<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_10_186245</id>
	<title>Microsoft Finally Open Sources Windows 7 Tool</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1260469080000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Jan writes <i>"Microsoft has <a href="http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/12/microsoft-finally-open-sources-windows-7-tool.ars">
open sourced the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool</a>  by releasing it under the GPLv2 license. The code is now available on CodePlex, Microsoft's Open Source software project hosting repository, over at wudt.codeplex.com. The actual installer for the tool is now again available for download at the Microsoft Store (2.59MB). (Microsoft  <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/11/13/2311232/Microsoft-Takes-Responsibility-For-GPL-Violation">previously took responsiblity for the violation</a>.)"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jan writes " Microsoft has open sourced the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool by releasing it under the GPLv2 license .
The code is now available on CodePlex , Microsoft 's Open Source software project hosting repository , over at wudt.codeplex.com .
The actual installer for the tool is now again available for download at the Microsoft Store ( 2.59MB ) .
( Microsoft previously took responsiblity for the violation .
) "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jan writes "Microsoft has 
open sourced the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool  by releasing it under the GPLv2 license.
The code is now available on CodePlex, Microsoft's Open Source software project hosting repository, over at wudt.codeplex.com.
The actual installer for the tool is now again available for download at the Microsoft Store (2.59MB).
(Microsoft  previously took responsiblity for the violation.
)"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391848</id>
	<title>I must be getting old</title>
	<author>pm\_rat\_poison</author>
	<datestamp>1260473880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>First the SEGA logo brazenly appeared on a Nintendo console<br>
Now it's Microsoft publishing GPL licenced-code. TWICE (the other being their contribution to the kernel) <br>
Pigs expected to fly next week.</htmltext>
<tokenext>First the SEGA logo brazenly appeared on a Nintendo console Now it 's Microsoft publishing GPL licenced-code .
TWICE ( the other being their contribution to the kernel ) Pigs expected to fly next week .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First the SEGA logo brazenly appeared on a Nintendo console
Now it's Microsoft publishing GPL licenced-code.
TWICE (the other being their contribution to the kernel) 
Pigs expected to fly next week.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392888</id>
	<title>Re:Vaguely related questions...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260477840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>dd</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>dd</tokentext>
<sentencetext>dd</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394506</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Foredecker</author>
	<datestamp>1260441060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, we don't have a set of rigid coding standards.   Team's have coding standards (mine has one).  Teams can be as small as a few people, or as large has many tens of poeple, or a bit more.  But there is no Windows or MSFT wide coding standard.
<p>
This is especially true for the simply typographic stuff (tabs, spaces, where curly braces go, etc).
</p><p>
Note, there are widely followed best practices.   But these are not mandated.  They are followed because its the right thing to do.
</p><p>
-<i>Foredecker</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , we do n't have a set of rigid coding standards .
Team 's have coding standards ( mine has one ) .
Teams can be as small as a few people , or as large has many tens of poeple , or a bit more .
But there is no Windows or MSFT wide coding standard .
This is especially true for the simply typographic stuff ( tabs , spaces , where curly braces go , etc ) .
Note , there are widely followed best practices .
But these are not mandated .
They are followed because its the right thing to do .
-Foredecker</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, we don't have a set of rigid coding standards.
Team's have coding standards (mine has one).
Teams can be as small as a few people, or as large has many tens of poeple, or a bit more.
But there is no Windows or MSFT wide coding standard.
This is especially true for the simply typographic stuff (tabs, spaces, where curly braces go, etc).
Note, there are widely followed best practices.
But these are not mandated.
They are followed because its the right thing to do.
-Foredecker</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393998</id>
	<title>A peek</title>
	<author>nyri</author>
	<datestamp>1260438900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As opposed almost everyone fussing about "teh M$" and nuances of "freedom", I decided to take a look as see this professionalism.</p><p>The first, <i>the first</i>, line I read had a pre-processor no-no. Here:</p><p><tt>#define ReleaseStr(pwz) if (pwz) { StrFree(pwz); }</tt></p><p>You can read all about it here: <a href="http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/misc-technical-issues.html#faq-39.4" title="parashift.com">http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/misc-technical-issues.html#faq-39.4</a> [parashift.com]</p><p>Here's how it doesn't work:</p><p><tt><br>if ( something )<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ReleaseStr(pwz)<br>else<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; foobar;<br></tt></p><p>So there. The code might <i>look</i> professional. It might but it doesn't mean that it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As opposed almost everyone fussing about " teh M $ " and nuances of " freedom " , I decided to take a look as see this professionalism.The first , the first , line I read had a pre-processor no-no .
Here : # define ReleaseStr ( pwz ) if ( pwz ) { StrFree ( pwz ) ; } You can read all about it here : http : //www.parashift.com/c + + -faq-lite/misc-technical-issues.html # faq-39.4 [ parashift.com ] Here 's how it does n't work : if ( something )         ReleaseStr ( pwz ) else         foobar ; So there .
The code might look professional .
It might but it does n't mean that it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As opposed almost everyone fussing about "teh M$" and nuances of "freedom", I decided to take a look as see this professionalism.The first, the first, line I read had a pre-processor no-no.
Here:#define ReleaseStr(pwz) if (pwz) { StrFree(pwz); }You can read all about it here: http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/misc-technical-issues.html#faq-39.4 [parashift.com]Here's how it doesn't work:if ( something )
        ReleaseStr(pwz)else
        foobar;So there.
The code might look professional.
It might but it doesn't mean that it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391604</id>
	<title>Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260472920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's good that Microsoft took responsibility for this, kudos to them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's good that Microsoft took responsibility for this , kudos to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's good that Microsoft took responsibility for this, kudos to them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394304</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260440340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Trust me,</p></div></blockquote><blockquote><div><p>Anyway, trust me -</p></div></blockquote><p>No, I don't trust you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Trust me,Anyway , trust me -No , I do n't trust you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trust me,Anyway, trust me -No, I don't trust you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30396818</id>
	<title>Re:A peek</title>
	<author>jpmorgan</author>
	<datestamp>1260450540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, if you've been paying any attention you'd note that this tool was developed by a 3rd party, on contract for Microsoft. So no, this wasn't their code.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , if you 've been paying any attention you 'd note that this tool was developed by a 3rd party , on contract for Microsoft .
So no , this was n't their code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, if you've been paying any attention you'd note that this tool was developed by a 3rd party, on contract for Microsoft.
So no, this wasn't their code.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391684</id>
	<title>I give up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260473220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I took a quick look at the article and I have no idea what this tool is supposed to do.  I couldn't even venture a guess.  So some tool that I know nothing about and have no idea what it does now has the source code available for it.  I think the term "underwhelmed" would apply.  What exactly is a USB/DVD download tool?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I took a quick look at the article and I have no idea what this tool is supposed to do .
I could n't even venture a guess .
So some tool that I know nothing about and have no idea what it does now has the source code available for it .
I think the term " underwhelmed " would apply .
What exactly is a USB/DVD download tool ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I took a quick look at the article and I have no idea what this tool is supposed to do.
I couldn't even venture a guess.
So some tool that I know nothing about and have no idea what it does now has the source code available for it.
I think the term "underwhelmed" would apply.
What exactly is a USB/DVD download tool?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391772</id>
	<title>Re:I give up</title>
	<author>Java Pimp</author>
	<datestamp>1260473580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool allows you to create a copy of your Windows 7 ISO file on a USB flash drive or a DVD. To create a bootable DVD or USB flash drive, download the ISO file and then run the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool. Once this is done, you can install Windows 7 directly from the USB flash drive or DVD."</p><p>Source: <a href="http://wudt.codeplex.com/" title="codeplex.com">http://wudt.codeplex.com/</a> [codeplex.com] from TFA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool allows you to create a copy of your Windows 7 ISO file on a USB flash drive or a DVD .
To create a bootable DVD or USB flash drive , download the ISO file and then run the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool .
Once this is done , you can install Windows 7 directly from the USB flash drive or DVD .
" Source : http : //wudt.codeplex.com/ [ codeplex.com ] from TFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool allows you to create a copy of your Windows 7 ISO file on a USB flash drive or a DVD.
To create a bootable DVD or USB flash drive, download the ISO file and then run the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool.
Once this is done, you can install Windows 7 directly from the USB flash drive or DVD.
"Source: http://wudt.codeplex.com/ [codeplex.com] from TFA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397158</id>
	<title>Re:/. Bias</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260453000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering they released it illegally and they should have either written the whole thing themselves or open sourced it from the beginning, that's not really biased, rather it's letting them off easy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering they released it illegally and they should have either written the whole thing themselves or open sourced it from the beginning , that 's not really biased , rather it 's letting them off easy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering they released it illegally and they should have either written the whole thing themselves or open sourced it from the beginning, that's not really biased, rather it's letting them off easy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391930</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Ziekheid</author>
	<datestamp>1260474180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What do you base this on?
When the source code of 2k and NT leaked everyone agreed that the code was good and clean, as what you would expect from a company as Microsoft.
You're just randomly throwing out bashes with no valid arguments.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you base this on ?
When the source code of 2k and NT leaked everyone agreed that the code was good and clean , as what you would expect from a company as Microsoft .
You 're just randomly throwing out bashes with no valid arguments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you base this on?
When the source code of 2k and NT leaked everyone agreed that the code was good and clean, as what you would expect from a company as Microsoft.
You're just randomly throwing out bashes with no valid arguments.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392452</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Jah-Wren Ryel</author>
	<datestamp>1260475980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Anyway, trust me - it's very professional, clean code, nice design, and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel.</p></div><p>Bad example.  Just about every uniprocessor-developed OS had a Big Global Lock until they went multi-cpu - and even then it usually took a few releases before it was really eliminated.  I would be hugely surprised to find that the Win9x series didn't have one too.  When did the linux kernel deprecate it?  Like a decade ago?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyway , trust me - it 's very professional , clean code , nice design , and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel.Bad example .
Just about every uniprocessor-developed OS had a Big Global Lock until they went multi-cpu - and even then it usually took a few releases before it was really eliminated .
I would be hugely surprised to find that the Win9x series did n't have one too .
When did the linux kernel deprecate it ?
Like a decade ago ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyway, trust me - it's very professional, clean code, nice design, and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel.Bad example.
Just about every uniprocessor-developed OS had a Big Global Lock until they went multi-cpu - and even then it usually took a few releases before it was really eliminated.
I would be hugely surprised to find that the Win9x series didn't have one too.
When did the linux kernel deprecate it?
Like a decade ago?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394466</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>bcmm</author>
	<datestamp>1260440880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>OTHO [sic] the Linux kernel was written by coders from ALL walks of life with different views on how to write code. There is only a very loose coding standard for the kernel, if Linus can read it and understand it, it gets used as is.</p></div></blockquote><p>
[Citation needed], and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/src/linux/Documentation/CodingStyle would disagree with you. I'll reproduce the first paragraph here, in case you don't have the kernel source handy:</p><blockquote><div><p>This is a short document describing the preferred coding style for the
linux kernel.  Coding style is very personal, and I won't \_force\_ my
views on anybody, but this is what goes for anything that I have to be
able to maintain, and I'd prefer it for most other things too.  Please
at least consider the points made here.</p></div></blockquote><p>


While it says nobody will be *forced* to obey it, "this is what goes for anything that I have to be able to maintain", implies that ignoring it would make it difficult to get code accepted into the kernel. Indeed, IIRC, one of the major reasons kernel developers didn't get on with Hans Reiser and wouldn't include Reiserfs4 in the kernel tree was Reiser's refusal to use kernel coding standards (he insisted his own style was superior, apparently missing the point that, in the absence of general consensus on style, the important thing was consistency).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>OTHO [ sic ] the Linux kernel was written by coders from ALL walks of life with different views on how to write code .
There is only a very loose coding standard for the kernel , if Linus can read it and understand it , it gets used as is .
[ Citation needed ] , and /usr/src/linux/Documentation/CodingStyle would disagree with you .
I 'll reproduce the first paragraph here , in case you do n't have the kernel source handy : This is a short document describing the preferred coding style for the linux kernel .
Coding style is very personal , and I wo n't \ _force \ _ my views on anybody , but this is what goes for anything that I have to be able to maintain , and I 'd prefer it for most other things too .
Please at least consider the points made here .
While it says nobody will be * forced * to obey it , " this is what goes for anything that I have to be able to maintain " , implies that ignoring it would make it difficult to get code accepted into the kernel .
Indeed , IIRC , one of the major reasons kernel developers did n't get on with Hans Reiser and would n't include Reiserfs4 in the kernel tree was Reiser 's refusal to use kernel coding standards ( he insisted his own style was superior , apparently missing the point that , in the absence of general consensus on style , the important thing was consistency ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OTHO [sic] the Linux kernel was written by coders from ALL walks of life with different views on how to write code.
There is only a very loose coding standard for the kernel, if Linus can read it and understand it, it gets used as is.
[Citation needed], and /usr/src/linux/Documentation/CodingStyle would disagree with you.
I'll reproduce the first paragraph here, in case you don't have the kernel source handy:This is a short document describing the preferred coding style for the
linux kernel.
Coding style is very personal, and I won't \_force\_ my
views on anybody, but this is what goes for anything that I have to be
able to maintain, and I'd prefer it for most other things too.
Please
at least consider the points made here.
While it says nobody will be *forced* to obey it, "this is what goes for anything that I have to be able to maintain", implies that ignoring it would make it difficult to get code accepted into the kernel.
Indeed, IIRC, one of the major reasons kernel developers didn't get on with Hans Reiser and wouldn't include Reiserfs4 in the kernel tree was Reiser's refusal to use kernel coding standards (he insisted his own style was superior, apparently missing the point that, in the absence of general consensus on style, the important thing was consistency).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391786</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>badboy\_tw2002</author>
	<datestamp>1260473580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You apparently have never worked in a large company before.  There were probably 27 meetings before someone high enough up the food chain stuck their neck out to say "ok".  We're talking about opensourcing code from a company that generally doesn't do it.  Legal was involved, top executives were involved, someone had to talk to PR about spinning a press release, etc etc.  This isn't like some dev got emailed and said, "Shit! I better get that posted right away!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You apparently have never worked in a large company before .
There were probably 27 meetings before someone high enough up the food chain stuck their neck out to say " ok " .
We 're talking about opensourcing code from a company that generally does n't do it .
Legal was involved , top executives were involved , someone had to talk to PR about spinning a press release , etc etc .
This is n't like some dev got emailed and said , " Shit !
I better get that posted right away !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You apparently have never worked in a large company before.
There were probably 27 meetings before someone high enough up the food chain stuck their neck out to say "ok".
We're talking about opensourcing code from a company that generally doesn't do it.
Legal was involved, top executives were involved, someone had to talk to PR about spinning a press release, etc etc.
This isn't like some dev got emailed and said, "Shit!
I better get that posted right away!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395572</id>
	<title>Re:The bigger news here</title>
	<author>jd2112</author>
	<datestamp>1260444720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On the other hand they will probably spin it as "See, GPL is bad, if you link to it you have to give away your code!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand they will probably spin it as " See , GPL is bad , if you link to it you have to give away your code !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand they will probably spin it as "See, GPL is bad, if you link to it you have to give away your code!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393842</id>
	<title>Re:The bigger news here</title>
	<author>bcmm</author>
	<datestamp>1260438180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It was not inevitable. It would've been possible for them to simply stop distributing it, or stop distributing that version, strip out some features of their own they were scared someone would copy, and start distributing (with source) that version.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It was not inevitable .
It would 've been possible for them to simply stop distributing it , or stop distributing that version , strip out some features of their own they were scared someone would copy , and start distributing ( with source ) that version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was not inevitable.
It would've been possible for them to simply stop distributing it, or stop distributing that version, strip out some features of their own they were scared someone would copy, and start distributing (with source) that version.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30406584</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>man\_of\_mr\_e</author>
	<datestamp>1260524340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, in fact this incident could very well support microsoft's "cancer" or "virus" claims, and help to reinforce the fears that the GPL must be avoided in corporations at all costs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , in fact this incident could very well support microsoft 's " cancer " or " virus " claims , and help to reinforce the fears that the GPL must be avoided in corporations at all costs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, in fact this incident could very well support microsoft's "cancer" or "virus" claims, and help to reinforce the fears that the GPL must be avoided in corporations at all costs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30403040</id>
	<title>Re:I must be getting old</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260552540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You didn't hear? The swine flew.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You did n't hear ?
The swine flew .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You didn't hear?
The swine flew.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392030</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Slothrup</author>
	<datestamp>1260474480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is PROOF that Microsoft KNOWS they are producing bad code. They put something out there, and then when they had to open source the code, they were all like "Well now everyone will see how bad our coding is, better take a week to fix it up before releasing it to the public!"</p></div><p>Having been involved with open source at Microsoft, I'd guess that the real reason for the delay was to "scrub" it to make sure that no intellectual property was inadvertently being given away.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is PROOF that Microsoft KNOWS they are producing bad code .
They put something out there , and then when they had to open source the code , they were all like " Well now everyone will see how bad our coding is , better take a week to fix it up before releasing it to the public !
" Having been involved with open source at Microsoft , I 'd guess that the real reason for the delay was to " scrub " it to make sure that no intellectual property was inadvertently being given away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is PROOF that Microsoft KNOWS they are producing bad code.
They put something out there, and then when they had to open source the code, they were all like "Well now everyone will see how bad our coding is, better take a week to fix it up before releasing it to the public!
"Having been involved with open source at Microsoft, I'd guess that the real reason for the delay was to "scrub" it to make sure that no intellectual property was inadvertently being given away.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394120</id>
	<title>what is that very faint...</title>
	<author>McNihil</author>
	<datestamp>1260439500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>what is that very faint oinking sound I am hearing. OMG I see pigs fly in the distance!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what is that very faint oinking sound I am hearing .
OMG I see pigs fly in the distance !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what is that very faint oinking sound I am hearing.
OMG I see pigs fly in the distance!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392102</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Sir\_Sri</author>
	<datestamp>1260474780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or at least code they don't want shown to the public<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/* This chunk written by Sir\_Sri ext 1111 e-mail<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... */<nobr> <wbr></nobr>//coudn't get this sh*t to work right, used a hack but if you swirl the mouse around counter clockwise 7 times the program always crashes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>// Sir\_Sri is an idiot, incompetent and has been moved away from coding into marketing, he won't touch this again, I fixed this crap up for him Bill ext 1, office 1 e-mail 1@microsoft.com.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or at least code they do n't want shown to the public / * This chunk written by Sir \ _Sri ext 1111 e-mail ... * / //coud n't get this sh * t to work right , used a hack but if you swirl the mouse around counter clockwise 7 times the program always crashes // Sir \ _Sri is an idiot , incompetent and has been moved away from coding into marketing , he wo n't touch this again , I fixed this crap up for him Bill ext 1 , office 1 e-mail 1 @ microsoft.com .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or at least code they don't want shown to the public /* This chunk written by Sir\_Sri ext 1111 e-mail ... */ //coudn't get this sh*t to work right, used a hack but if you swirl the mouse around counter clockwise 7 times the program always crashes // Sir\_Sri is an idiot, incompetent and has been moved away from coding into marketing, he won't touch this again, I fixed this crap up for him Bill ext 1, office 1 e-mail 1@microsoft.com.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394924</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading</title>
	<author>aztracker1</author>
	<datestamp>1260442380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most of the extensions to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net framework.  Libraries, samples, and other tools within<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net.  They've also pushed source viewing into Visual Studio for the entire<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net framework directly.  Most notibly ASP.Net MVC is available under MS-PL (a very BSD-style license).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the extensions to the .Net framework .
Libraries , samples , and other tools within .Net .
They 've also pushed source viewing into Visual Studio for the entire .Net framework directly .
Most notibly ASP.Net MVC is available under MS-PL ( a very BSD-style license ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the extensions to the .Net framework.
Libraries, samples, and other tools within .Net.
They've also pushed source viewing into Visual Studio for the entire .Net framework directly.
Most notibly ASP.Net MVC is available under MS-PL (a very BSD-style license).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395600</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>HiThere</author>
	<datestamp>1260444900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I heard, a couple of decades ago, and with no way to verify it, was that each independent group at MS had to work in ignorance of the code that the other sections were writing, and the decisions they were making.</p><p>If this it is true, it would go a long way to explaining the series of disasters, even if each group was writing "pretty good" code.  (OTOH, I've also heard *that* called into question.  Perhaps it depends on what you think of as good.)</p><p>One thing to remember is that with each group hiding the code that it writes (true?) even a few bad choices could really foul things up, and nobody might be certain of why.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I heard , a couple of decades ago , and with no way to verify it , was that each independent group at MS had to work in ignorance of the code that the other sections were writing , and the decisions they were making.If this it is true , it would go a long way to explaining the series of disasters , even if each group was writing " pretty good " code .
( OTOH , I 've also heard * that * called into question .
Perhaps it depends on what you think of as good .
) One thing to remember is that with each group hiding the code that it writes ( true ?
) even a few bad choices could really foul things up , and nobody might be certain of why .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I heard, a couple of decades ago, and with no way to verify it, was that each independent group at MS had to work in ignorance of the code that the other sections were writing, and the decisions they were making.If this it is true, it would go a long way to explaining the series of disasters, even if each group was writing "pretty good" code.
(OTOH, I've also heard *that* called into question.
Perhaps it depends on what you think of as good.
)One thing to remember is that with each group hiding the code that it writes (true?
) even a few bad choices could really foul things up, and nobody might be certain of why.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392238</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>lewiscr</author>
	<datestamp>1260475140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel</p></div><p>The spinning hourglass begs to differ.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernelThe spinning hourglass begs to differ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernelThe spinning hourglass begs to differ.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392174</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Lemming Mark</author>
	<datestamp>1260474960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think your comment about asking the engineers to solve the right problem is very insightful.</p><p>But I'm curious - did Windows have more fine-grained locking than a single kernel lock at the time Linux introduced SMP support with 2.0?  I can imagine Windows may well have been better re locking scalability back then.  Both Linux and Windows have been using increasingly fine granularity locking over the years, which is nice.  It's somewhat frustrating that the Big Kernel Lock is still hanging around but at least it's not on most / any important critical paths now.  And one day hopefully it will go away properly<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think your comment about asking the engineers to solve the right problem is very insightful.But I 'm curious - did Windows have more fine-grained locking than a single kernel lock at the time Linux introduced SMP support with 2.0 ?
I can imagine Windows may well have been better re locking scalability back then .
Both Linux and Windows have been using increasingly fine granularity locking over the years , which is nice .
It 's somewhat frustrating that the Big Kernel Lock is still hanging around but at least it 's not on most / any important critical paths now .
And one day hopefully it will go away properly : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think your comment about asking the engineers to solve the right problem is very insightful.But I'm curious - did Windows have more fine-grained locking than a single kernel lock at the time Linux introduced SMP support with 2.0?
I can imagine Windows may well have been better re locking scalability back then.
Both Linux and Windows have been using increasingly fine granularity locking over the years, which is nice.
It's somewhat frustrating that the Big Kernel Lock is still hanging around but at least it's not on most / any important critical paths now.
And one day hopefully it will go away properly :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393350</id>
	<title>Re:For a company</title>
	<author>bmcage</author>
	<datestamp>1260436380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is priceless to read this on a MS site: <a href="http://wudt.codeplex.com/license" title="codeplex.com">http://wudt.codeplex.com/license</a> [codeplex.com] <p><div class="quote"><p>The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to share and change it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is priceless to read this on a MS site : http : //wudt.codeplex.com/license [ codeplex.com ] The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to share and change it .
.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is priceless to read this on a MS site: http://wudt.codeplex.com/license [codeplex.com] The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to share and change it.
...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394246</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>McNihil</author>
	<datestamp>1260440100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would say that the Solaris code is even cleaner and clearer than the Win-NT codebase. Linux is a bit all over the place depending on what level of cutting edge you want to be at.</p><p>Many would prefer working code rather than beautiful/elegant looking code. From a maintenance POV it is often easier if the code adheres to the KISS principle and that can at many times make the code look fugly, unpolished and in great need of refactoring. Too much re-factoring "can" result in too congealed code where it becomes "impossible" to extend beyond certain inherent thought paradigms regarding the solution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would say that the Solaris code is even cleaner and clearer than the Win-NT codebase .
Linux is a bit all over the place depending on what level of cutting edge you want to be at.Many would prefer working code rather than beautiful/elegant looking code .
From a maintenance POV it is often easier if the code adheres to the KISS principle and that can at many times make the code look fugly , unpolished and in great need of refactoring .
Too much re-factoring " can " result in too congealed code where it becomes " impossible " to extend beyond certain inherent thought paradigms regarding the solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would say that the Solaris code is even cleaner and clearer than the Win-NT codebase.
Linux is a bit all over the place depending on what level of cutting edge you want to be at.Many would prefer working code rather than beautiful/elegant looking code.
From a maintenance POV it is often easier if the code adheres to the KISS principle and that can at many times make the code look fugly, unpolished and in great need of refactoring.
Too much re-factoring "can" result in too congealed code where it becomes "impossible" to extend beyond certain inherent thought paradigms regarding the solution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393208</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>blitzkrieg3</author>
	<datestamp>1260435840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>BTW, I've heard of some diehard Mircosofties getting windows tats. Wonder if Linux coders have a Tux tat. (yuck).</p></div><p>I have a co worker that got a <a href="http://mairin.wordpress.com/2009/09/03/dedication/" title="wordpress.com">fedora</a> [wordpress.com] tattoo a little while back.to add to his <a href="http://people.redhat.com/tcameron/shadowman\_tattoo.jpg" title="redhat.com">Red Hat</a> [redhat.com] tattoo. A quick google search shows that some people get <a href="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3033/2701001571\_8a9f67438f.jpg" title="flickr.com">Tux tattoos</a> [flickr.com].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>BTW , I 've heard of some diehard Mircosofties getting windows tats .
Wonder if Linux coders have a Tux tat .
( yuck ) .I have a co worker that got a fedora [ wordpress.com ] tattoo a little while back.to add to his Red Hat [ redhat.com ] tattoo .
A quick google search shows that some people get Tux tattoos [ flickr.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BTW, I've heard of some diehard Mircosofties getting windows tats.
Wonder if Linux coders have a Tux tat.
(yuck).I have a co worker that got a fedora [wordpress.com] tattoo a little while back.to add to his Red Hat [redhat.com] tattoo.
A quick google search shows that some people get Tux tattoos [flickr.com].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397838</id>
	<title>all's well that ends well</title>
	<author>icepick72</author>
	<datestamp>1260458700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Snafu cleared up and Microsoft didn't act evil about it, so nothing really to do here. Next article please.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Snafu cleared up and Microsoft did n't act evil about it , so nothing really to do here .
Next article please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Snafu cleared up and Microsoft didn't act evil about it, so nothing really to do here.
Next article please.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393594</id>
	<title>PSSHT to all you who don't like copyright</title>
	<author>Theovon</author>
	<datestamp>1260437220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are two kinds of people who don't like copyright (as a general concept) (1) Those so prolifically and amazingly creative that they put very little value in any one thing they create, and (2) Those who are so incredibly lazy or uncreative that to get anything they have to rely on others to do it for them.</p><p>People in category (1) are incredibly rare.  Lots of people THINK they're in (1), but most of them just produce a hell of a lot of useless crap, kindal like that Shampoo guy.  I've never encountered anyone like this.  A lot of writers create way more than they publish, but most of them will admit that the stuff they didn't publish wasn't very good, so they're really not in category (1).</p><p>People in caregory (2) are shamless wastes of carbon, leeching off everyone else because they're too stupid or lazy to do anything for themselves, and they don't want to work to earn money so they can PAY for the stuff other people create.  They're the kinds of leaches that inevitably make socialism fail, sucking the system dry at the expense of everyone else who IS willing to work and contribute to society.  This actually accounts for the vast majority of people who whine on and on about how copyright is EVIL.  WRONG.  Current US copyright LAW is evil.  And people should be entitled to far more "fair use" than they have.  But a proper and fair system of copyright enhances productivity for everone, because moderately creative people are encouraged to create more, because they can profit from it.</p><p>That leaves category (3), which is the rest of us people who are at least moderately creative.  We have to work HARD to create something, and we're not happy when fools in category (2) decide to shamelessly rip us off.  Say I create something.  If I hadn't, then you wouldn't have it.  You, worthless brat, are not entitled to it.  If I hadn't worked on it, maybe someone else would have.  Maybe not.  Either way, we put time, money, and other resources into creating this thing, and I am as entitled to recouping and profiting from my investment as much as I am entitled to ask you to pay for a physical object I just built if you want to have it.</p><p>Money, BTW, isn't the only form of compensation that people want.  When I compose a scientific conference paper, I am putting the knowledge into the public domain.  But thereafter, if someone else uses my idea, they are required to cite my work.  They cannot claim it as their own.  The knowledge is in the public domain, but the mindshare is mine.  I get credited for making my invention or discovery and doing all of the work and research necessary to prove that my idea is worthwhile.</p><p>What makes the GPL brilliant as a copyright license is that it allows people to both share information (which is very important), and also profit from it.  If I put the GPL on something, I can release the source code so that others can learn from it, and if it's wrong, they can fix it.  But if someone wants to just COPY what I worked so hard to create, then they have to follow the rules.  If they embed it in another product, either they have to contribute knowledge to the world just as I did, or they can PAY me for a commercial license.</p><p>What's really evil about proprietary software, for instance, is not so much that they don't release the source code.  It's that you pay money for something without any guarantee that what you're getting is any good, and if it IS broken, you are completely screwed.  I've bought commercial software before.  Some of it was really good and worth the money I spent.  Some of it made me want to claw the eyes of of the scheisters who cheated me out of my money.  In general, having the source code is the only way to permanently guarantee that you get your money's worth out of software you purchased.</p><p>Keep in mind that most people like Free Software not for the sake of freedom but because they don't want to pay for it.  Again, LEECHES. They take and take but never give anything back to the community.  Stop fooling yourselves into thinking most people use Linux</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are two kinds of people who do n't like copyright ( as a general concept ) ( 1 ) Those so prolifically and amazingly creative that they put very little value in any one thing they create , and ( 2 ) Those who are so incredibly lazy or uncreative that to get anything they have to rely on others to do it for them.People in category ( 1 ) are incredibly rare .
Lots of people THINK they 're in ( 1 ) , but most of them just produce a hell of a lot of useless crap , kindal like that Shampoo guy .
I 've never encountered anyone like this .
A lot of writers create way more than they publish , but most of them will admit that the stuff they did n't publish was n't very good , so they 're really not in category ( 1 ) .People in caregory ( 2 ) are shamless wastes of carbon , leeching off everyone else because they 're too stupid or lazy to do anything for themselves , and they do n't want to work to earn money so they can PAY for the stuff other people create .
They 're the kinds of leaches that inevitably make socialism fail , sucking the system dry at the expense of everyone else who IS willing to work and contribute to society .
This actually accounts for the vast majority of people who whine on and on about how copyright is EVIL .
WRONG. Current US copyright LAW is evil .
And people should be entitled to far more " fair use " than they have .
But a proper and fair system of copyright enhances productivity for everone , because moderately creative people are encouraged to create more , because they can profit from it.That leaves category ( 3 ) , which is the rest of us people who are at least moderately creative .
We have to work HARD to create something , and we 're not happy when fools in category ( 2 ) decide to shamelessly rip us off .
Say I create something .
If I had n't , then you would n't have it .
You , worthless brat , are not entitled to it .
If I had n't worked on it , maybe someone else would have .
Maybe not .
Either way , we put time , money , and other resources into creating this thing , and I am as entitled to recouping and profiting from my investment as much as I am entitled to ask you to pay for a physical object I just built if you want to have it.Money , BTW , is n't the only form of compensation that people want .
When I compose a scientific conference paper , I am putting the knowledge into the public domain .
But thereafter , if someone else uses my idea , they are required to cite my work .
They can not claim it as their own .
The knowledge is in the public domain , but the mindshare is mine .
I get credited for making my invention or discovery and doing all of the work and research necessary to prove that my idea is worthwhile.What makes the GPL brilliant as a copyright license is that it allows people to both share information ( which is very important ) , and also profit from it .
If I put the GPL on something , I can release the source code so that others can learn from it , and if it 's wrong , they can fix it .
But if someone wants to just COPY what I worked so hard to create , then they have to follow the rules .
If they embed it in another product , either they have to contribute knowledge to the world just as I did , or they can PAY me for a commercial license.What 's really evil about proprietary software , for instance , is not so much that they do n't release the source code .
It 's that you pay money for something without any guarantee that what you 're getting is any good , and if it IS broken , you are completely screwed .
I 've bought commercial software before .
Some of it was really good and worth the money I spent .
Some of it made me want to claw the eyes of of the scheisters who cheated me out of my money .
In general , having the source code is the only way to permanently guarantee that you get your money 's worth out of software you purchased.Keep in mind that most people like Free Software not for the sake of freedom but because they do n't want to pay for it .
Again , LEECHES .
They take and take but never give anything back to the community .
Stop fooling yourselves into thinking most people use Linux</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are two kinds of people who don't like copyright (as a general concept) (1) Those so prolifically and amazingly creative that they put very little value in any one thing they create, and (2) Those who are so incredibly lazy or uncreative that to get anything they have to rely on others to do it for them.People in category (1) are incredibly rare.
Lots of people THINK they're in (1), but most of them just produce a hell of a lot of useless crap, kindal like that Shampoo guy.
I've never encountered anyone like this.
A lot of writers create way more than they publish, but most of them will admit that the stuff they didn't publish wasn't very good, so they're really not in category (1).People in caregory (2) are shamless wastes of carbon, leeching off everyone else because they're too stupid or lazy to do anything for themselves, and they don't want to work to earn money so they can PAY for the stuff other people create.
They're the kinds of leaches that inevitably make socialism fail, sucking the system dry at the expense of everyone else who IS willing to work and contribute to society.
This actually accounts for the vast majority of people who whine on and on about how copyright is EVIL.
WRONG.  Current US copyright LAW is evil.
And people should be entitled to far more "fair use" than they have.
But a proper and fair system of copyright enhances productivity for everone, because moderately creative people are encouraged to create more, because they can profit from it.That leaves category (3), which is the rest of us people who are at least moderately creative.
We have to work HARD to create something, and we're not happy when fools in category (2) decide to shamelessly rip us off.
Say I create something.
If I hadn't, then you wouldn't have it.
You, worthless brat, are not entitled to it.
If I hadn't worked on it, maybe someone else would have.
Maybe not.
Either way, we put time, money, and other resources into creating this thing, and I am as entitled to recouping and profiting from my investment as much as I am entitled to ask you to pay for a physical object I just built if you want to have it.Money, BTW, isn't the only form of compensation that people want.
When I compose a scientific conference paper, I am putting the knowledge into the public domain.
But thereafter, if someone else uses my idea, they are required to cite my work.
They cannot claim it as their own.
The knowledge is in the public domain, but the mindshare is mine.
I get credited for making my invention or discovery and doing all of the work and research necessary to prove that my idea is worthwhile.What makes the GPL brilliant as a copyright license is that it allows people to both share information (which is very important), and also profit from it.
If I put the GPL on something, I can release the source code so that others can learn from it, and if it's wrong, they can fix it.
But if someone wants to just COPY what I worked so hard to create, then they have to follow the rules.
If they embed it in another product, either they have to contribute knowledge to the world just as I did, or they can PAY me for a commercial license.What's really evil about proprietary software, for instance, is not so much that they don't release the source code.
It's that you pay money for something without any guarantee that what you're getting is any good, and if it IS broken, you are completely screwed.
I've bought commercial software before.
Some of it was really good and worth the money I spent.
Some of it made me want to claw the eyes of of the scheisters who cheated me out of my money.
In general, having the source code is the only way to permanently guarantee that you get your money's worth out of software you purchased.Keep in mind that most people like Free Software not for the sake of freedom but because they don't want to pay for it.
Again, LEECHES.
They take and take but never give anything back to the community.
Stop fooling yourselves into thinking most people use Linux</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260474900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure Microsoft's source code looks much more professional than the Linux source code.  The company probably has rigid coding standards that all programmers must adhere to.  Not only standards that have to do with the kinds of constructs you are allowed to use, but how the code must look, how many spaces to indent, how to format your comments, and where to put comments.  In other words they probably have a 'grammar police' for code.  (Do they still use Hungarian notation?).   OTHO the Linux kernel was written by coders from ALL walks of life with different views on how to write code.  There is only a very loose coding standard for the kernel, if Linus can read it and understand it, it gets used as is.</p><p>Does this make Microsoft source code work any better than Linux?  No.  Does it make it more supportable (for the programmers actually working on it)?  Probably.  But the people working on the Linux Kernel are used to the hodge-podge of coding standards in use.  Still it could make it harder for someone to break into kernel support.</p><p>BTW, I've heard of some diehard Mircosofties getting windows tats.  Wonder if Linux coders have a Tux tat.  (yuck).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure Microsoft 's source code looks much more professional than the Linux source code .
The company probably has rigid coding standards that all programmers must adhere to .
Not only standards that have to do with the kinds of constructs you are allowed to use , but how the code must look , how many spaces to indent , how to format your comments , and where to put comments .
In other words they probably have a 'grammar police ' for code .
( Do they still use Hungarian notation ? ) .
OTHO the Linux kernel was written by coders from ALL walks of life with different views on how to write code .
There is only a very loose coding standard for the kernel , if Linus can read it and understand it , it gets used as is.Does this make Microsoft source code work any better than Linux ?
No. Does it make it more supportable ( for the programmers actually working on it ) ?
Probably. But the people working on the Linux Kernel are used to the hodge-podge of coding standards in use .
Still it could make it harder for someone to break into kernel support.BTW , I 've heard of some diehard Mircosofties getting windows tats .
Wonder if Linux coders have a Tux tat .
( yuck ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure Microsoft's source code looks much more professional than the Linux source code.
The company probably has rigid coding standards that all programmers must adhere to.
Not only standards that have to do with the kinds of constructs you are allowed to use, but how the code must look, how many spaces to indent, how to format your comments, and where to put comments.
In other words they probably have a 'grammar police' for code.
(Do they still use Hungarian notation?).
OTHO the Linux kernel was written by coders from ALL walks of life with different views on how to write code.
There is only a very loose coding standard for the kernel, if Linus can read it and understand it, it gets used as is.Does this make Microsoft source code work any better than Linux?
No.  Does it make it more supportable (for the programmers actually working on it)?
Probably.  But the people working on the Linux Kernel are used to the hodge-podge of coding standards in use.
Still it could make it harder for someone to break into kernel support.BTW, I've heard of some diehard Mircosofties getting windows tats.
Wonder if Linux coders have a Tux tat.
(yuck).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391872</id>
	<title>CT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260474000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love the conspiracy theories posted here.  This truly is more entertaining, and dramatic, then anything on prime time television.</p><p>Ciao</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love the conspiracy theories posted here .
This truly is more entertaining , and dramatic , then anything on prime time television.Ciao</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love the conspiracy theories posted here.
This truly is more entertaining, and dramatic, then anything on prime time television.Ciao</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392066</id>
	<title>Finally?</title>
	<author>Rix</author>
	<datestamp>1260474600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's been, what, a month since they were informed of the lapse, and less than that since they acknowledged the error?</p><p>Show a reasonable amount of patience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's been , what , a month since they were informed of the lapse , and less than that since they acknowledged the error ? Show a reasonable amount of patience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's been, what, a month since they were informed of the lapse, and less than that since they acknowledged the error?Show a reasonable amount of patience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392358</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1260475560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>not sure about that but their excuse that it happened was that it was 3rd party code. If that really is the case, where is their process for handling licensing?  Did they really have a licensing process in place for the 3rd party contract and one of the coders there subverted any code review process or licensing policies and brought in GPL'ed code? For a company with so much to lose brand-wise and with so much cash as Microsoft has, this would seem extremely careless. If it really was 3rd party code. If we look at the code now, we should see what company really did produce the code right?  Or did Microsoft take 100\% of the credit for 100\% of the code except for the part which was the originally GPL'ed?<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>not sure about that but their excuse that it happened was that it was 3rd party code .
If that really is the case , where is their process for handling licensing ?
Did they really have a licensing process in place for the 3rd party contract and one of the coders there subverted any code review process or licensing policies and brought in GPL'ed code ?
For a company with so much to lose brand-wise and with so much cash as Microsoft has , this would seem extremely careless .
If it really was 3rd party code .
If we look at the code now , we should see what company really did produce the code right ?
Or did Microsoft take 100 \ % of the credit for 100 \ % of the code except for the part which was the originally GPL'ed ? LoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not sure about that but their excuse that it happened was that it was 3rd party code.
If that really is the case, where is their process for handling licensing?
Did they really have a licensing process in place for the 3rd party contract and one of the coders there subverted any code review process or licensing policies and brought in GPL'ed code?
For a company with so much to lose brand-wise and with so much cash as Microsoft has, this would seem extremely careless.
If it really was 3rd party code.
If we look at the code now, we should see what company really did produce the code right?
Or did Microsoft take 100\% of the credit for 100\% of the code except for the part which was the originally GPL'ed?LoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394606</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>thuerrsch</author>
	<datestamp>1260441420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Anyway, trust me - </p></div><p>Sure I could trust some random guy from the internet, but I think I'd rather trust my own judgement and take a look at that professional, clean, nicely designed Windows source code. Oh wait --</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyway , trust me - Sure I could trust some random guy from the internet , but I think I 'd rather trust my own judgement and take a look at that professional , clean , nicely designed Windows source code .
Oh wait --</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyway, trust me - Sure I could trust some random guy from the internet, but I think I'd rather trust my own judgement and take a look at that professional, clean, nicely designed Windows source code.
Oh wait --
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392492</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260476100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've seen some of the Windows Source code</p></div><p>How delightfully vague.  How much code did you "see"?  Just kernel code?  IE code?  Outlook code?  Which branches of products?  Just 2000/XP or does that include 95/98/ME?  Did you actually help engineer any of it or just browse?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen some of the Windows Source codeHow delightfully vague .
How much code did you " see " ?
Just kernel code ?
IE code ?
Outlook code ?
Which branches of products ?
Just 2000/XP or does that include 95/98/ME ?
Did you actually help engineer any of it or just browse ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen some of the Windows Source codeHow delightfully vague.
How much code did you "see"?
Just kernel code?
IE code?
Outlook code?
Which branches of products?
Just 2000/XP or does that include 95/98/ME?
Did you actually help engineer any of it or just browse?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392786</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260477480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I too have seen some of the MS Source Code and trust me, it is not the Devs that screw things up, it is Sales &amp; Marketing.</p><p>MS is a Sales and Marketing Company, make no mistake about that.  The S&amp;M guy's will dream something up, get conceptual artists involved, make sketches and the like and then have a meeting with the deve side of the house and say, "We want this and get it built."</p><p>The problem with that is the S&amp;M people don't give a rats ass how many hoops dev has to jump through to make it work or how much the may or may not have to compromise stability &amp; security to make this new "feature" work and when push comes to shove, the Dev crowd <b>always</b> loses.</p><p>This is not to say the MS is the only company doing it, they ALL do it but because the Windows Ecosystem is so insanely complex and interdependent, no amount of regression testing is going to catch everything.</p><p>I <b>DO</b> hate Microsoft as a company, but from the folks that I have met from the Dev side are pretty damn smart and pretty damn good coders that unfortunately never get to do what is right and correct because they must answer to S&amp;M, which is run by some truly fucked up individuals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I too have seen some of the MS Source Code and trust me , it is not the Devs that screw things up , it is Sales &amp; Marketing.MS is a Sales and Marketing Company , make no mistake about that .
The S&amp;M guy 's will dream something up , get conceptual artists involved , make sketches and the like and then have a meeting with the deve side of the house and say , " We want this and get it built .
" The problem with that is the S&amp;M people do n't give a rats ass how many hoops dev has to jump through to make it work or how much the may or may not have to compromise stability &amp; security to make this new " feature " work and when push comes to shove , the Dev crowd always loses.This is not to say the MS is the only company doing it , they ALL do it but because the Windows Ecosystem is so insanely complex and interdependent , no amount of regression testing is going to catch everything.I DO hate Microsoft as a company , but from the folks that I have met from the Dev side are pretty damn smart and pretty damn good coders that unfortunately never get to do what is right and correct because they must answer to S&amp;M , which is run by some truly fucked up individuals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I too have seen some of the MS Source Code and trust me, it is not the Devs that screw things up, it is Sales &amp; Marketing.MS is a Sales and Marketing Company, make no mistake about that.
The S&amp;M guy's will dream something up, get conceptual artists involved, make sketches and the like and then have a meeting with the deve side of the house and say, "We want this and get it built.
"The problem with that is the S&amp;M people don't give a rats ass how many hoops dev has to jump through to make it work or how much the may or may not have to compromise stability &amp; security to make this new "feature" work and when push comes to shove, the Dev crowd always loses.This is not to say the MS is the only company doing it, they ALL do it but because the Windows Ecosystem is so insanely complex and interdependent, no amount of regression testing is going to catch everything.I DO hate Microsoft as a company, but from the folks that I have met from the Dev side are pretty damn smart and pretty damn good coders that unfortunately never get to do what is right and correct because they must answer to S&amp;M, which is run by some truly fucked up individuals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394858</id>
	<title>Why GPL?</title>
	<author>KlaasVaak</author>
	<datestamp>1260442140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find this the strangest part of the whole thing actually. They where forced to open source it  because of the GPL lines in there but they could just as well made them available under a BSD license. That would make way more sense from Microsoft's perspective I say.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find this the strangest part of the whole thing actually .
They where forced to open source it because of the GPL lines in there but they could just as well made them available under a BSD license .
That would make way more sense from Microsoft 's perspective I say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find this the strangest part of the whole thing actually.
They where forced to open source it  because of the GPL lines in there but they could just as well made them available under a BSD license.
That would make way more sense from Microsoft's perspective I say.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392236</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading</title>
	<author>Arthur Grumbine</author>
	<datestamp>1260475140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Other reasons to stop calling it the "Windows 7 Tool" include the similarity between:<br>
"Microsoft Finally Open Sources Windows 7 Tool" and<br>
"Microsoft Finally Open Sources Windows 7 Too!"<br> <br>
I spent the first 30 seconds in shocked disbelief as I tried to remember anything else they've open sourced.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Other reasons to stop calling it the " Windows 7 Tool " include the similarity between : " Microsoft Finally Open Sources Windows 7 Tool " and " Microsoft Finally Open Sources Windows 7 Too !
" I spent the first 30 seconds in shocked disbelief as I tried to remember anything else they 've open sourced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Other reasons to stop calling it the "Windows 7 Tool" include the similarity between:
"Microsoft Finally Open Sources Windows 7 Tool" and
"Microsoft Finally Open Sources Windows 7 Too!
" 
I spent the first 30 seconds in shocked disbelief as I tried to remember anything else they've open sourced.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391988</id>
	<title>Re:I must be getting old</title>
	<author>guppysap13</author>
	<datestamp>1260474300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a bit late for that. Swine flew ages ago. Now, temperatures in Hell might be dropping a little.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a bit late for that .
Swine flew ages ago .
Now , temperatures in Hell might be dropping a little .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a bit late for that.
Swine flew ages ago.
Now, temperatures in Hell might be dropping a little.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391608</id>
	<title>Misleading</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260472920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please, would you finally stop calling it a "Windows 7 Tool"?</p><p>It's so f*cking obvious that you've been just trying to make it sound like it was a component of Windows 7 that it's not even funny.</p><p>So, those of you who have been misled by these dishonest "journalists": It's NOT a component of Windows 7, it's a tool COMPATIBLE WITH Windows 7 that you can DOWNLOAD from Microsoft app shop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please , would you finally stop calling it a " Windows 7 Tool " ? It 's so f * cking obvious that you 've been just trying to make it sound like it was a component of Windows 7 that it 's not even funny.So , those of you who have been misled by these dishonest " journalists " : It 's NOT a component of Windows 7 , it 's a tool COMPATIBLE WITH Windows 7 that you can DOWNLOAD from Microsoft app shop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please, would you finally stop calling it a "Windows 7 Tool"?It's so f*cking obvious that you've been just trying to make it sound like it was a component of Windows 7 that it's not even funny.So, those of you who have been misled by these dishonest "journalists": It's NOT a component of Windows 7, it's a tool COMPATIBLE WITH Windows 7 that you can DOWNLOAD from Microsoft app shop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670</id>
	<title>PROOF!</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1260473160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTFA:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>In November 2009, Microsoft pulled the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool from the Microsoft Store website after a report indicated that it incorporated open source code in a way that violated the GPL. A week later, Microsoft confirmed that the tool violates the GPL, a widely used (including by the Linux kernel) free software license. The problem wasn't just that Microsoft used open source code in the tool, but that it also released the tool under a closed source license, so Redmond decided to rerelease the tool under the GPL. Another week later, Microsoft pushed back its schedule a bit, blaming testing and localization for the delay.</p> </div><p>This is PROOF that Microsoft KNOWS they are producing bad code. They put something out there, and then when they had to open source the code, they were all like "Well now everyone will see how bad our coding is, better take a week to fix it up before releasing it to the public!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA : In November 2009 , Microsoft pulled the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool from the Microsoft Store website after a report indicated that it incorporated open source code in a way that violated the GPL .
A week later , Microsoft confirmed that the tool violates the GPL , a widely used ( including by the Linux kernel ) free software license .
The problem was n't just that Microsoft used open source code in the tool , but that it also released the tool under a closed source license , so Redmond decided to rerelease the tool under the GPL .
Another week later , Microsoft pushed back its schedule a bit , blaming testing and localization for the delay .
This is PROOF that Microsoft KNOWS they are producing bad code .
They put something out there , and then when they had to open source the code , they were all like " Well now everyone will see how bad our coding is , better take a week to fix it up before releasing it to the public !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA:In November 2009, Microsoft pulled the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool from the Microsoft Store website after a report indicated that it incorporated open source code in a way that violated the GPL.
A week later, Microsoft confirmed that the tool violates the GPL, a widely used (including by the Linux kernel) free software license.
The problem wasn't just that Microsoft used open source code in the tool, but that it also released the tool under a closed source license, so Redmond decided to rerelease the tool under the GPL.
Another week later, Microsoft pushed back its schedule a bit, blaming testing and localization for the delay.
This is PROOF that Microsoft KNOWS they are producing bad code.
They put something out there, and then when they had to open source the code, they were all like "Well now everyone will see how bad our coding is, better take a week to fix it up before releasing it to the public!
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392284</id>
	<title>Re:The bigger news here</title>
	<author>jim\_v2000</author>
	<datestamp>1260475320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doesn't seem like that big of a deal...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't seem like that big of a deal.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't seem like that big of a deal...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30398226</id>
	<title>Whenceforth ImageMaster Source?</title>
	<author>The Other White Meat</author>
	<datestamp>1260464100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On a related note, the author of ImageMaster took his code off Codeplex, and has not as of yet announced an alternative site for it.  Has anyone seen Imagemaster, or know where the source can be obtained?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On a related note , the author of ImageMaster took his code off Codeplex , and has not as of yet announced an alternative site for it .
Has anyone seen Imagemaster , or know where the source can be obtained ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a related note, the author of ImageMaster took his code off Codeplex, and has not as of yet announced an alternative site for it.
Has anyone seen Imagemaster, or know where the source can be obtained?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392822</id>
	<title>Microsoft released a GPL program...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260477660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...yet the sky is not falling?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...yet the sky is not falling ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...yet the sky is not falling?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391778</id>
	<title>Re:I give up</title>
	<author>nacturation</author>
	<datestamp>1260473580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I took a quick look at the article and I have no idea what this tool is supposed to do.  I couldn't even venture a guess.  So some tool that I know nothing about and have no idea what it does now has the source code available for it.  I think the term "underwhelmed" would apply.  What exactly is a USB/DVD download tool?</p></div><p>Read TFA's <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/11/07/1547214/Did-Microsoft-Borrow-GPL-Code-For-a-Windows-7-Utility?from=rss" title="slashdot.org">discussed last weekend</a> [slashdot.org] link.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I took a quick look at the article and I have no idea what this tool is supposed to do .
I could n't even venture a guess .
So some tool that I know nothing about and have no idea what it does now has the source code available for it .
I think the term " underwhelmed " would apply .
What exactly is a USB/DVD download tool ? Read TFA 's discussed last weekend [ slashdot.org ] link .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I took a quick look at the article and I have no idea what this tool is supposed to do.
I couldn't even venture a guess.
So some tool that I know nothing about and have no idea what it does now has the source code available for it.
I think the term "underwhelmed" would apply.
What exactly is a USB/DVD download tool?Read TFA's discussed last weekend [slashdot.org] link.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395520</id>
	<title>Re:/. Bias</title>
	<author>Beelzebud</author>
	<datestamp>1260444600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Where's the mod option for "isn't that adorable"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where 's the mod option for " is n't that adorable "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where's the mod option for "isn't that adorable"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394276</id>
	<title>Re:The bigger news here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260440220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's just a tool. If there was any code in there worth protecting I guarantee they would have replaced it rather than opened it up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's just a tool .
If there was any code in there worth protecting I guarantee they would have replaced it rather than opened it up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's just a tool.
If there was any code in there worth protecting I guarantee they would have replaced it rather than opened it up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392522</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260476220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've seen some of the Windows Source code when I worked there.  Trust me, it's WAY more professional than the Linux source code.</p></div><p>That's not what we saw with the Windows NT 4 and Windows 2000 source code leak back in 2003. It was an absolutely horrible mess with practically no comments what so ever except meaningless crap at the top of each source file. It seems it wasn't too terribly bad to figure out eventually since Linux's NTFS write support improved quite a bit not too long after the leak.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen some of the Windows Source code when I worked there .
Trust me , it 's WAY more professional than the Linux source code.That 's not what we saw with the Windows NT 4 and Windows 2000 source code leak back in 2003 .
It was an absolutely horrible mess with practically no comments what so ever except meaningless crap at the top of each source file .
It seems it was n't too terribly bad to figure out eventually since Linux 's NTFS write support improved quite a bit not too long after the leak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen some of the Windows Source code when I worked there.
Trust me, it's WAY more professional than the Linux source code.That's not what we saw with the Windows NT 4 and Windows 2000 source code leak back in 2003.
It was an absolutely horrible mess with practically no comments what so ever except meaningless crap at the top of each source file.
It seems it wasn't too terribly bad to figure out eventually since Linux's NTFS write support improved quite a bit not too long after the leak.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30396296</id>
	<title>Re:Why GPL?</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1260447600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The code that Microsoft used was GPL code. They could BSD <i>their</i> code but they can't BSD the GPL code that they're including. So if they went the BSD route you would have a tool that is 80\% BSD and 20\% GPL but the GPL's requirements would assert themselves over the entire tool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The code that Microsoft used was GPL code .
They could BSD their code but they ca n't BSD the GPL code that they 're including .
So if they went the BSD route you would have a tool that is 80 \ % BSD and 20 \ % GPL but the GPL 's requirements would assert themselves over the entire tool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The code that Microsoft used was GPL code.
They could BSD their code but they can't BSD the GPL code that they're including.
So if they went the BSD route you would have a tool that is 80\% BSD and 20\% GPL but the GPL's requirements would assert themselves over the entire tool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392612</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>omkhar</author>
	<datestamp>1260476700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ehm, back in my day we called it the Big Kernel Lock. You kids!</p><p>now get off my lawn!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ehm , back in my day we called it the Big Kernel Lock .
You kids ! now get off my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ehm, back in my day we called it the Big Kernel Lock.
You kids!now get off my lawn!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391754</id>
	<title>For a company</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260473520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a company that believes so strongly in the inviolability of Software licensing, it's nice to see them practice what they preach when it comes to the rights of others. Fair play to Microsoft for meeting it's requirements, and score one for the GPL and Open Source.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a company that believes so strongly in the inviolability of Software licensing , it 's nice to see them practice what they preach when it comes to the rights of others .
Fair play to Microsoft for meeting it 's requirements , and score one for the GPL and Open Source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a company that believes so strongly in the inviolability of Software licensing, it's nice to see them practice what they preach when it comes to the rights of others.
Fair play to Microsoft for meeting it's requirements, and score one for the GPL and Open Source.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393712</id>
	<title>Re:/. Bias</title>
	<author>DavidD\_CA</author>
	<datestamp>1260437700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New here?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393370</id>
	<title>Re:The bigger news here</title>
	<author>shaitand</author>
	<datestamp>1260436440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The news here is that Microsoft kept the open source tool instead of replacing it with one of their own."</p><p>I think you are jumping the gun on that conclusion. Of course they are keeping the tool for the moment. But no doubt they are moving at corporate speed to develop a replacement immediately! They should begin hiring people to do it sometime in the middle of next year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The news here is that Microsoft kept the open source tool instead of replacing it with one of their own .
" I think you are jumping the gun on that conclusion .
Of course they are keeping the tool for the moment .
But no doubt they are moving at corporate speed to develop a replacement immediately !
They should begin hiring people to do it sometime in the middle of next year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The news here is that Microsoft kept the open source tool instead of replacing it with one of their own.
"I think you are jumping the gun on that conclusion.
Of course they are keeping the tool for the moment.
But no doubt they are moving at corporate speed to develop a replacement immediately!
They should begin hiring people to do it sometime in the middle of next year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392434</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260475920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>asking, not implying: is this supposed to be under GPLv3?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>asking , not implying : is this supposed to be under GPLv3 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>asking, not implying: is this supposed to be under GPLv3?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392626</id>
	<title>I can't open it :p</title>
	<author>atisss</author>
	<datestamp>1260476760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>GPL:
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their righ</p></div><p>I downloaded code (which is in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe format) and i can't open it. Wine says:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>atis@atis-desktop-work-duo:~/Desktop$ wine<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./Windows7-USB-DVD-Download-Tool-Installer-en-US.exe
fixme:advapi:DecryptFileA "C:\\windows\\temp\\IXP000.TMP\\" 00000000
Access denied</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>GPL : For example , if you distribute copies of such a program , whether gratis or for a fee , you must give the recipients all the rights that you have .
You must make sure that they , too , receive or can get the source code .
And you must show them these terms so they know their righI downloaded code ( which is in .exe format ) and i ca n't open it .
Wine says : atis @ atis-desktop-work-duo : ~ /Desktop $ wine ./Windows7-USB-DVD-Download-Tool-Installer-en-US.exe fixme : advapi : DecryptFileA " C : \ \ windows \ \ temp \ \ IXP000.TMP \ \ " 00000000 Access denied</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GPL:
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have.
You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code.
And you must show them these terms so they know their righI downloaded code (which is in .exe format) and i can't open it.
Wine says:atis@atis-desktop-work-duo:~/Desktop$ wine ./Windows7-USB-DVD-Download-Tool-Installer-en-US.exe
fixme:advapi:DecryptFileA "C:\\windows\\temp\\IXP000.TMP\\" 00000000
Access denied
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397062</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>MarkKB</author>
	<datestamp>1260452160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux audio. Just... Linux audio.</p><p>---</p><p>Most of the senior engineers at the time were working on Windows Server 2003. The people working on Longhorn were less experienced, and after a bit they started to put their pet projects into Windows, similar to the Copland fiasco Apple went through. (The difference was probably pride rather than fear of getting fired, like "see that? That's my idea!", but meh.)</p><p>Jim Allchin wrote his "I'd buy a Mac" memo here.</p><p>After they shipped Server 2003, they tried to clean up the Longhorn mess - first by cutting out some of the projects, then by stripping it down and then building up to Server 2003-level. Only then did they decide it was too unworkable, and decided to rebuild straight from the Server 2003 codebase.</p><p>Not trying to refute anything here, just giving some background info. Yeah, they definitely could have done a lot better, but they also could have done worse, and I'm not sure that open source would have helped them at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux audio .
Just... Linux audio.---Most of the senior engineers at the time were working on Windows Server 2003 .
The people working on Longhorn were less experienced , and after a bit they started to put their pet projects into Windows , similar to the Copland fiasco Apple went through .
( The difference was probably pride rather than fear of getting fired , like " see that ?
That 's my idea !
" , but meh .
) Jim Allchin wrote his " I 'd buy a Mac " memo here.After they shipped Server 2003 , they tried to clean up the Longhorn mess - first by cutting out some of the projects , then by stripping it down and then building up to Server 2003-level .
Only then did they decide it was too unworkable , and decided to rebuild straight from the Server 2003 codebase.Not trying to refute anything here , just giving some background info .
Yeah , they definitely could have done a lot better , but they also could have done worse , and I 'm not sure that open source would have helped them at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux audio.
Just... Linux audio.---Most of the senior engineers at the time were working on Windows Server 2003.
The people working on Longhorn were less experienced, and after a bit they started to put their pet projects into Windows, similar to the Copland fiasco Apple went through.
(The difference was probably pride rather than fear of getting fired, like "see that?
That's my idea!
", but meh.
)Jim Allchin wrote his "I'd buy a Mac" memo here.After they shipped Server 2003, they tried to clean up the Longhorn mess - first by cutting out some of the projects, then by stripping it down and then building up to Server 2003-level.
Only then did they decide it was too unworkable, and decided to rebuild straight from the Server 2003 codebase.Not trying to refute anything here, just giving some background info.
Yeah, they definitely could have done a lot better, but they also could have done worse, and I'm not sure that open source would have helped them at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391716</id>
	<title>Phallic?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260473400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it me or does the icon for this story (cartoon character standing) look phallic with a hand around it's side? I'm not normally looking for phallic symbols, but that's what I originally thought the icon was... someone jerkin off. I figured it was related to the story being M$.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it me or does the icon for this story ( cartoon character standing ) look phallic with a hand around it 's side ?
I 'm not normally looking for phallic symbols , but that 's what I originally thought the icon was... someone jerkin off .
I figured it was related to the story being M $ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it me or does the icon for this story (cartoon character standing) look phallic with a hand around it's side?
I'm not normally looking for phallic symbols, but that's what I originally thought the icon was... someone jerkin off.
I figured it was related to the story being M$.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392878</id>
	<title>A better way to look at it.</title>
	<author>KickInNutsAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1260477780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft did the right thing, they shouldn't be bashed for it. Consider the following:
<br>
<br>
You're standing in line thinking that the guy next to you, Steve, is a pretty normal guy; perhaps you don't like him a lot, but he seems to keep to himself. Suddenly Steve turns to you and junk-kicks you right up in your man business. When you come to several minutes later, Steve apologizes profusely. Apparently there was a mix-up which unfortunately resulted in your swollen nuts. Wanting to make things right, Steve allows you to junk-kick him in his man business.
<br>
<br>
I think it is safe to say Microsoft is doing the right thing allowing you to junk-kick their man business.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft did the right thing , they should n't be bashed for it .
Consider the following : You 're standing in line thinking that the guy next to you , Steve , is a pretty normal guy ; perhaps you do n't like him a lot , but he seems to keep to himself .
Suddenly Steve turns to you and junk-kicks you right up in your man business .
When you come to several minutes later , Steve apologizes profusely .
Apparently there was a mix-up which unfortunately resulted in your swollen nuts .
Wanting to make things right , Steve allows you to junk-kick him in his man business .
I think it is safe to say Microsoft is doing the right thing allowing you to junk-kick their man business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft did the right thing, they shouldn't be bashed for it.
Consider the following:


You're standing in line thinking that the guy next to you, Steve, is a pretty normal guy; perhaps you don't like him a lot, but he seems to keep to himself.
Suddenly Steve turns to you and junk-kicks you right up in your man business.
When you come to several minutes later, Steve apologizes profusely.
Apparently there was a mix-up which unfortunately resulted in your swollen nuts.
Wanting to make things right, Steve allows you to junk-kick him in his man business.
I think it is safe to say Microsoft is doing the right thing allowing you to junk-kick their man business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395160</id>
	<title>Microsoft Good or Bad?</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1260443340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The motivation of Microsoft doesn't matter because their <i>actions</i> are all we are privy to. Let their behavior encourage the other GPL violators to "do the right thing" and also see that GPL-licensed software can co-exist with other-licensed software; one just need follow the terms of the licenses.</p><p>IANAP, but is there anything useful to the community in the GPL'ed code released by Microsoft? It seems like a useful utility and there are FOSS ways to make USB/thumb drives bootable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The motivation of Microsoft does n't matter because their actions are all we are privy to .
Let their behavior encourage the other GPL violators to " do the right thing " and also see that GPL-licensed software can co-exist with other-licensed software ; one just need follow the terms of the licenses.IANAP , but is there anything useful to the community in the GPL'ed code released by Microsoft ?
It seems like a useful utility and there are FOSS ways to make USB/thumb drives bootable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The motivation of Microsoft doesn't matter because their actions are all we are privy to.
Let their behavior encourage the other GPL violators to "do the right thing" and also see that GPL-licensed software can co-exist with other-licensed software; one just need follow the terms of the licenses.IANAP, but is there anything useful to the community in the GPL'ed code released by Microsoft?
It seems like a useful utility and there are FOSS ways to make USB/thumb drives bootable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392292</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Bill, Shooter of Bul</author>
	<datestamp>1260475380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Eh... I understand what you are saying. And yet, Linux has never produced anything nearly as bad as Longhorn. Seriously, Long- freaking-horn. You can't praise them for 2000 and xp SP2 and ignore their obvious mistakes with xp/xp-sp1 and longhorn/vista. Every version of windows that is released is accompanied by a story interviewing some Microsoft fellow that describes how bad the source code for the previous version was and how no one really knows how all of the different parts of windows interact. I'm sure its not bad code full of obvious hackery and bad coding. I am however convinced that its a more difficult of a design than the Unix philosophy and it suffers because of that. <br> <br> Plus, as closed source we can just sort of imagine the code that causes the problems we run into, where as with linux we can actually see the code that caused the problem so we don't have to imagine any code crappier than what we find.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Eh... I understand what you are saying .
And yet , Linux has never produced anything nearly as bad as Longhorn .
Seriously , Long- freaking-horn .
You ca n't praise them for 2000 and xp SP2 and ignore their obvious mistakes with xp/xp-sp1 and longhorn/vista .
Every version of windows that is released is accompanied by a story interviewing some Microsoft fellow that describes how bad the source code for the previous version was and how no one really knows how all of the different parts of windows interact .
I 'm sure its not bad code full of obvious hackery and bad coding .
I am however convinced that its a more difficult of a design than the Unix philosophy and it suffers because of that .
Plus , as closed source we can just sort of imagine the code that causes the problems we run into , where as with linux we can actually see the code that caused the problem so we do n't have to imagine any code crappier than what we find .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eh... I understand what you are saying.
And yet, Linux has never produced anything nearly as bad as Longhorn.
Seriously, Long- freaking-horn.
You can't praise them for 2000 and xp SP2 and ignore their obvious mistakes with xp/xp-sp1 and longhorn/vista.
Every version of windows that is released is accompanied by a story interviewing some Microsoft fellow that describes how bad the source code for the previous version was and how no one really knows how all of the different parts of windows interact.
I'm sure its not bad code full of obvious hackery and bad coding.
I am however convinced that its a more difficult of a design than the Unix philosophy and it suffers because of that.
Plus, as closed source we can just sort of imagine the code that causes the problems we run into, where as with linux we can actually see the code that caused the problem so we don't have to imagine any code crappier than what we find.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30396766</id>
	<title>Re:I must be getting old</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260450240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://tweetphoto.com/6050031</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //tweetphoto.com/6050031</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://tweetphoto.com/6050031</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392036</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>DaveV1.0</author>
	<datestamp>1260474480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You keep using that word .
I do not think it means what you think it means .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397184</id>
	<title>Hopefull Dreamer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260453120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wouldn't it be cool if Microsoft did the "Right Thing" so many times that people came to eventually forget their past offenses, that people came to trust them, and had good feelings about buying their software and supporting them. Wouldn't that be great ?</p><p>What ?</p><p>I can dream can't I ?</p><p>PS I think that it WOULD be cool. Sigh . .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>., maybe someday.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't it be cool if Microsoft did the " Right Thing " so many times that people came to eventually forget their past offenses , that people came to trust them , and had good feelings about buying their software and supporting them .
Would n't that be great ? What ? I can dream ca n't I ? PS I think that it WOULD be cool .
Sigh .
. . , maybe someday .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't it be cool if Microsoft did the "Right Thing" so many times that people came to eventually forget their past offenses, that people came to trust them, and had good feelings about buying their software and supporting them.
Wouldn't that be great ?What ?I can dream can't I ?PS I think that it WOULD be cool.
Sigh .
. ., maybe someday.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30396408</id>
	<title>did hell freeze over?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260448140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they released something open source with their name attached to it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they released something open source with their name attached to it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they released something open source with their name attached to it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928</id>
	<title>The bigger news here</title>
	<author>onyxruby</author>
	<datestamp>1260474180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The bigger news is not that Microsoft open sourced the tool after their GPL violation (that was inevitable). The news here is that Microsoft <em>kept</em> the open source tool instead of replacing it with one of their own. Microsoft has open sourced portions of their code before, that really isn't newsworthy. Keeping an open source tool that will be used to deploy their crown jewel operating system by millions of people - that's newsworthy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The bigger news is not that Microsoft open sourced the tool after their GPL violation ( that was inevitable ) .
The news here is that Microsoft kept the open source tool instead of replacing it with one of their own .
Microsoft has open sourced portions of their code before , that really is n't newsworthy .
Keeping an open source tool that will be used to deploy their crown jewel operating system by millions of people - that 's newsworthy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bigger news is not that Microsoft open sourced the tool after their GPL violation (that was inevitable).
The news here is that Microsoft kept the open source tool instead of replacing it with one of their own.
Microsoft has open sourced portions of their code before, that really isn't newsworthy.
Keeping an open source tool that will be used to deploy their crown jewel operating system by millions of people - that's newsworthy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108</id>
	<title>Vaguely related questions...</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1260474780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) What programs do people here like for applying<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ISO images to USB drives in Windows? Is this one "locked" to Windows 7 ISOs or can I use it to, say, put Puppy Linux onto a USB drive? I tried to install this one to find out but it's telling me "This application requires the Image Mastering API v2" and I don't want to put too much effort into this if it isn't for general use.</p><p>2) Anyone know how to do the same thing in OS X? I tried using Disc Utility but it will only let me a) burn ISOs to CDs or b) apply Apple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.DMGs to drives. I tried mounting the ISO and using that as a source to create a DMG and that worked, but then when I went to apply that DMG to a disk it gave up at the last minute. (Sorry, that machine is at home, I don't know the exact error message. It basically said "Sorry, can't" after I clicked 'restore'.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) What programs do people here like for applying .ISO images to USB drives in Windows ?
Is this one " locked " to Windows 7 ISOs or can I use it to , say , put Puppy Linux onto a USB drive ?
I tried to install this one to find out but it 's telling me " This application requires the Image Mastering API v2 " and I do n't want to put too much effort into this if it is n't for general use.2 ) Anyone know how to do the same thing in OS X ?
I tried using Disc Utility but it will only let me a ) burn ISOs to CDs or b ) apply Apple .DMGs to drives .
I tried mounting the ISO and using that as a source to create a DMG and that worked , but then when I went to apply that DMG to a disk it gave up at the last minute .
( Sorry , that machine is at home , I do n't know the exact error message .
It basically said " Sorry , ca n't " after I clicked 'restore' .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) What programs do people here like for applying .ISO images to USB drives in Windows?
Is this one "locked" to Windows 7 ISOs or can I use it to, say, put Puppy Linux onto a USB drive?
I tried to install this one to find out but it's telling me "This application requires the Image Mastering API v2" and I don't want to put too much effort into this if it isn't for general use.2) Anyone know how to do the same thing in OS X?
I tried using Disc Utility but it will only let me a) burn ISOs to CDs or b) apply Apple .DMGs to drives.
I tried mounting the ISO and using that as a source to create a DMG and that worked, but then when I went to apply that DMG to a disk it gave up at the last minute.
(Sorry, that machine is at home, I don't know the exact error message.
It basically said "Sorry, can't" after I clicked 'restore'.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392980</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260478200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Do they still use Hungarian notation?</p></div></blockquote><p>He said it looked professional. Not that it looked like something written in Visual Basic by an amateur.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do they still use Hungarian notation ? He said it looked professional .
Not that it looked like something written in Visual Basic by an amateur .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do they still use Hungarian notation?He said it looked professional.
Not that it looked like something written in Visual Basic by an amateur.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392428</id>
	<title>Re:I give up</title>
	<author>cc1984\_</author>
	<datestamp>1260475860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I took a quick look at the article and I have no idea what this tool is supposed to do.</p> </div><p>Well now you can look at the source code and it will all become clear!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I took a quick look at the article and I have no idea what this tool is supposed to do .
Well now you can look at the source code and it will all become clear !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I took a quick look at the article and I have no idea what this tool is supposed to do.
Well now you can look at the source code and it will all become clear!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395898</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>martas</author>
	<datestamp>1260446040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>yeah, i never thought i'd see "microsoft" and "open source" in the same sentence, except when separated by "screws over"</htmltext>
<tokenext>yeah , i never thought i 'd see " microsoft " and " open source " in the same sentence , except when separated by " screws over "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yeah, i never thought i'd see "microsoft" and "open source" in the same sentence, except when separated by "screws over"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394320</id>
	<title>Re:For a company</title>
	<author>im\_thatoneguy</author>
	<datestamp>1260440400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But at what cost?  You can bet your bottom dollar that the company contracted to write the tool has gotten flogged 10 ways and Sunday and that using Open Source anywhere in future products will be far less likely from Microsoft contractors.</p><p>Also note that it took several months to work through the necessary lawyers etc.  Good luck proposing that under a tight deadline.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But at what cost ?
You can bet your bottom dollar that the company contracted to write the tool has gotten flogged 10 ways and Sunday and that using Open Source anywhere in future products will be far less likely from Microsoft contractors.Also note that it took several months to work through the necessary lawyers etc .
Good luck proposing that under a tight deadline .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But at what cost?
You can bet your bottom dollar that the company contracted to write the tool has gotten flogged 10 ways and Sunday and that using Open Source anywhere in future products will be far less likely from Microsoft contractors.Also note that it took several months to work through the necessary lawyers etc.
Good luck proposing that under a tight deadline.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391598</id>
	<title>FP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260472920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Frosty piss y'all...it's a celebration, bitches!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Frosty piss y'all...it 's a celebration , bitches !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frosty piss y'all...it's a celebration, bitches!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391958</id>
	<title>Re:I must be getting old</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260474240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>First the SEGA logo brazenly appeared on a Nintendo console</p><p>Now it's Microsoft publishing GPL licenced-code. TWICE (the other being their contribution to the kernel)</p><p>Pigs expected to fly next week.</p></div><p>Duke Nukem: For(n)ever is the week after that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>First the SEGA logo brazenly appeared on a Nintendo consoleNow it 's Microsoft publishing GPL licenced-code .
TWICE ( the other being their contribution to the kernel ) Pigs expected to fly next week.Duke Nukem : For ( n ) ever is the week after that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First the SEGA logo brazenly appeared on a Nintendo consoleNow it's Microsoft publishing GPL licenced-code.
TWICE (the other being their contribution to the kernel)Pigs expected to fly next week.Duke Nukem: For(n)ever is the week after that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30400528</id>
	<title>Re:A better way to look at it.</title>
	<author>vegiVamp</author>
	<datestamp>1260540660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh ? They've promised to use buggy versions of my software for years on end and pay me ludicrous amounts of money for it ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh ?
They 've promised to use buggy versions of my software for years on end and pay me ludicrous amounts of money for it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh ?
They've promised to use buggy versions of my software for years on end and pay me ludicrous amounts of money for it ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395678</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>innocent\_white\_lamb</author>
	<datestamp>1260445200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the shoe was on the other foot and MS code was found in something related to Linux, there would be articles in the New York Times and "Get The Facts" ads in the Wall Street Journal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the shoe was on the other foot and MS code was found in something related to Linux , there would be articles in the New York Times and " Get The Facts " ads in the Wall Street Journal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the shoe was on the other foot and MS code was found in something related to Linux, there would be articles in the New York Times and "Get The Facts" ads in the Wall Street Journal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397806</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Johnno74</author>
	<datestamp>1260458400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Anyway, trust me - it's very professional, clean code, nice design, and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel.</p></div><p>Bad example.  Just about every uniprocessor-developed OS had a Big Global Lock until they went multi-cpu - and even then it usually took a few releases before it was really eliminated.  I would be hugely surprised to find that the Win9x series didn't have one too.  When did the linux kernel deprecate it?  Like a decade ago?</p></div><p>Actually, one of the major changes in 7 is the removal of a global lock in the scheduler.  Prior to this windows didn't really scale beyond 64 cpus, now I don't know what the limit is, but I've seen pics (on the web) of server 2008 r2 running on 256 cpu machines.</p><p>More info here: <a href="http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/Arun-Kishan-Farewell-to-the-Windows-Kernel-Dispatcher-Lock/" title="msdn.com">http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/Arun-Kishan-Farewell-to-the-Windows-Kernel-Dispatcher-Lock/</a> [msdn.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyway , trust me - it 's very professional , clean code , nice design , and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel.Bad example .
Just about every uniprocessor-developed OS had a Big Global Lock until they went multi-cpu - and even then it usually took a few releases before it was really eliminated .
I would be hugely surprised to find that the Win9x series did n't have one too .
When did the linux kernel deprecate it ?
Like a decade ago ? Actually , one of the major changes in 7 is the removal of a global lock in the scheduler .
Prior to this windows did n't really scale beyond 64 cpus , now I do n't know what the limit is , but I 've seen pics ( on the web ) of server 2008 r2 running on 256 cpu machines.More info here : http : //channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going + Deep/Arun-Kishan-Farewell-to-the-Windows-Kernel-Dispatcher-Lock/ [ msdn.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyway, trust me - it's very professional, clean code, nice design, and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel.Bad example.
Just about every uniprocessor-developed OS had a Big Global Lock until they went multi-cpu - and even then it usually took a few releases before it was really eliminated.
I would be hugely surprised to find that the Win9x series didn't have one too.
When did the linux kernel deprecate it?
Like a decade ago?Actually, one of the major changes in 7 is the removal of a global lock in the scheduler.
Prior to this windows didn't really scale beyond 64 cpus, now I don't know what the limit is, but I've seen pics (on the web) of server 2008 r2 running on 256 cpu machines.More info here: http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/Arun-Kishan-Farewell-to-the-Windows-Kernel-Dispatcher-Lock/ [msdn.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391878</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260474000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And this post is PROOF that you're a MORON.  Microsoft hires the most expensive people.  They may outsource some of their coding, but if you think Microsoft writes any "worse" code than anyone else, you're an idiot.  It's like you think suddenly because highly paid, highly educated, highly experienced developers start working for a company you irrationally hate that they become bad developers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And this post is PROOF that you 're a MORON .
Microsoft hires the most expensive people .
They may outsource some of their coding , but if you think Microsoft writes any " worse " code than anyone else , you 're an idiot .
It 's like you think suddenly because highly paid , highly educated , highly experienced developers start working for a company you irrationally hate that they become bad developers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And this post is PROOF that you're a MORON.
Microsoft hires the most expensive people.
They may outsource some of their coding, but if you think Microsoft writes any "worse" code than anyone else, you're an idiot.
It's like you think suddenly because highly paid, highly educated, highly experienced developers start working for a company you irrationally hate that they become bad developers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392852</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260477720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Professional code doesn't imply working code.</p><p>I don't give a damn if Microsoft's code looks nice. It comes down to whether or not it WORKS. I also don't give a rats ass whether or not someone is asking them to do the right thing. That isn't going to change. What I've taken away from your post is that Microsoft is an utter failure and there's no possible course of action to fix that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Professional code does n't imply working code.I do n't give a damn if Microsoft 's code looks nice .
It comes down to whether or not it WORKS .
I also do n't give a rats ass whether or not someone is asking them to do the right thing .
That is n't going to change .
What I 've taken away from your post is that Microsoft is an utter failure and there 's no possible course of action to fix that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Professional code doesn't imply working code.I don't give a damn if Microsoft's code looks nice.
It comes down to whether or not it WORKS.
I also don't give a rats ass whether or not someone is asking them to do the right thing.
That isn't going to change.
What I've taken away from your post is that Microsoft is an utter failure and there's no possible course of action to fix that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393954</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>DevStar</author>
	<datestamp>1260438660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's too bad users here on Slashdot don't simply take the time to read MS code.  Windows kernel code is available for researchers.  You can see the code for the CLR largely in Rotor.  And the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET Fx source code has been released as well.

It's not hard to see what they're code looks like.  And for the most part the code is very reasonable looking.

MS doesn't have the problem with code quality they get accused of.  There real problem historically has been lack of vision.  If you give them a target they can generally hit it -- see how they've done on things like security, IE (until IE6), Win7, Bing, etc...  What they don't do is see what's over the hill, ala the iPhone.  This is why I think WinMo7 will be a very solid OS as they have competitors to target, but I'm not sure they know what's after that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's too bad users here on Slashdot do n't simply take the time to read MS code .
Windows kernel code is available for researchers .
You can see the code for the CLR largely in Rotor .
And the .NET Fx source code has been released as well .
It 's not hard to see what they 're code looks like .
And for the most part the code is very reasonable looking .
MS does n't have the problem with code quality they get accused of .
There real problem historically has been lack of vision .
If you give them a target they can generally hit it -- see how they 've done on things like security , IE ( until IE6 ) , Win7 , Bing , etc... What they do n't do is see what 's over the hill , ala the iPhone .
This is why I think WinMo7 will be a very solid OS as they have competitors to target , but I 'm not sure they know what 's after that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's too bad users here on Slashdot don't simply take the time to read MS code.
Windows kernel code is available for researchers.
You can see the code for the CLR largely in Rotor.
And the .NET Fx source code has been released as well.
It's not hard to see what they're code looks like.
And for the most part the code is very reasonable looking.
MS doesn't have the problem with code quality they get accused of.
There real problem historically has been lack of vision.
If you give them a target they can generally hit it -- see how they've done on things like security, IE (until IE6), Win7, Bing, etc...  What they don't do is see what's over the hill, ala the iPhone.
This is why I think WinMo7 will be a very solid OS as they have competitors to target, but I'm not sure they know what's after that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392070</id>
	<title>/. Bias</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260474600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't help but notice the "finally" in the title.<br>Really slashdot, can't you post any MS related story without personal bias?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't help but notice the " finally " in the title.Really slashdot , ca n't you post any MS related story without personal bias ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't help but notice the "finally" in the title.Really slashdot, can't you post any MS related story without personal bias?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393216</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>shaitand</author>
	<datestamp>1260435840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Microsoft's problem with code quality isn't the engineers - they're the same as everywhere else. In Windows 2000, they set out to eliminate BSOD, and they mostly did. In XP SP2, they set out to make it secure, and it's better."</p><p>So in 1999 they set out to eliminate the BSOD but they failed. Then they blamed the failing on third parties... when the reality is that Microsoft is responsible for the fact that hardware drivers are maintained by thousands of third parties in the first place. In XP SP2 they set out to make windows secure and again they failed, miserably.</p><p>"Anyway, trust me - it's very professional, clean code, nice design, and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel."</p><p>I'm sure its very pretty. But at the end of the day, it doesn't work as well as the Linux kernel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Microsoft 's problem with code quality is n't the engineers - they 're the same as everywhere else .
In Windows 2000 , they set out to eliminate BSOD , and they mostly did .
In XP SP2 , they set out to make it secure , and it 's better .
" So in 1999 they set out to eliminate the BSOD but they failed .
Then they blamed the failing on third parties... when the reality is that Microsoft is responsible for the fact that hardware drivers are maintained by thousands of third parties in the first place .
In XP SP2 they set out to make windows secure and again they failed , miserably .
" Anyway , trust me - it 's very professional , clean code , nice design , and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel .
" I 'm sure its very pretty .
But at the end of the day , it does n't work as well as the Linux kernel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Microsoft's problem with code quality isn't the engineers - they're the same as everywhere else.
In Windows 2000, they set out to eliminate BSOD, and they mostly did.
In XP SP2, they set out to make it secure, and it's better.
"So in 1999 they set out to eliminate the BSOD but they failed.
Then they blamed the failing on third parties... when the reality is that Microsoft is responsible for the fact that hardware drivers are maintained by thousands of third parties in the first place.
In XP SP2 they set out to make windows secure and again they failed, miserably.
"Anyway, trust me - it's very professional, clean code, nice design, and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel.
"I'm sure its very pretty.
But at the end of the day, it doesn't work as well as the Linux kernel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397104</id>
	<title>Re:Vaguely related questions...</title>
	<author>agristin</author>
	<datestamp>1260452460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DD on OSX is what I use.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 1. Download the desired<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.img or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.iso file<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 2. Open a Terminal (under Utilities)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 3. Run diskutil list to get the current list of devices<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 4. Insert your flash media<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 5. Run diskutil list again and determine the device node assigned to your flash media (e.g.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/disk2)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 6. Run diskutil unmountDisk<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/diskN<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 7. Execute sudo dd if=/path/to/downloaded.img of=/dev/diskN bs=1m<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 8. Run diskutil eject<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/diskN and remove your flash media when the command completes</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DD on OSX is what I use .
      1 .
Download the desired .img or .iso file       2 .
Open a Terminal ( under Utilities )       3 .
Run diskutil list to get the current list of devices       4 .
Insert your flash media       5 .
Run diskutil list again and determine the device node assigned to your flash media ( e.g .
/dev/disk2 )       6 .
Run diskutil unmountDisk /dev/diskN       7 .
Execute sudo dd if = /path/to/downloaded.img of = /dev/diskN bs = 1m       8 .
Run diskutil eject /dev/diskN and remove your flash media when the command completes</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DD on OSX is what I use.
      1.
Download the desired .img or .iso file
      2.
Open a Terminal (under Utilities)
      3.
Run diskutil list to get the current list of devices
      4.
Insert your flash media
      5.
Run diskutil list again and determine the device node assigned to your flash media (e.g.
/dev/disk2)
      6.
Run diskutil unmountDisk /dev/diskN
      7.
Execute sudo dd if=/path/to/downloaded.img of=/dev/diskN bs=1m
      8.
Run diskutil eject /dev/diskN and remove your flash media when the command completes</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392426</id>
	<title>The even BIGGER news here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260475860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft released a GPL'd program and many hours later, they still exist, and all of civilazation has not crumbled!  If you were to believe the BSD-tards and closed source advocates, this release of code should have caused the next great extinction event.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft released a GPL 'd program and many hours later , they still exist , and all of civilazation has not crumbled !
If you were to believe the BSD-tards and closed source advocates , this release of code should have caused the next great extinction event .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft released a GPL'd program and many hours later, they still exist, and all of civilazation has not crumbled!
If you were to believe the BSD-tards and closed source advocates, this release of code should have caused the next great extinction event.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392402</id>
	<title>unusual trend.</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1260475800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft's been doing this a lot lately (a lot being relative to their past conduct).</p><p>It's good that they're doing good and paying down their negative karma, but sometimes I wonder if people are deliberately infecting their sources with GPL'ed code just to make them cough it up once it gets published.  A windows 7 tool getting fingered for a GPL violation so quickly makes me think that the exposure had a bit of inside help.</p><p>Time will tell.</p><p>Kudos to Microsoft though if their efforts are sincere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft 's been doing this a lot lately ( a lot being relative to their past conduct ) .It 's good that they 're doing good and paying down their negative karma , but sometimes I wonder if people are deliberately infecting their sources with GPL'ed code just to make them cough it up once it gets published .
A windows 7 tool getting fingered for a GPL violation so quickly makes me think that the exposure had a bit of inside help.Time will tell.Kudos to Microsoft though if their efforts are sincere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft's been doing this a lot lately (a lot being relative to their past conduct).It's good that they're doing good and paying down their negative karma, but sometimes I wonder if people are deliberately infecting their sources with GPL'ed code just to make them cough it up once it gets published.
A windows 7 tool getting fingered for a GPL violation so quickly makes me think that the exposure had a bit of inside help.Time will tell.Kudos to Microsoft though if their efforts are sincere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394370</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260440640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a Tux tat...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a Tux tat.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a Tux tat...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391596</id>
	<title>Microsoft PENIS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260472920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>PENIS microsoft! Heh heh! Oh man yeahhhhhhhhhh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>PENIS microsoft !
Heh heh !
Oh man yeahhhhhhhhhh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PENIS microsoft!
Heh heh!
Oh man yeahhhhhhhhhh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391774</id>
	<title>Lol</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260473580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As if I'm going to trust windows for anything of importance. Its a great OS until you need to do real work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As if I 'm going to trust windows for anything of importance .
Its a great OS until you need to do real work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As if I'm going to trust windows for anything of importance.
Its a great OS until you need to do real work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30399382</id>
	<title>Re:Vaguely related questions...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260525420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To burn CD's/DVD's under Mac OS X, use <a href="http://burn-osx.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net" rel="nofollow">Burn OS X</a> [sourceforge.net].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To burn CD 's/DVD 's under Mac OS X , use Burn OS X [ sourceforge.net ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To burn CD's/DVD's under Mac OS X, use Burn OS X [sourceforge.net].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391750</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>0racle</author>
	<datestamp>1260473520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is PROOF that Microsoft KNOWS they are producing bad code.</p></div></blockquote><p>Or it's proof that they made some changes so that the tool uses public API's instead of private windows internals and instead of just throwing it out the door, tested the changes made.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is PROOF that Microsoft KNOWS they are producing bad code.Or it 's proof that they made some changes so that the tool uses public API 's instead of private windows internals and instead of just throwing it out the door , tested the changes made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is PROOF that Microsoft KNOWS they are producing bad code.Or it's proof that they made some changes so that the tool uses public API's instead of private windows internals and instead of just throwing it out the door, tested the changes made.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393648</id>
	<title>Re:Vaguely related questions...</title>
	<author>RedmonkeyVII</author>
	<datestamp>1260437460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Regarding "This application requires the Image Mastering API v2":</p><p>Are you using Windows XP? From the bottom of <a href="http://wudt.codeplex.com/" title="codeplex.com" rel="nofollow">the download page:</a> [codeplex.com] </p><p>"Microsoft Image Mastering API v2 must be installed. It can be downloaded at <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=B5F726F1-4ACE-455D-BAD7-ABC4DD2F147B&amp;displaylang=en" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=B5F726F1-4ACE-455D-BAD7-ABC4DD2F147B&amp;displaylang=en</a> [microsoft.com]"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Regarding " This application requires the Image Mastering API v2 " : Are you using Windows XP ?
From the bottom of the download page : [ codeplex.com ] " Microsoft Image Mastering API v2 must be installed .
It can be downloaded at http : //www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx ? FamilyId = B5F726F1-4ACE-455D-BAD7-ABC4DD2F147B&amp;displaylang = en [ microsoft.com ] "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Regarding "This application requires the Image Mastering API v2":Are you using Windows XP?
From the bottom of the download page: [codeplex.com] "Microsoft Image Mastering API v2 must be installed.
It can be downloaded at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=B5F726F1-4ACE-455D-BAD7-ABC4DD2F147B&amp;displaylang=en [microsoft.com]"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391982</id>
	<title>Seething, burning, rioting rage for Microsoft</title>
	<author>hellfire</author>
	<datestamp>1260474300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Micro$oft suxx0rs!  Close source is evil!  Linux is better because it's open!  Microsoft will die because it's closed!  *RAAAAWWWRRRRRRRviolentflaminggeekrage*</p><p>Wait... Microsoft just open sourced code?</p><p>**head a'splodes**</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Micro $ oft suxx0rs !
Close source is evil !
Linux is better because it 's open !
Microsoft will die because it 's closed !
* RAAAAWWWRRRRRRRviolentflaminggeekrage * Wait... Microsoft just open sourced code ?
* * head a'splodes * *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Micro$oft suxx0rs!
Close source is evil!
Linux is better because it's open!
Microsoft will die because it's closed!
*RAAAAWWWRRRRRRRviolentflaminggeekrage*Wait... Microsoft just open sourced code?
**head a'splodes**</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764</id>
	<title>Re:PROOF!</title>
	<author>Saint Stephen</author>
	<datestamp>1260473520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've seen some of the Windows Source code when I worked there.  Trust me, it's WAY more professional than the Linux source code.</p><p>Microsoft's problem with code quality isn't the engineers - they're the same as everywhere else.  In Windows 2000, they set out to eliminate BSOD, and they mostly did.  In XP SP2, they set out to make it secure, and it's better.</p><p>The problem is no one asks them to do the right things.</p><p>Anyway, trust me - it's very professional, clean code, nice design, and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen some of the Windows Source code when I worked there .
Trust me , it 's WAY more professional than the Linux source code.Microsoft 's problem with code quality is n't the engineers - they 're the same as everywhere else .
In Windows 2000 , they set out to eliminate BSOD , and they mostly did .
In XP SP2 , they set out to make it secure , and it 's better.The problem is no one asks them to do the right things.Anyway , trust me - it 's very professional , clean code , nice design , and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen some of the Windows Source code when I worked there.
Trust me, it's WAY more professional than the Linux source code.Microsoft's problem with code quality isn't the engineers - they're the same as everywhere else.
In Windows 2000, they set out to eliminate BSOD, and they mostly did.
In XP SP2, they set out to make it secure, and it's better.The problem is no one asks them to do the right things.Anyway, trust me - it's very professional, clean code, nice design, and not filled with hacks like the Big Global Lock that used to be in the Linux kernel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392630</id>
	<title>Re:Vaguely related questions...</title>
	<author>Vyse of Arcadia</author>
	<datestamp>1260476760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know growisofs has been ported to Mac OS X. You might want to look into that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know growisofs has been ported to Mac OS X. You might want to look into that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know growisofs has been ported to Mac OS X. You might want to look into that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392770</id>
	<title>I first read the headline as:</title>
	<author>digipres</author>
	<datestamp>1260477420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Microsoft Finally Open Sources Windows 7 Too!"

And I wondered whether anyone would care if they did.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Microsoft Finally Open Sources Windows 7 Too !
" And I wondered whether anyone would care if they did .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Microsoft Finally Open Sources Windows 7 Too!
"

And I wondered whether anyone would care if they did.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391712</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260473400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is good, but I'm uncomfortable with how this whole thing unfolded.  It reads like, "Woot... caught em!  Engage the GPL virus! F-U Microsoft!"  As if a battle was won and they're over there shaking their heads about having lost something.</p><p>Open Source is not supposed to be a punishment you get slapped with.  It's about availability, encouraging development and creating better software.  Let's not jeer too much, eh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is good , but I 'm uncomfortable with how this whole thing unfolded .
It reads like , " Woot... caught em !
Engage the GPL virus !
F-U Microsoft !
" As if a battle was won and they 're over there shaking their heads about having lost something.Open Source is not supposed to be a punishment you get slapped with .
It 's about availability , encouraging development and creating better software .
Let 's not jeer too much , eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is good, but I'm uncomfortable with how this whole thing unfolded.
It reads like, "Woot... caught em!
Engage the GPL virus!
F-U Microsoft!
"  As if a battle was won and they're over there shaking their heads about having lost something.Open Source is not supposed to be a punishment you get slapped with.
It's about availability, encouraging development and creating better software.
Let's not jeer too much, eh?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391604</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30396296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30406584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30396818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30403040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30400528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30396766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30399382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_186245_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391598
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394304
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392292
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397062
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395600
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392238
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392786
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393954
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392522
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392852
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392174
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392612
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393216
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392148
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393208
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394466
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394506
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394370
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392980
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394246
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392452
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397806
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393998
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30396818
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391750
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392358
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392402
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393712
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30396766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30403040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391958
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30397104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30399382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30396296
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391712
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395678
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30406584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395898
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392770
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392236
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394924
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392066
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30400528
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_186245.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30391928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30394276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30392426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30393842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_186245.30395572
</commentlist>
</conversation>
