than asking local company - who also does not have a clear policy on logging and sharing my data.<br>And yes, in my case also its fast but not as local ISP DNS, but no big trade off since I use BIND to cache anyway. So primary and secondary are my ISP's, and tertiary and quadriary Google's.<br>What I learned from all this is that second(ary) DNS IP your ISP gives you is sometimes bit (lot?) faster, and better used as Primary DNS under Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anything can be used for good and evil .
Not to sound like a Google fanboy , but by setting default primary/secondary DNS to a hardened , cache poison ( and other stuff ) secured and properly maintained DNS service , their ChromeOS / Android / people-who-trust-them customers could be better off than relying on some unsecured local ISP DNS.If I was paranoid ( or had a reason ) , I would trust Google more than my ISP - my ISP 's DNS belongs to my ISP .
Which is subject to my country 's law .
Google is not , and getting any info from them is at least bit harder than asking local company - who also does not have a clear policy on logging and sharing my data.And yes , in my case also its fast but not as local ISP DNS , but no big trade off since I use BIND to cache anyway .
So primary and secondary are my ISP 's , and tertiary and quadriary Google 's.What I learned from all this is that second ( ary ) DNS IP your ISP gives you is sometimes bit ( lot ?
) faster , and better used as Primary DNS under Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anything can be used for good and evil.
Not to sound like a Google fanboy, but by setting default primary/secondary DNS to a hardened, cache poison (and other stuff) secured and properly maintained DNS service, their ChromeOS / Android / people-who-trust-them customers could be better off than relying on some unsecured local ISP DNS.If I was paranoid (or had a reason), I would trust Google more than my ISP - my ISP's DNS belongs to my ISP.
Which is subject to my country's law.
Google is not, and getting any info from them is at least bit harder than asking local company - who also does not have a clear policy on logging and sharing my data.And yes, in my case also its fast but not as local ISP DNS, but no big trade off since I use BIND to cache anyway.
So primary and secondary are my ISP's, and tertiary and quadriary Google's.What I learned from all this is that second(ary) DNS IP your ISP gives you is sometimes bit (lot?
) faster, and better used as Primary DNS under Windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30359488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30358432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30399638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30358226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30364834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1529231_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355072
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355178
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354436
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355934
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354830
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354946
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356140
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354170
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30358432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354202
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355248
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354652
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30364834
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355754
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30355224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30356830
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30358226
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30354324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30399638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30359488
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1529231.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1529231.30357440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
