<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_06_0343252</id>
	<title>Y2.01K</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1262804040000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>After our recent discussion of <a href="//tech.slashdot.org/story/10/01/03/1312209/2016-Bug-Hits-Text-Messages-Payment-Processing">decimal/hexadecimal confusion</a> at the turn of 2010, alphadogg writes in with a Network World survey of wider problems caused by the date change. <i>"A decade after the Y2K crisis, <a href="https://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/010510-date-change-problems.html?hpg1=bn">date changes still pose technology problems</a>, making some security software upgrades difficult and locking millions of bank ATM users out of their accounts. Chips used in bank cards to identify account numbers could not read the year 2010 properly, making it impossible for ATMs and point of sale machines in Germany to read debit cards of 30 million people since New Year's Day, according to published reports. The workaround is to reprogram the machines so the chips don't have to deal with the number. In Australia, point-of-sales machines skipped ahead to 2016 rather than 2010 at midnight Dec. 31, rendering them unusable by retailers, some of whom reported thousands of dollars in lost sales. Meanwhile Symantec's network-access control software that is supposed to check whether spam and virus definitions have been updated recently enough <a href="http://www.symantec.com/connect/forums/official-status-sepm-definitions-stay-31-12-2009-last-updated-04-jan-2010">fails because of this 2010 problem</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>After our recent discussion of decimal/hexadecimal confusion at the turn of 2010 , alphadogg writes in with a Network World survey of wider problems caused by the date change .
" A decade after the Y2K crisis , date changes still pose technology problems , making some security software upgrades difficult and locking millions of bank ATM users out of their accounts .
Chips used in bank cards to identify account numbers could not read the year 2010 properly , making it impossible for ATMs and point of sale machines in Germany to read debit cards of 30 million people since New Year 's Day , according to published reports .
The workaround is to reprogram the machines so the chips do n't have to deal with the number .
In Australia , point-of-sales machines skipped ahead to 2016 rather than 2010 at midnight Dec. 31 , rendering them unusable by retailers , some of whom reported thousands of dollars in lost sales .
Meanwhile Symantec 's network-access control software that is supposed to check whether spam and virus definitions have been updated recently enough fails because of this 2010 problem .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After our recent discussion of decimal/hexadecimal confusion at the turn of 2010, alphadogg writes in with a Network World survey of wider problems caused by the date change.
"A decade after the Y2K crisis, date changes still pose technology problems, making some security software upgrades difficult and locking millions of bank ATM users out of their accounts.
Chips used in bank cards to identify account numbers could not read the year 2010 properly, making it impossible for ATMs and point of sale machines in Germany to read debit cards of 30 million people since New Year's Day, according to published reports.
The workaround is to reprogram the machines so the chips don't have to deal with the number.
In Australia, point-of-sales machines skipped ahead to 2016 rather than 2010 at midnight Dec. 31, rendering them unusable by retailers, some of whom reported thousands of dollars in lost sales.
Meanwhile Symantec's network-access control software that is supposed to check whether spam and virus definitions have been updated recently enough fails because of this 2010 problem.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667394</id>
	<title>2038</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262776680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>2038 bugs are already here - I ran foul of OpenSSL failing valid crypto certs with end dates past then last year (now fixed)</htmltext>
<tokenext>2038 bugs are already here - I ran foul of OpenSSL failing valid crypto certs with end dates past then last year ( now fixed )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2038 bugs are already here - I ran foul of OpenSSL failing valid crypto certs with end dates past then last year (now fixed)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668118</id>
	<title>Re:Spamassassin</title>
	<author>darkmeridian</author>
	<datestamp>1262784480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was a flaw in the Spamassassin rules that set 2010 as a date so far off that it has to be spam. There is a patch that says 2020 is that date, not 2010. Hopefully, someone will update the rules regarding 2020 before 2020 rolls around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was a flaw in the Spamassassin rules that set 2010 as a date so far off that it has to be spam .
There is a patch that says 2020 is that date , not 2010 .
Hopefully , someone will update the rules regarding 2020 before 2020 rolls around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was a flaw in the Spamassassin rules that set 2010 as a date so far off that it has to be spam.
There is a patch that says 2020 is that date, not 2010.
Hopefully, someone will update the rules regarding 2020 before 2020 rolls around.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468</id>
	<title>idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262721480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>How on earth can things like this happen? After the  Y2K debacle how can anyone <br>not anticipate and extensively test for future dates?<br> <br>

Is this sheer utter incompetence, or just a total lack of intelligence?<br> <br>

Yee Gods!</htmltext>
<tokenext>How on earth can things like this happen ?
After the Y2K debacle how can anyone not anticipate and extensively test for future dates ?
Is this sheer utter incompetence , or just a total lack of intelligence ?
Yee Gods !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How on earth can things like this happen?
After the  Y2K debacle how can anyone not anticipate and extensively test for future dates?
Is this sheer utter incompetence, or just a total lack of intelligence?
Yee Gods!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668510</id>
	<title>Work Ethic Thread</title>
	<author>EmagGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1262787780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Should this story be merged with the story about the lack of work ethic in the software industry?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should this story be merged with the story about the lack of work ethic in the software industry ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Should this story be merged with the story about the lack of work ethic in the software industry?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30677044</id>
	<title>Re:Y2.01K?</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1262783280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/" title="bbc.co.uk">At least you'd be in good company</a> [bbc.co.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least you 'd be in good company [ bbc.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least you'd be in good company [bbc.co.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670386</id>
	<title>Re:Spamassassin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262796900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's because there's a rule in 72\_active.cf that would check if e-mail was too far in the future.. That rule started with mail date 2010 or beyond, which was fine a few years ago, but the rules has to be edited to go to 2020 now, or just score it as 0.</p><p>header   FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX    Date =~<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/20[1-9][0-9]/ [if-unset: 2006] is the problem.  Change it to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/20[2-9].....  Or just change it's score to 0 to bypass it entirely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's because there 's a rule in 72 \ _active.cf that would check if e-mail was too far in the future.. That rule started with mail date 2010 or beyond , which was fine a few years ago , but the rules has to be edited to go to 2020 now , or just score it as 0.header FH \ _DATE \ _PAST \ _20XX Date = ~ /20 [ 1-9 ] [ 0-9 ] / [ if-unset : 2006 ] is the problem .
Change it to /20 [ 2-9 ] ..... Or just change it 's score to 0 to bypass it entirely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's because there's a rule in 72\_active.cf that would check if e-mail was too far in the future.. That rule started with mail date 2010 or beyond, which was fine a few years ago, but the rules has to be edited to go to 2020 now, or just score it as 0.header   FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX    Date =~ /20[1-9][0-9]/ [if-unset: 2006] is the problem.
Change it to /20[2-9].....  Or just change it's score to 0 to bypass it entirely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670516</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Dreadneck</author>
	<datestamp>1262797380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>Is this sheer utter incompetence, or just a total lack of intelligence?</i> </p><p>you phrase that question as if it can't be both...</p></div><p>I refer to the intersection of the two as the Federal Triangle.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this sheer utter incompetence , or just a total lack of intelligence ?
you phrase that question as if it ca n't be both...I refer to the intersection of the two as the Federal Triangle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Is this sheer utter incompetence, or just a total lack of intelligence?
you phrase that question as if it can't be both...I refer to the intersection of the two as the Federal Triangle.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666592</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>mlts</author>
	<datestamp>1262809440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its neither.  It's ROI and worrying about this quarter's earnings over anything else, pure and simple.  Because there isn't any primary returns from finding date errors in the future, businesses just won't plunk down funds to fix them, and will reactively fix problems when they happen.  I see this a lot in businesses, and not just the big boys.  Plenty of SMBs also are not interested in hearing about anything they need to spend their money on, but stuff that has a positive return.  They would rather forget about time issues.  When zero hour happens, most feel that they can hire a ton of consultants to fix any problems that arise, even though it costs way more than if it was fixed before stuff failed.</p><p>Just the same with computer security because to a typical MBA++ PHB, security gives no financial gains.  I've heard so many times, "I'm not worried.  If I get hacked, I'll just call the Geek Squad guys and they will fix it."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its neither .
It 's ROI and worrying about this quarter 's earnings over anything else , pure and simple .
Because there is n't any primary returns from finding date errors in the future , businesses just wo n't plunk down funds to fix them , and will reactively fix problems when they happen .
I see this a lot in businesses , and not just the big boys .
Plenty of SMBs also are not interested in hearing about anything they need to spend their money on , but stuff that has a positive return .
They would rather forget about time issues .
When zero hour happens , most feel that they can hire a ton of consultants to fix any problems that arise , even though it costs way more than if it was fixed before stuff failed.Just the same with computer security because to a typical MBA + + PHB , security gives no financial gains .
I 've heard so many times , " I 'm not worried .
If I get hacked , I 'll just call the Geek Squad guys and they will fix it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its neither.
It's ROI and worrying about this quarter's earnings over anything else, pure and simple.
Because there isn't any primary returns from finding date errors in the future, businesses just won't plunk down funds to fix them, and will reactively fix problems when they happen.
I see this a lot in businesses, and not just the big boys.
Plenty of SMBs also are not interested in hearing about anything they need to spend their money on, but stuff that has a positive return.
They would rather forget about time issues.
When zero hour happens, most feel that they can hire a ton of consultants to fix any problems that arise, even though it costs way more than if it was fixed before stuff failed.Just the same with computer security because to a typical MBA++ PHB, security gives no financial gains.
I've heard so many times, "I'm not worried.
If I get hacked, I'll just call the Geek Squad guys and they will fix it.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670506</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Gunstick</author>
	<datestamp>1262797320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if the code had been fixed in 1999 using reverse engineering, the developer should have seen that the field says 99 and not 63<br>So if 99 means 1999 then that 99 must be BCD.<br>If of course the developer has never heard of what BCD is (most high level languages do not have that concept and today you only learn this stuff at school) then it's no suprise that he passed over this $99 representing 1999. Never questioning why he has to modify the code as $99+1=$9A and that would be fine for 2000...</p><p>On another note, some programs were indeed fixed like that. The BCD field, in 1999 was defined as hexadecimal number of years since 1846<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... This works fine until 2102</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if the code had been fixed in 1999 using reverse engineering , the developer should have seen that the field says 99 and not 63So if 99 means 1999 then that 99 must be BCD.If of course the developer has never heard of what BCD is ( most high level languages do not have that concept and today you only learn this stuff at school ) then it 's no suprise that he passed over this $ 99 representing 1999 .
Never questioning why he has to modify the code as $ 99 + 1 = $ 9A and that would be fine for 2000...On another note , some programs were indeed fixed like that .
The BCD field , in 1999 was defined as hexadecimal number of years since 1846 ... This works fine until 2102</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if the code had been fixed in 1999 using reverse engineering, the developer should have seen that the field says 99 and not 63So if 99 means 1999 then that 99 must be BCD.If of course the developer has never heard of what BCD is (most high level languages do not have that concept and today you only learn this stuff at school) then it's no suprise that he passed over this $99 representing 1999.
Never questioning why he has to modify the code as $99+1=$9A and that would be fine for 2000...On another note, some programs were indeed fixed like that.
The BCD field, in 1999 was defined as hexadecimal number of years since 1846 ... This works fine until 2102</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30674968</id>
	<title>Re:It's Y2K01</title>
	<author>snowgirl</author>
	<datestamp>1262772780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think the proper way to denote year 2010 is Y2K01, just like 14K4 was used for 14400.<br>Of course writing Y2K01 or Y2.01K is more difficult than Y2010, so why bother using that arcane notation.</p></div><p>Because Y2.01K is funnier.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the proper way to denote year 2010 is Y2K01 , just like 14K4 was used for 14400.Of course writing Y2K01 or Y2.01K is more difficult than Y2010 , so why bother using that arcane notation.Because Y2.01K is funnier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the proper way to denote year 2010 is Y2K01, just like 14K4 was used for 14400.Of course writing Y2K01 or Y2.01K is more difficult than Y2010, so why bother using that arcane notation.Because Y2.01K is funnier.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668922</id>
	<title>Another one.. NSDQ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262790240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another one.. Nasdaq is sending Administrative messages over it's feed lines that are incorrect. This:</p><p>1:15@M3T1</p><p>Should be:</p><p>10:15@M3T1</p><p>The first 2 characters being the year.</p><p>Luckily it's only administrative messages, and they only show up out of market hours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another one.. Nasdaq is sending Administrative messages over it 's feed lines that are incorrect .
This : 1 : 15 @ M3T1Should be : 10 : 15 @ M3T1The first 2 characters being the year.Luckily it 's only administrative messages , and they only show up out of market hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another one.. Nasdaq is sending Administrative messages over it's feed lines that are incorrect.
This:1:15@M3T1Should be:10:15@M3T1The first 2 characters being the year.Luckily it's only administrative messages, and they only show up out of market hours.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667674</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262779800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personally, I blame it on bad reverse-engineering. 9 looks the same in binary and binary-coded-decimal (the bit pattern for each is 00001001), but the bit pattern for 10 in binary-coded-decimal (00010000) is the same as the bit pattern for 16 in binary. I imagine what's going on here is people guessing at a protocol and not having enough information to distinguish binary from BCD. (If they do that because the protocol isn't available, it's forgivable; if they do it because they're too lazy to look it up, it's incompetence.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I blame it on bad reverse-engineering .
9 looks the same in binary and binary-coded-decimal ( the bit pattern for each is 00001001 ) , but the bit pattern for 10 in binary-coded-decimal ( 00010000 ) is the same as the bit pattern for 16 in binary .
I imagine what 's going on here is people guessing at a protocol and not having enough information to distinguish binary from BCD .
( If they do that because the protocol is n't available , it 's forgivable ; if they do it because they 're too lazy to look it up , it 's incompetence .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I blame it on bad reverse-engineering.
9 looks the same in binary and binary-coded-decimal (the bit pattern for each is 00001001), but the bit pattern for 10 in binary-coded-decimal (00010000) is the same as the bit pattern for 16 in binary.
I imagine what's going on here is people guessing at a protocol and not having enough information to distinguish binary from BCD.
(If they do that because the protocol isn't available, it's forgivable; if they do it because they're too lazy to look it up, it's incompetence.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666844</id>
	<title>Good.</title>
	<author>AK Marc</author>
	<datestamp>1262769900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I did Y2K remediation.  I've seen it called a waste of resources and that because nothing happened, nothing would have happened.  This is the smallest taste of what would have happened if Y2K weren't addressed.  Only we would have had airliners fall from the sky (silly?  Military jets had all navigation crash when crossing the date line, and if not for a tanker with them and that communications worked when navigation failed, they would have crashed).  But with a lot of hard work, it was a non event.<br> <br>Though, if anyone could tell me why my power went out at exactly midnight on that night, I'd love to know.  The Preston Hollow neighborhood in Dallas did have a power failure right at midnight.  And I never could figure out what happened.  But all the equipment I was responsible worked flawlessly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did Y2K remediation .
I 've seen it called a waste of resources and that because nothing happened , nothing would have happened .
This is the smallest taste of what would have happened if Y2K were n't addressed .
Only we would have had airliners fall from the sky ( silly ?
Military jets had all navigation crash when crossing the date line , and if not for a tanker with them and that communications worked when navigation failed , they would have crashed ) .
But with a lot of hard work , it was a non event .
Though , if anyone could tell me why my power went out at exactly midnight on that night , I 'd love to know .
The Preston Hollow neighborhood in Dallas did have a power failure right at midnight .
And I never could figure out what happened .
But all the equipment I was responsible worked flawlessly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did Y2K remediation.
I've seen it called a waste of resources and that because nothing happened, nothing would have happened.
This is the smallest taste of what would have happened if Y2K weren't addressed.
Only we would have had airliners fall from the sky (silly?
Military jets had all navigation crash when crossing the date line, and if not for a tanker with them and that communications worked when navigation failed, they would have crashed).
But with a lot of hard work, it was a non event.
Though, if anyone could tell me why my power went out at exactly midnight on that night, I'd love to know.
The Preston Hollow neighborhood in Dallas did have a power failure right at midnight.
And I never could figure out what happened.
But all the equipment I was responsible worked flawlessly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666542</id>
	<title>Try complacency</title>
	<author>Bovius</author>
	<datestamp>1262808780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Y2K ended up being a lot less scary than it could have been. Most of that is because we were prepared, turned a lot of systems off during the rollover, and then brought them back up under close monitoring.</p><p>The end result is that the populace, including business decision makers, hear about more date-related tech problems and think "Eh, it won't be that big of a deal. Y2K wasn't that bad, right?"</p><p>And now, an obligatory XKCD reference: <a href="http://xkcd.com/607/" title="xkcd.com" rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/607/</a> [xkcd.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Y2K ended up being a lot less scary than it could have been .
Most of that is because we were prepared , turned a lot of systems off during the rollover , and then brought them back up under close monitoring.The end result is that the populace , including business decision makers , hear about more date-related tech problems and think " Eh , it wo n't be that big of a deal .
Y2K was n't that bad , right ?
" And now , an obligatory XKCD reference : http : //xkcd.com/607/ [ xkcd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Y2K ended up being a lot less scary than it could have been.
Most of that is because we were prepared, turned a lot of systems off during the rollover, and then brought them back up under close monitoring.The end result is that the populace, including business decision makers, hear about more date-related tech problems and think "Eh, it won't be that big of a deal.
Y2K wasn't that bad, right?
"And now, an obligatory XKCD reference: http://xkcd.com/607/ [xkcd.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666466</id>
	<title>Have I not heard this before?</title>
	<author>bezenek</author>
	<datestamp>1262721480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Didn't I hear this before?  I remember people talking about scamming banking systems via the confusion caused by 2010.<br> <br>
Does anyone remember this well enough to dig up the article?<br> <br>
Thanks (and lazy),<br>Todd</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't I hear this before ?
I remember people talking about scamming banking systems via the confusion caused by 2010 .
Does anyone remember this well enough to dig up the article ?
Thanks ( and lazy ) ,Todd</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't I hear this before?
I remember people talking about scamming banking systems via the confusion caused by 2010.
Does anyone remember this well enough to dig up the article?
Thanks (and lazy),Todd</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666532</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262808660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Is this sheer utter incompetence</i></p><p>Sounds good! Tastes even better!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this sheer utter incompetenceSounds good !
Tastes even better !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this sheer utter incompetenceSounds good!
Tastes even better!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667104</id>
	<title>Y2.01K?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262773080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about MMX? I like confusing other people by reusing acronyms. Even better if I could walk around with a slot 1 Pentium and wave it in front of IT staff while mentioning it...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about MMX ?
I like confusing other people by reusing acronyms .
Even better if I could walk around with a slot 1 Pentium and wave it in front of IT staff while mentioning it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about MMX?
I like confusing other people by reusing acronyms.
Even better if I could walk around with a slot 1 Pentium and wave it in front of IT staff while mentioning it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30775876</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1263497940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
BCD works great, and is efficient, when you have  16 digits to encode.
Every bit as efficient as other binary encodings.
More efficient than ASCII or unicode.
</p><p>
0-9, A-F.
</p><p>
Or...  0-9  A, B, C, D, *, #
</p><p>
Packed BCD commonly used by standard record structures such as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic\_Message\_Accounting" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Bellcore AMA</a> [wikipedia.org] formats
</p><p>
There are plenty of good reasons to use BCD for storage in certain situations.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BCD works great , and is efficient , when you have 16 digits to encode .
Every bit as efficient as other binary encodings .
More efficient than ASCII or unicode .
0-9 , A-F . Or... 0-9 A , B , C , D , * , # Packed BCD commonly used by standard record structures such as Bellcore AMA [ wikipedia.org ] formats There are plenty of good reasons to use BCD for storage in certain situations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
BCD works great, and is efficient, when you have  16 digits to encode.
Every bit as efficient as other binary encodings.
More efficient than ASCII or unicode.
0-9, A-F.

Or...  0-9  A, B, C, D, *, #

Packed BCD commonly used by standard record structures such as Bellcore AMA [wikipedia.org] formats

There are plenty of good reasons to use BCD for storage in certain situations.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668294</id>
	<title>Re:What's the main bug?</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1262786040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An apparent requirement was to squeeze the year into a single byte.  They just did it very badly by choosing BCD format for the last 2 digits of the year, and assuming every new CS grad would know what that means, and would understand by examining the existing data field where 0x03 was present for 2003 and 0x04 was present for 2004 that it must be in BCD.  Since BCD and plain binary share the same values for 2000 through 2009, it fully depended on the programmer reading AND UNDERSTANDING the documentation to get it right<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... if the documentation even reliably pointed this out.</p><p>We need to get away from BCD encodings.  It was convenient for hardware level protocols because they allowed displays of decimal digits without further conversion.  Do we do that anymore?  Unlikely.  We have software or firmware, and that can do decimal conversions just fine.  All NEW communications protocols should from this day forward use only one of a binary format with a documented resolution and sufficient bits to last until at least the year 2200, or characters with the date in a format with year first, month next, and day of month after that, or a plain decimal count of days since the epoch.  Where an epoch is needed, it must be clearly documented.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An apparent requirement was to squeeze the year into a single byte .
They just did it very badly by choosing BCD format for the last 2 digits of the year , and assuming every new CS grad would know what that means , and would understand by examining the existing data field where 0x03 was present for 2003 and 0x04 was present for 2004 that it must be in BCD .
Since BCD and plain binary share the same values for 2000 through 2009 , it fully depended on the programmer reading AND UNDERSTANDING the documentation to get it right ... if the documentation even reliably pointed this out.We need to get away from BCD encodings .
It was convenient for hardware level protocols because they allowed displays of decimal digits without further conversion .
Do we do that anymore ?
Unlikely. We have software or firmware , and that can do decimal conversions just fine .
All NEW communications protocols should from this day forward use only one of a binary format with a documented resolution and sufficient bits to last until at least the year 2200 , or characters with the date in a format with year first , month next , and day of month after that , or a plain decimal count of days since the epoch .
Where an epoch is needed , it must be clearly documented .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An apparent requirement was to squeeze the year into a single byte.
They just did it very badly by choosing BCD format for the last 2 digits of the year, and assuming every new CS grad would know what that means, and would understand by examining the existing data field where 0x03 was present for 2003 and 0x04 was present for 2004 that it must be in BCD.
Since BCD and plain binary share the same values for 2000 through 2009, it fully depended on the programmer reading AND UNDERSTANDING the documentation to get it right ... if the documentation even reliably pointed this out.We need to get away from BCD encodings.
It was convenient for hardware level protocols because they allowed displays of decimal digits without further conversion.
Do we do that anymore?
Unlikely.  We have software or firmware, and that can do decimal conversions just fine.
All NEW communications protocols should from this day forward use only one of a binary format with a documented resolution and sufficient bits to last until at least the year 2200, or characters with the date in a format with year first, month next, and day of month after that, or a plain decimal count of days since the epoch.
Where an epoch is needed, it must be clearly documented.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666882</id>
	<title>It's Y2K01</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262770440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the proper way to denote year 2010 is Y2K01, just like 14K4 was used for 14400.<br>Of course writing Y2K01 or Y2.01K is more difficult than Y2010, so why bother using that arcane notation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the proper way to denote year 2010 is Y2K01 , just like 14K4 was used for 14400.Of course writing Y2K01 or Y2.01K is more difficult than Y2010 , so why bother using that arcane notation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the proper way to denote year 2010 is Y2K01, just like 14K4 was used for 14400.Of course writing Y2K01 or Y2.01K is more difficult than Y2010, so why bother using that arcane notation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30719090</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263134880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Add NetNewsWire to the list of buggy programs. Granted, I was one version behind current, but that's only because they changed the location of the updates so the automatic update function was silently failing rather than telling me a new version existed.</p><p>I had my retention set for 1000 days after a news item is removed from the RSS feed. Thaty might sound excessive, but when I flag things to go back to, I don't want to have some artifical deadline set for when I must get back to it. If there was a 'forever' option, I would have picked it. With a number of active feeds, such as<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., that quickly grew to over 18000 items since I started using it in April of last year.</p><p>When midnight hit, I heard quite the churning from my computer, which was dismissed as a number of cron jobs having a party. Also, I aws more pre-occupied with my party, watching fireworks and drinking scotch. A couple hours later I sat down at my desk and noticed the unread count being displaed rather considerably lower (I don't keep up with every feed, so it was up to 4 digits, but now was down to 2 digits). I scanned over a few feeds and noticed that nothing older than a few days existed in most except those that keep items in the feed for a long time, which tend to be low activity feeds. As best I can tell, its date handling code figured that 2010/01/01 - 2009/12/31 &gt; 1000, so it proceeded to purge ALL new items not still in an active RSS feed. Shit....</p><p>I had a backup from mid November, but that was it. This isn't something that goes under any of the normal backups, but it probably should have. Hindsight and all that. Ironically, NetNewsWire backups up its data to some extent, too bad its not useful. The feeds are stored in plists, which are loosely structured XML files for those not familiar with OS X, which means flat files of several megabytes for active feeds. Those files are NOT backed up. What is backed up is the list of feeds, something that could be recreated by parsing the first few lines of each feed 'database', but apparently that's the important part because it keeps several dozen copies of this file in the backups directory, despite it not changing between any of the copies.</p><p>I'm fairly convinced now that more thought was put into the ability to deliver ads (take it from commercial, to free to get users, then to adware to spray ads at those that are hooked and have their data trapped with no export function for anything but the list of feeds) than to any functional aspect. That, or the programmers are simply retarded. Well, guess what? I'm not locked in anymore because I have no data worth retaining. The most relevant articles are the most recent, and those are what is gone (the last 6-7 weeks). So I jumped ship, all new stuff goes elsewhere. If anyone should happen to have feeds data from<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. and Ars Technica for Nov-Dec 2009, in NetNewsWire files or any other format, that would care to share it that would be greatly appreciated. This also raises questions in my head about RSS. It acts like a itemized exporter to a certain externt, but it has no ability to provide access to the stuff not judged 'current' by the feed operator. It would certainly be nice if there was some standard mechanism to pull items from sites in a logical fashion that permitted archival access. Pulling the whole page when the page is merely a grouping of smaller logical items is messy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Add NetNewsWire to the list of buggy programs .
Granted , I was one version behind current , but that 's only because they changed the location of the updates so the automatic update function was silently failing rather than telling me a new version existed.I had my retention set for 1000 days after a news item is removed from the RSS feed .
Thaty might sound excessive , but when I flag things to go back to , I do n't want to have some artifical deadline set for when I must get back to it .
If there was a 'forever ' option , I would have picked it .
With a number of active feeds , such as /. , that quickly grew to over 18000 items since I started using it in April of last year.When midnight hit , I heard quite the churning from my computer , which was dismissed as a number of cron jobs having a party .
Also , I aws more pre-occupied with my party , watching fireworks and drinking scotch .
A couple hours later I sat down at my desk and noticed the unread count being displaed rather considerably lower ( I do n't keep up with every feed , so it was up to 4 digits , but now was down to 2 digits ) .
I scanned over a few feeds and noticed that nothing older than a few days existed in most except those that keep items in the feed for a long time , which tend to be low activity feeds .
As best I can tell , its date handling code figured that 2010/01/01 - 2009/12/31 &gt; 1000 , so it proceeded to purge ALL new items not still in an active RSS feed .
Shit....I had a backup from mid November , but that was it .
This is n't something that goes under any of the normal backups , but it probably should have .
Hindsight and all that .
Ironically , NetNewsWire backups up its data to some extent , too bad its not useful .
The feeds are stored in plists , which are loosely structured XML files for those not familiar with OS X , which means flat files of several megabytes for active feeds .
Those files are NOT backed up .
What is backed up is the list of feeds , something that could be recreated by parsing the first few lines of each feed 'database ' , but apparently that 's the important part because it keeps several dozen copies of this file in the backups directory , despite it not changing between any of the copies.I 'm fairly convinced now that more thought was put into the ability to deliver ads ( take it from commercial , to free to get users , then to adware to spray ads at those that are hooked and have their data trapped with no export function for anything but the list of feeds ) than to any functional aspect .
That , or the programmers are simply retarded .
Well , guess what ?
I 'm not locked in anymore because I have no data worth retaining .
The most relevant articles are the most recent , and those are what is gone ( the last 6-7 weeks ) .
So I jumped ship , all new stuff goes elsewhere .
If anyone should happen to have feeds data from / .
and Ars Technica for Nov-Dec 2009 , in NetNewsWire files or any other format , that would care to share it that would be greatly appreciated .
This also raises questions in my head about RSS .
It acts like a itemized exporter to a certain externt , but it has no ability to provide access to the stuff not judged 'current ' by the feed operator .
It would certainly be nice if there was some standard mechanism to pull items from sites in a logical fashion that permitted archival access .
Pulling the whole page when the page is merely a grouping of smaller logical items is messy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Add NetNewsWire to the list of buggy programs.
Granted, I was one version behind current, but that's only because they changed the location of the updates so the automatic update function was silently failing rather than telling me a new version existed.I had my retention set for 1000 days after a news item is removed from the RSS feed.
Thaty might sound excessive, but when I flag things to go back to, I don't want to have some artifical deadline set for when I must get back to it.
If there was a 'forever' option, I would have picked it.
With a number of active feeds, such as /., that quickly grew to over 18000 items since I started using it in April of last year.When midnight hit, I heard quite the churning from my computer, which was dismissed as a number of cron jobs having a party.
Also, I aws more pre-occupied with my party, watching fireworks and drinking scotch.
A couple hours later I sat down at my desk and noticed the unread count being displaed rather considerably lower (I don't keep up with every feed, so it was up to 4 digits, but now was down to 2 digits).
I scanned over a few feeds and noticed that nothing older than a few days existed in most except those that keep items in the feed for a long time, which tend to be low activity feeds.
As best I can tell, its date handling code figured that 2010/01/01 - 2009/12/31 &gt; 1000, so it proceeded to purge ALL new items not still in an active RSS feed.
Shit....I had a backup from mid November, but that was it.
This isn't something that goes under any of the normal backups, but it probably should have.
Hindsight and all that.
Ironically, NetNewsWire backups up its data to some extent, too bad its not useful.
The feeds are stored in plists, which are loosely structured XML files for those not familiar with OS X, which means flat files of several megabytes for active feeds.
Those files are NOT backed up.
What is backed up is the list of feeds, something that could be recreated by parsing the first few lines of each feed 'database', but apparently that's the important part because it keeps several dozen copies of this file in the backups directory, despite it not changing between any of the copies.I'm fairly convinced now that more thought was put into the ability to deliver ads (take it from commercial, to free to get users, then to adware to spray ads at those that are hooked and have their data trapped with no export function for anything but the list of feeds) than to any functional aspect.
That, or the programmers are simply retarded.
Well, guess what?
I'm not locked in anymore because I have no data worth retaining.
The most relevant articles are the most recent, and those are what is gone (the last 6-7 weeks).
So I jumped ship, all new stuff goes elsewhere.
If anyone should happen to have feeds data from /.
and Ars Technica for Nov-Dec 2009, in NetNewsWire files or any other format, that would care to share it that would be greatly appreciated.
This also raises questions in my head about RSS.
It acts like a itemized exporter to a certain externt, but it has no ability to provide access to the stuff not judged 'current' by the feed operator.
It would certainly be nice if there was some standard mechanism to pull items from sites in a logical fashion that permitted archival access.
Pulling the whole page when the page is merely a grouping of smaller logical items is messy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667234</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262774940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about the fear of copyright infringement or plagiarism. You grow up and go through school being told NOT to copy any one elses work, hand in your own work, you can be expelled from school for handing in work that is not yours, then one day people start telling you to stop "reinventing the wheel". There is code all ready written that does that. Copy and paste that in and your done. It's not easy to go against what a life time has taught you is wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about the fear of copyright infringement or plagiarism .
You grow up and go through school being told NOT to copy any one elses work , hand in your own work , you can be expelled from school for handing in work that is not yours , then one day people start telling you to stop " reinventing the wheel " .
There is code all ready written that does that .
Copy and paste that in and your done .
It 's not easy to go against what a life time has taught you is wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about the fear of copyright infringement or plagiarism.
You grow up and go through school being told NOT to copy any one elses work, hand in your own work, you can be expelled from school for handing in work that is not yours, then one day people start telling you to stop "reinventing the wheel".
There is code all ready written that does that.
Copy and paste that in and your done.
It's not easy to go against what a life time has taught you is wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670922</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>jbengt</author>
	<datestamp>1262798700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone working with $s should consider using BCD.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone working with $ s should consider using BCD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone working with $s should consider using BCD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668124</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262784480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(silly? Military jets had all navigation crash when crossing the date line, and if not for a tanker with them and that communications worked when navigation failed, they would have crashed).</p></div><p>If <em>avionics</em> failed, they would have crashed. But if these fucks can't land planes on basic instrumentation then they probably shouldn't be piloting military hardware.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( silly ?
Military jets had all navigation crash when crossing the date line , and if not for a tanker with them and that communications worked when navigation failed , they would have crashed ) .If avionics failed , they would have crashed .
But if these fucks ca n't land planes on basic instrumentation then they probably should n't be piloting military hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(silly?
Military jets had all navigation crash when crossing the date line, and if not for a tanker with them and that communications worked when navigation failed, they would have crashed).If avionics failed, they would have crashed.
But if these fucks can't land planes on basic instrumentation then they probably shouldn't be piloting military hardware.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669584</id>
	<title>It's the money, stupid</title>
	<author>Daddy-Oh</author>
	<datestamp>1262793660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Prior to "Y2K", I saw far too many mediocre "consultants" make more money than God by spreading FUD about the possibility that your software would 'esplode on midnight 1/1/2000. Were there systems that would be affected? Sure. Back when storage and memory cost money, the amount of space used by data was an issue that could not be ignored, and that led to decisions in system design that caused the issue. Heck, who thought that any single piece of software would still be relevant 20 years after it was written? But, so-called experts came out of the woodwork to "help" businesses through the non-crisis by charging them huge rates.</p><p>But, to have this really happen on "modern" systems seems unacceptable to me. I half expect to see another new breed of "expert" consultant who specializes in reviewing all of your code to make sure you are next-year compliant.</p><p>Of course, maybe I'm just envious that I didn't capitalize on that feeding frenzy in the first place....</p><p>--</p><p>If "external" is the opposite of "internal", what is the opposite of "increment"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Prior to " Y2K " , I saw far too many mediocre " consultants " make more money than God by spreading FUD about the possibility that your software would 'esplode on midnight 1/1/2000 .
Were there systems that would be affected ?
Sure. Back when storage and memory cost money , the amount of space used by data was an issue that could not be ignored , and that led to decisions in system design that caused the issue .
Heck , who thought that any single piece of software would still be relevant 20 years after it was written ?
But , so-called experts came out of the woodwork to " help " businesses through the non-crisis by charging them huge rates.But , to have this really happen on " modern " systems seems unacceptable to me .
I half expect to see another new breed of " expert " consultant who specializes in reviewing all of your code to make sure you are next-year compliant.Of course , maybe I 'm just envious that I did n't capitalize on that feeding frenzy in the first place....--If " external " is the opposite of " internal " , what is the opposite of " increment " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prior to "Y2K", I saw far too many mediocre "consultants" make more money than God by spreading FUD about the possibility that your software would 'esplode on midnight 1/1/2000.
Were there systems that would be affected?
Sure. Back when storage and memory cost money, the amount of space used by data was an issue that could not be ignored, and that led to decisions in system design that caused the issue.
Heck, who thought that any single piece of software would still be relevant 20 years after it was written?
But, so-called experts came out of the woodwork to "help" businesses through the non-crisis by charging them huge rates.But, to have this really happen on "modern" systems seems unacceptable to me.
I half expect to see another new breed of "expert" consultant who specializes in reviewing all of your code to make sure you are next-year compliant.Of course, maybe I'm just envious that I didn't capitalize on that feeding frenzy in the first place....--If "external" is the opposite of "internal", what is the opposite of "increment"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666706</id>
	<title>Spamassassin</title>
	<author>j\_sp\_r</author>
	<datestamp>1262811060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spamassassin in Kerio Mailserver has a bug that flags all messages dated 2010 as spam. I think it affects the normal spamassassin as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spamassassin in Kerio Mailserver has a bug that flags all messages dated 2010 as spam .
I think it affects the normal spamassassin as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spamassassin in Kerio Mailserver has a bug that flags all messages dated 2010 as spam.
I think it affects the normal spamassassin as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30675422</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1262774940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Copy and paste that in and your done</i><br>You shouldn't just copy and paste code in willy nilly anyway! that is what leads to cases like the recent "GPL code in MS software" incident.</p><p>What you should do is learn the facilities of the libraries available to you (most importantly your languages standard library) and make use of them. If they libraries you have available don't offer what you need then you need to weigh up the advantages of copying in code you didn't write (and may therefore have difficulty maintaining) vs adding a dependency vs reinventing the wheel.</p><p>Sadly as you say schools don't really teach this and even if they do people often end up picking up a new language very quickly without really ever learning it properly..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Copy and paste that in and your doneYou should n't just copy and paste code in willy nilly anyway !
that is what leads to cases like the recent " GPL code in MS software " incident.What you should do is learn the facilities of the libraries available to you ( most importantly your languages standard library ) and make use of them .
If they libraries you have available do n't offer what you need then you need to weigh up the advantages of copying in code you did n't write ( and may therefore have difficulty maintaining ) vs adding a dependency vs reinventing the wheel.Sadly as you say schools do n't really teach this and even if they do people often end up picking up a new language very quickly without really ever learning it properly. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Copy and paste that in and your doneYou shouldn't just copy and paste code in willy nilly anyway!
that is what leads to cases like the recent "GPL code in MS software" incident.What you should do is learn the facilities of the libraries available to you (most importantly your languages standard library) and make use of them.
If they libraries you have available don't offer what you need then you need to weigh up the advantages of copying in code you didn't write (and may therefore have difficulty maintaining) vs adding a dependency vs reinventing the wheel.Sadly as you say schools don't really teach this and even if they do people often end up picking up a new language very quickly without really ever learning it properly..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30672238</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1262803920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Indeed, it always gets under my skin to hear it called "a lot of noise about nothing" or oversimplified to the point of "computers would think your newborn was born in 1901!" <p>
I also worked on Y2K remediation -- and the issues we found and fixed were far from trivial.  Had the effort not been applied, it <b>would</b> have been as catastrophic as predicted.  That it went as smoothly and quietly as it is the result of uncountable hours of analysis, development, and testing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , it always gets under my skin to hear it called " a lot of noise about nothing " or oversimplified to the point of " computers would think your newborn was born in 1901 !
" I also worked on Y2K remediation -- and the issues we found and fixed were far from trivial .
Had the effort not been applied , it would have been as catastrophic as predicted .
That it went as smoothly and quietly as it is the result of uncountable hours of analysis , development , and testing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, it always gets under my skin to hear it called "a lot of noise about nothing" or oversimplified to the point of "computers would think your newborn was born in 1901!
" 
I also worked on Y2K remediation -- and the issues we found and fixed were far from trivial.
Had the effort not been applied, it would have been as catastrophic as predicted.
That it went as smoothly and quietly as it is the result of uncountable hours of analysis, development, and testing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30671310</id>
	<title>Re:Spamassassin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262800320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You must be running it on Windows. KMS 6.7 on Fedora Core has no such issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You must be running it on Windows .
KMS 6.7 on Fedora Core has no such issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must be running it on Windows.
KMS 6.7 on Fedora Core has no such issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668040</id>
	<title>Y2.01K?</title>
	<author>agw</author>
	<datestamp>1262783640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Y2.01K? That's surely a plot of the hard disk industry.<br>Everybody knows that Y2010 are only Y1.963K.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Y2.01K ?
That 's surely a plot of the hard disk industry.Everybody knows that Y2010 are only Y1.963K .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Y2.01K?
That's surely a plot of the hard disk industry.Everybody knows that Y2010 are only Y1.963K.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669848</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1262795040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670268</id>
	<title>Re:Spamassassin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262796480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What do you want? 2010 is <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/story/10/01/02/0027207/SpamAssassin-2010-Bug" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">grossly in the future</a> [slashdot.org]. And I'm looking forward to my 19th birthday.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you want ?
2010 is grossly in the future [ slashdot.org ] .
And I 'm looking forward to my 19th birthday .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you want?
2010 is grossly in the future [slashdot.org].
And I'm looking forward to my 19th birthday.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666552</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262808900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Is this sheer utter incompetence, or just a total lack of intelligence?</i></p><p>you phrase that question as if it can't be both...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this sheer utter incompetence , or just a total lack of intelligence ? you phrase that question as if it ca n't be both.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this sheer utter incompetence, or just a total lack of intelligence?you phrase that question as if it can't be both...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667288</id>
	<title>Hit my Garmin too.</title>
	<author>Ranzear</author>
	<datestamp>1262775540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Last year I had my Garmin GPS's traffic module enabled for a year 'subscription', which is effectively a code that tells the unit 'enable yourseilf until xxx date'. It expired a few months ago. Now, come Jan 1st, 2010, its magically back on without any reactivation.

Not sure if I want to tell them straight away, I, and many others I'm sure, just saved $70 by their programming error.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Last year I had my Garmin GPS 's traffic module enabled for a year 'subscription ' , which is effectively a code that tells the unit 'enable yourseilf until xxx date' .
It expired a few months ago .
Now , come Jan 1st , 2010 , its magically back on without any reactivation .
Not sure if I want to tell them straight away , I , and many others I 'm sure , just saved $ 70 by their programming error .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last year I had my Garmin GPS's traffic module enabled for a year 'subscription', which is effectively a code that tells the unit 'enable yourseilf until xxx date'.
It expired a few months ago.
Now, come Jan 1st, 2010, its magically back on without any reactivation.
Not sure if I want to tell them straight away, I, and many others I'm sure, just saved $70 by their programming error.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30671260</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1262800140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be quite serious, if we as a society actually live long enough to make it to 10000, and in the 8000 years until then have STILL not gotten our act together in the programming arena, then we deserve whatever crap Y10K throws our way.</p><p>Particularly after the big scare from Y2K.</p><p>Sadly, I'm not that optimistic human civ will last long enough for it to be a problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be quite serious , if we as a society actually live long enough to make it to 10000 , and in the 8000 years until then have STILL not gotten our act together in the programming arena , then we deserve whatever crap Y10K throws our way.Particularly after the big scare from Y2K.Sadly , I 'm not that optimistic human civ will last long enough for it to be a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be quite serious, if we as a society actually live long enough to make it to 10000, and in the 8000 years until then have STILL not gotten our act together in the programming arena, then we deserve whatever crap Y10K throws our way.Particularly after the big scare from Y2K.Sadly, I'm not that optimistic human civ will last long enough for it to be a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668622</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262788440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bad regex for the date.</p><p>##{ FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX</p><p>530     header FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX Date =~<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/20[1-9][0-9]/ [if-unset: 2006]</p><p>531     describe FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX The date is grossly in the future.</p><p>532     ##} FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bad regex for the date. # # { FH \ _DATE \ _PAST \ _20XX530 header FH \ _DATE \ _PAST \ _20XX Date = ~ /20 [ 1-9 ] [ 0-9 ] / [ if-unset : 2006 ] 531 describe FH \ _DATE \ _PAST \ _20XX The date is grossly in the future.532 # # } FH \ _DATE \ _PAST \ _20XX</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bad regex for the date.##{ FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX530     header FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX Date =~ /20[1-9][0-9]/ [if-unset: 2006]531     describe FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX The date is grossly in the future.532     ##} FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667218</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667044</id>
	<title>Do people never learn?</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1262772360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With all the hype of y2k, you'd think that would be enough to push people into action and learn how to handle dates correctly... Instead, some people "fixed" y2k problems with another series of short sighted dirty hacks that are now starting to break again after only 10 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With all the hype of y2k , you 'd think that would be enough to push people into action and learn how to handle dates correctly... Instead , some people " fixed " y2k problems with another series of short sighted dirty hacks that are now starting to break again after only 10 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With all the hype of y2k, you'd think that would be enough to push people into action and learn how to handle dates correctly... Instead, some people "fixed" y2k problems with another series of short sighted dirty hacks that are now starting to break again after only 10 years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668500</id>
	<title>stupidity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262787660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not about a 2010 problem. This is about incredible stupid programmers / hardware designers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not about a 2010 problem .
This is about incredible stupid programmers / hardware designers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not about a 2010 problem.
This is about incredible stupid programmers / hardware designers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667110</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>hydromike2</author>
	<datestamp>1262773140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Wait until Dec. 31, 9999. Watch as people panic about there being 5 digits in the year and how programs were only written to accommodate  4 digit years for the past 8000 years!</p></div><p>I wouldnt sweat the 5 dgits, we only have 2 years 350 days +/- a few hours till the earth goes back to zero(if even that, possibly even negative relative to the next sentient species that comes to be on earth)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait until Dec. 31 , 9999 .
Watch as people panic about there being 5 digits in the year and how programs were only written to accommodate 4 digit years for the past 8000 years ! I wouldnt sweat the 5 dgits , we only have 2 years 350 days + /- a few hours till the earth goes back to zero ( if even that , possibly even negative relative to the next sentient species that comes to be on earth )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait until Dec. 31, 9999.
Watch as people panic about there being 5 digits in the year and how programs were only written to accommodate  4 digit years for the past 8000 years!I wouldnt sweat the 5 dgits, we only have 2 years 350 days +/- a few hours till the earth goes back to zero(if even that, possibly even negative relative to the next sentient species that comes to be on earth)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669242</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Wisconsingod</author>
	<datestamp>1262792100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>
I would bet all the money I have that 99.99\% of these problems are caused by people not taking the time to learn the standard library of whatever programming language they're using.
</p></div><p>I'll take that bet, and you can send me a cashier check.<br> <br>

The bulk of the 2016 bug was due to a miscode in a library of microsoft software, that was used by various systems, notably Windows Mobile 5.1+, EFTPOS systems in Austrailia, etc.    Bugs exist in all aspects of code, and even standard library functions.     The problem is when the bug is in the library, it has widespread effects around the world.   The benefit is that a single fix can be coded, and then rolled out to everyone using that library.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would bet all the money I have that 99.99 \ % of these problems are caused by people not taking the time to learn the standard library of whatever programming language they 're using .
I 'll take that bet , and you can send me a cashier check .
The bulk of the 2016 bug was due to a miscode in a library of microsoft software , that was used by various systems , notably Windows Mobile 5.1 + , EFTPOS systems in Austrailia , etc .
Bugs exist in all aspects of code , and even standard library functions .
The problem is when the bug is in the library , it has widespread effects around the world .
The benefit is that a single fix can be coded , and then rolled out to everyone using that library .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I would bet all the money I have that 99.99\% of these problems are caused by people not taking the time to learn the standard library of whatever programming language they're using.
I'll take that bet, and you can send me a cashier check.
The bulk of the 2016 bug was due to a miscode in a library of microsoft software, that was used by various systems, notably Windows Mobile 5.1+, EFTPOS systems in Austrailia, etc.
Bugs exist in all aspects of code, and even standard library functions.
The problem is when the bug is in the library, it has widespread effects around the world.
The benefit is that a single fix can be coded, and then rolled out to everyone using that library.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667642</id>
	<title>Quick fixes from 1999</title>
	<author>s7uar7</author>
	<datestamp>1262779320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd be willing to bet that some of this has been caused by, "just change it so that if the year is 10 then assume it's 20??, we'll fix it properly before then".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be willing to bet that some of this has been caused by , " just change it so that if the year is 10 then assume it 's 20 ?
? , we 'll fix it properly before then " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be willing to bet that some of this has been caused by, "just change it so that if the year is 10 then assume it's 20?
?, we'll fix it properly before then".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30721204</id>
	<title>NetNeewsWire sucks too</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263208620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Add NetNewsWire to the list of buggy programs. Granted, I was one version behind current, but that's only because they changed the location of the updates so the automatic update function was silently failing rather than telling me a new version existed.</p><p>I had my retention set for 1000 days after a news item is removed from the RSS feed. That might sound excessive, but when I flag things to go back to, I don't want to have some artificial deadline set for when I must get back to it. If there was a 'forever' option, I would have picked it. With a number of active feeds, such as<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., that quickly grew to over 18000 items since I started using it in April of last year.</p><p>When midnight hit, I heard quite the churning from my computer, which was dismissed as a number of cron jobs having a party. Also, I was more preoccupied with my party, watching fireworks and drinking scotch. A couple hours later I sat down at my desk and noticed the unread count being displayed rather considerably lower (I don't keep up with every feed, so it was up to 4 digits, but now was down to 2 digits). I scanned over a few feeds and noticed that nothing older than a few days existed in most except those that keep items in the feed for a long time, which tend to be low activity feeds. As best I can tell, its date handling code figured that 2010/01/01 - 2009/12/31 &gt; 1000, so it proceeded to purge ALL new items not still in an active RSS feed. Shit....</p><p>I had a backup from mid November, but that was it. This isn't something that goes under any of the normal backups, but it probably should have. Hindsight and all that. Ironically, NetNewsWire backups up its data to some extent, too bad its not useful. The feeds are stored in plists, which are loosely structured XML files for those not familiar with OS X, which means flat files of several megabytes for active feeds. Those files are NOT backed up. What is backed up is the list of feeds, something that could be recreated by parsing the first few lines of each feed 'database', but apparently that's the important part because it keeps several dozen copies of this file in the backups directory, despite it not changing between any of the copies.</p><p>I'm fairly convinced now that more thought was put into the ability to deliver ads (take it from commercial, to free to get users, then to adware to spray ads at those that are hooked and have their data trapped with no export function for anything but the list of feeds) than to any functional aspect. That, or the programmers are simply retarded. Well, guess what? I'm not locked in anymore because I have no data worth retaining. The most relevant articles are the most recent, and those are what is gone (the last 6-7 weeks). So I jumped ship, all new stuff goes elsewhere. If anyone should happen to have feeds data from<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. and Ars Technica for Nov-Dec 2009, in NetNewsWire files or any other format, that would care to share it that would be greatly appreciated. This also raises questions in my head about RSS. It acts like a itemized exporter to a certain extent, but it has no ability to provide access to the stuff not judged 'current' by the feed operator. It would certainly be nice if there was some standard mechanism to pull items from sites in a logical fashion that permitted archival access. Pulling the whole page when the page is merely a grouping of smaller logical items is messy.</p><p>(slashdot comment interface, along with much else of the site, has apparently gone straight to hell in the time I've not been using the site directly. yay anti-intuitive interfaces! buttons that don't do what they say, unlabeled form fields, hidden controls, its just like windoze now, wheee)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Add NetNewsWire to the list of buggy programs .
Granted , I was one version behind current , but that 's only because they changed the location of the updates so the automatic update function was silently failing rather than telling me a new version existed.I had my retention set for 1000 days after a news item is removed from the RSS feed .
That might sound excessive , but when I flag things to go back to , I do n't want to have some artificial deadline set for when I must get back to it .
If there was a 'forever ' option , I would have picked it .
With a number of active feeds , such as /. , that quickly grew to over 18000 items since I started using it in April of last year.When midnight hit , I heard quite the churning from my computer , which was dismissed as a number of cron jobs having a party .
Also , I was more preoccupied with my party , watching fireworks and drinking scotch .
A couple hours later I sat down at my desk and noticed the unread count being displayed rather considerably lower ( I do n't keep up with every feed , so it was up to 4 digits , but now was down to 2 digits ) .
I scanned over a few feeds and noticed that nothing older than a few days existed in most except those that keep items in the feed for a long time , which tend to be low activity feeds .
As best I can tell , its date handling code figured that 2010/01/01 - 2009/12/31 &gt; 1000 , so it proceeded to purge ALL new items not still in an active RSS feed .
Shit....I had a backup from mid November , but that was it .
This is n't something that goes under any of the normal backups , but it probably should have .
Hindsight and all that .
Ironically , NetNewsWire backups up its data to some extent , too bad its not useful .
The feeds are stored in plists , which are loosely structured XML files for those not familiar with OS X , which means flat files of several megabytes for active feeds .
Those files are NOT backed up .
What is backed up is the list of feeds , something that could be recreated by parsing the first few lines of each feed 'database ' , but apparently that 's the important part because it keeps several dozen copies of this file in the backups directory , despite it not changing between any of the copies.I 'm fairly convinced now that more thought was put into the ability to deliver ads ( take it from commercial , to free to get users , then to adware to spray ads at those that are hooked and have their data trapped with no export function for anything but the list of feeds ) than to any functional aspect .
That , or the programmers are simply retarded .
Well , guess what ?
I 'm not locked in anymore because I have no data worth retaining .
The most relevant articles are the most recent , and those are what is gone ( the last 6-7 weeks ) .
So I jumped ship , all new stuff goes elsewhere .
If anyone should happen to have feeds data from / .
and Ars Technica for Nov-Dec 2009 , in NetNewsWire files or any other format , that would care to share it that would be greatly appreciated .
This also raises questions in my head about RSS .
It acts like a itemized exporter to a certain extent , but it has no ability to provide access to the stuff not judged 'current ' by the feed operator .
It would certainly be nice if there was some standard mechanism to pull items from sites in a logical fashion that permitted archival access .
Pulling the whole page when the page is merely a grouping of smaller logical items is messy .
( slashdot comment interface , along with much else of the site , has apparently gone straight to hell in the time I 've not been using the site directly .
yay anti-intuitive interfaces !
buttons that do n't do what they say , unlabeled form fields , hidden controls , its just like windoze now , wheee )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Add NetNewsWire to the list of buggy programs.
Granted, I was one version behind current, but that's only because they changed the location of the updates so the automatic update function was silently failing rather than telling me a new version existed.I had my retention set for 1000 days after a news item is removed from the RSS feed.
That might sound excessive, but when I flag things to go back to, I don't want to have some artificial deadline set for when I must get back to it.
If there was a 'forever' option, I would have picked it.
With a number of active feeds, such as /., that quickly grew to over 18000 items since I started using it in April of last year.When midnight hit, I heard quite the churning from my computer, which was dismissed as a number of cron jobs having a party.
Also, I was more preoccupied with my party, watching fireworks and drinking scotch.
A couple hours later I sat down at my desk and noticed the unread count being displayed rather considerably lower (I don't keep up with every feed, so it was up to 4 digits, but now was down to 2 digits).
I scanned over a few feeds and noticed that nothing older than a few days existed in most except those that keep items in the feed for a long time, which tend to be low activity feeds.
As best I can tell, its date handling code figured that 2010/01/01 - 2009/12/31 &gt; 1000, so it proceeded to purge ALL new items not still in an active RSS feed.
Shit....I had a backup from mid November, but that was it.
This isn't something that goes under any of the normal backups, but it probably should have.
Hindsight and all that.
Ironically, NetNewsWire backups up its data to some extent, too bad its not useful.
The feeds are stored in plists, which are loosely structured XML files for those not familiar with OS X, which means flat files of several megabytes for active feeds.
Those files are NOT backed up.
What is backed up is the list of feeds, something that could be recreated by parsing the first few lines of each feed 'database', but apparently that's the important part because it keeps several dozen copies of this file in the backups directory, despite it not changing between any of the copies.I'm fairly convinced now that more thought was put into the ability to deliver ads (take it from commercial, to free to get users, then to adware to spray ads at those that are hooked and have their data trapped with no export function for anything but the list of feeds) than to any functional aspect.
That, or the programmers are simply retarded.
Well, guess what?
I'm not locked in anymore because I have no data worth retaining.
The most relevant articles are the most recent, and those are what is gone (the last 6-7 weeks).
So I jumped ship, all new stuff goes elsewhere.
If anyone should happen to have feeds data from /.
and Ars Technica for Nov-Dec 2009, in NetNewsWire files or any other format, that would care to share it that would be greatly appreciated.
This also raises questions in my head about RSS.
It acts like a itemized exporter to a certain extent, but it has no ability to provide access to the stuff not judged 'current' by the feed operator.
It would certainly be nice if there was some standard mechanism to pull items from sites in a logical fashion that permitted archival access.
Pulling the whole page when the page is merely a grouping of smaller logical items is messy.
(slashdot comment interface, along with much else of the site, has apparently gone straight to hell in the time I've not been using the site directly.
yay anti-intuitive interfaces!
buttons that don't do what they say, unlabeled form fields, hidden controls, its just like windoze now, wheee)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666550</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262808840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait until Dec. 31, 9999. Watch as people panic about there being 5 digits in the year and how programs were only written to accommodate  4 digit years for the past 8000 years!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait until Dec. 31 , 9999 .
Watch as people panic about there being 5 digits in the year and how programs were only written to accommodate 4 digit years for the past 8000 years !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait until Dec. 31, 9999.
Watch as people panic about there being 5 digits in the year and how programs were only written to accommodate  4 digit years for the past 8000 years!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668962</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>sgtrock</author>
	<datestamp>1262790600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, much of the international dateline is over the Pacific Ocean where land masses tend to be really small, few, and very far between.  Depending upon where the jets were when the incident happened, I can see where a navigational systems crash may have meant attempting a water landing in an aircraft not exactly designed for it.</p><p>Amelia Earhart isn't the only one to end up in the drink, after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , much of the international dateline is over the Pacific Ocean where land masses tend to be really small , few , and very far between .
Depending upon where the jets were when the incident happened , I can see where a navigational systems crash may have meant attempting a water landing in an aircraft not exactly designed for it.Amelia Earhart is n't the only one to end up in the drink , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, much of the international dateline is over the Pacific Ocean where land masses tend to be really small, few, and very far between.
Depending upon where the jets were when the incident happened, I can see where a navigational systems crash may have meant attempting a water landing in an aircraft not exactly designed for it.Amelia Earhart isn't the only one to end up in the drink, after all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667218</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>gmack</author>
	<datestamp>1262774700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you explain this bug from spamassassin?</p><p>X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=6.1 required=4.0 tests=AWL,FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; HTML\_MESSAGE,HTML\_MIME\_NO\_HTML\_TAG,MIME\_HTML\_ONLY autolearn=disabled<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; version=3.2.5<br>X-Spam-Report:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; *  3.4 FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX The date is grossly in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you explain this bug from spamassassin ? X-Spam-Status : Yes , score = 6.1 required = 4.0 tests = AWL,FH \ _DATE \ _PAST \ _20XX ,         HTML \ _MESSAGE,HTML \ _MIME \ _NO \ _HTML \ _TAG,MIME \ _HTML \ _ONLY autolearn = disabled         version = 3.2.5X-Spam-Report :         * 3.4 FH \ _DATE \ _PAST \ _20XX The date is grossly in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you explain this bug from spamassassin?X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=6.1 required=4.0 tests=AWL,FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX,
        HTML\_MESSAGE,HTML\_MIME\_NO\_HTML\_TAG,MIME\_HTML\_ONLY autolearn=disabled
        version=3.2.5X-Spam-Report:
        *  3.4 FH\_DATE\_PAST\_20XX The date is grossly in the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666744</id>
	<title>My ThinkPad had some trouble too.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262811480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I booted it the next day the hardware clock thought it was 1987, and it couldn't mount the filesystem. In the console I eventually got to I found all my stuff was fine and the filesystem was mounted, but the firmwarewasn't seeing it. I manually the hardware clock and it hasn't had any problems since.</p><p>I was in the field when it happened, so the whole thing scared the shit out of me. I shudder thinking of what will happen come 03:14:07 UTC on Tuesday, 19 January 2038.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I booted it the next day the hardware clock thought it was 1987 , and it could n't mount the filesystem .
In the console I eventually got to I found all my stuff was fine and the filesystem was mounted , but the firmwarewas n't seeing it .
I manually the hardware clock and it has n't had any problems since.I was in the field when it happened , so the whole thing scared the shit out of me .
I shudder thinking of what will happen come 03 : 14 : 07 UTC on Tuesday , 19 January 2038 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I booted it the next day the hardware clock thought it was 1987, and it couldn't mount the filesystem.
In the console I eventually got to I found all my stuff was fine and the filesystem was mounted, but the firmwarewasn't seeing it.
I manually the hardware clock and it hasn't had any problems since.I was in the field when it happened, so the whole thing scared the shit out of me.
I shudder thinking of what will happen come 03:14:07 UTC on Tuesday, 19 January 2038.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667450</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262777220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That&rsquo;s more of a C programmer&rsquo;s disease. Because it came with next to no libraries. I mean, the environment is not even developed to a point where basic memory management has a sensible abstraction from hardware. (No, you don&rsquo;t need to hand-roll that. You just need to think harder, on how to generalize that thing.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That    s more of a C programmer    s disease .
Because it came with next to no libraries .
I mean , the environment is not even developed to a point where basic memory management has a sensible abstraction from hardware .
( No , you don    t need to hand-roll that .
You just need to think harder , on how to generalize that thing .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That’s more of a C programmer’s disease.
Because it came with next to no libraries.
I mean, the environment is not even developed to a point where basic memory management has a sensible abstraction from hardware.
(No, you don’t need to hand-roll that.
You just need to think harder, on how to generalize that thing.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30675832</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1262776560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many hardware RTCs actually use unix time anyway? the last one I dealt with stored years (2 digit!), months, days, hours minuites and seconds (I think there may have been another field too for smaller time units, not sure offhand).</p><p>Besides hardware RTCs usually wrap in a sane way so you can postpone the bug or reduce it to a bug that only happens if the system is left turned off for insane lengths of time fairly easilly.</p><p>The difficult bit with the 2038 bug is dealing with things like file formats, network protocols, library binary interfaces etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many hardware RTCs actually use unix time anyway ?
the last one I dealt with stored years ( 2 digit !
) , months , days , hours minuites and seconds ( I think there may have been another field too for smaller time units , not sure offhand ) .Besides hardware RTCs usually wrap in a sane way so you can postpone the bug or reduce it to a bug that only happens if the system is left turned off for insane lengths of time fairly easilly.The difficult bit with the 2038 bug is dealing with things like file formats , network protocols , library binary interfaces etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many hardware RTCs actually use unix time anyway?
the last one I dealt with stored years (2 digit!
), months, days, hours minuites and seconds (I think there may have been another field too for smaller time units, not sure offhand).Besides hardware RTCs usually wrap in a sane way so you can postpone the bug or reduce it to a bug that only happens if the system is left turned off for insane lengths of time fairly easilly.The difficult bit with the 2038 bug is dealing with things like file formats, network protocols, library binary interfaces etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669110</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262791380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are reasons of business and budget that trump incompetence, but your post reminded me of a story.</p><p>Technical background: I worked in VAX/VMS, where dates were stored as binary but commonly displayed as dd-mmm-yyyy, such as "01-Jan-2000".</p><p>Once upon a time, there was an Oracle DBA, whose primary claim to fame was being female and good looking in a line of work where such attributes were uncommon.  She applied for a job in my IT department and we interviewed her.  Although we found her visually refreshing, her technical skills were lacking. So I promoted an existing staff member into the DBA position.  The candidate we passed on landed at a nearby IT shop.  Later on, we had a collaborative project with that other IT group.  My DBA (the one I promoted) drops into my office...</p><p><i>DBA: "You gotta see this!  Remember Ms. xxxxxx?  You were right.  She built a database where all of the date fields are STRINGS!"</i></p><p><i>[DBA goes on an on about how wrong that is, but misses the real implications]</i></p><p><i>ME: "Do you know what the funny part of this is?"</i></p><p><i>DBA: "No."</i></p><p><i>ME: "She just made April Fools Day the first day of the year.  In fact, years don't matter all that much, since they are relegated to the tail end of the string.  Any select statement that sorts by one of those string/date fields is going to give you some fascinating results!  As of now, the calendar is April, August, December...."</i></p><p><i>[Laughter for the rest of the afternoon]</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are reasons of business and budget that trump incompetence , but your post reminded me of a story.Technical background : I worked in VAX/VMS , where dates were stored as binary but commonly displayed as dd-mmm-yyyy , such as " 01-Jan-2000 " .Once upon a time , there was an Oracle DBA , whose primary claim to fame was being female and good looking in a line of work where such attributes were uncommon .
She applied for a job in my IT department and we interviewed her .
Although we found her visually refreshing , her technical skills were lacking .
So I promoted an existing staff member into the DBA position .
The candidate we passed on landed at a nearby IT shop .
Later on , we had a collaborative project with that other IT group .
My DBA ( the one I promoted ) drops into my office...DBA : " You got ta see this !
Remember Ms. xxxxxx ? You were right .
She built a database where all of the date fields are STRINGS !
" [ DBA goes on an on about how wrong that is , but misses the real implications ] ME : " Do you know what the funny part of this is ?
" DBA : " No .
" ME : " She just made April Fools Day the first day of the year .
In fact , years do n't matter all that much , since they are relegated to the tail end of the string .
Any select statement that sorts by one of those string/date fields is going to give you some fascinating results !
As of now , the calendar is April , August , December.... " [ Laughter for the rest of the afternoon ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are reasons of business and budget that trump incompetence, but your post reminded me of a story.Technical background: I worked in VAX/VMS, where dates were stored as binary but commonly displayed as dd-mmm-yyyy, such as "01-Jan-2000".Once upon a time, there was an Oracle DBA, whose primary claim to fame was being female and good looking in a line of work where such attributes were uncommon.
She applied for a job in my IT department and we interviewed her.
Although we found her visually refreshing, her technical skills were lacking.
So I promoted an existing staff member into the DBA position.
The candidate we passed on landed at a nearby IT shop.
Later on, we had a collaborative project with that other IT group.
My DBA (the one I promoted) drops into my office...DBA: "You gotta see this!
Remember Ms. xxxxxx?  You were right.
She built a database where all of the date fields are STRINGS!
"[DBA goes on an on about how wrong that is, but misses the real implications]ME: "Do you know what the funny part of this is?
"DBA: "No.
"ME: "She just made April Fools Day the first day of the year.
In fact, years don't matter all that much, since they are relegated to the tail end of the string.
Any select statement that sorts by one of those string/date fields is going to give you some fascinating results!
As of now, the calendar is April, August, December...."[Laughter for the rest of the afternoon]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668756</id>
	<title>I can certainly vouch for this.</title>
	<author>gorzek</author>
	<datestamp>1262789280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work for a software company that's been in business since 1978. The product I work on is a real-time pharmacy benefit adjudication system, so it has to be up 24/7. They had one guy do Y2K fixes back in '99, and he retired last summer without telling anyone his Y2K "solution" was to just add 100 to any data containing a year. With the way this software works, that was fine--until 2010. Something tells me the timing of his retirement wasn't coincidental!

It wasn't hard to fix, but some people took really absurd shortcuts fixing Y2K bugs, when there are plenty of ways to do it that are just as simple and won't break after 10 years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a software company that 's been in business since 1978 .
The product I work on is a real-time pharmacy benefit adjudication system , so it has to be up 24/7 .
They had one guy do Y2K fixes back in '99 , and he retired last summer without telling anyone his Y2K " solution " was to just add 100 to any data containing a year .
With the way this software works , that was fine--until 2010 .
Something tells me the timing of his retirement was n't coincidental !
It was n't hard to fix , but some people took really absurd shortcuts fixing Y2K bugs , when there are plenty of ways to do it that are just as simple and wo n't break after 10 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a software company that's been in business since 1978.
The product I work on is a real-time pharmacy benefit adjudication system, so it has to be up 24/7.
They had one guy do Y2K fixes back in '99, and he retired last summer without telling anyone his Y2K "solution" was to just add 100 to any data containing a year.
With the way this software works, that was fine--until 2010.
Something tells me the timing of his retirement wasn't coincidental!
It wasn't hard to fix, but some people took really absurd shortcuts fixing Y2K bugs, when there are plenty of ways to do it that are just as simple and won't break after 10 years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670576</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262797500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think alot of that could be from VB programmers. Dear lord, the crap that VB puts you through. Locale specific date formatting and such is a bitch. And some people still do some batch programming. The horror.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think alot of that could be from VB programmers .
Dear lord , the crap that VB puts you through .
Locale specific date formatting and such is a bitch .
And some people still do some batch programming .
The horror .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think alot of that could be from VB programmers.
Dear lord, the crap that VB puts you through.
Locale specific date formatting and such is a bitch.
And some people still do some batch programming.
The horror.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666538</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262808660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is because they let people that shouldn't be anywhere near a production system write software.</p><p>Almost all of these issues can be attributed to developers rolling their own date handling functions or misusing built-in functions.</p><p>I'd blame some of it on retarded user interfaces that accept two digit year values.</p><p>DO NOT REINVENT THE WHEEL!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is because they let people that should n't be anywhere near a production system write software.Almost all of these issues can be attributed to developers rolling their own date handling functions or misusing built-in functions.I 'd blame some of it on retarded user interfaces that accept two digit year values.DO NOT REINVENT THE WHEEL !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is because they let people that shouldn't be anywhere near a production system write software.Almost all of these issues can be attributed to developers rolling their own date handling functions or misusing built-in functions.I'd blame some of it on retarded user interfaces that accept two digit year values.DO NOT REINVENT THE WHEEL!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666828</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>HuckleCom</author>
	<datestamp>1262769600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The -REAL- Y2K is the unix epoch - where HARDWARE base storage chips that keep time (really just a count of all the seconds since the beginning of the epoc) will essentially overflow because they can't store a number that large.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The -REAL- Y2K is the unix epoch - where HARDWARE base storage chips that keep time ( really just a count of all the seconds since the beginning of the epoc ) will essentially overflow because they ca n't store a number that large .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The -REAL- Y2K is the unix epoch - where HARDWARE base storage chips that keep time (really just a count of all the seconds since the beginning of the epoc) will essentially overflow because they can't store a number that large.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666854</id>
	<title>Weird</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262769960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I live in Germany and didn't notice a single problem with our cards. Granted we replaced ours a couple months ago due to another issue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in Germany and did n't notice a single problem with our cards .
Granted we replaced ours a couple months ago due to another issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in Germany and didn't notice a single problem with our cards.
Granted we replaced ours a couple months ago due to another issue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669254</id>
	<title>Re:My ThinkPad had some trouble too.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262792160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I shudder thinking of what will happen come 03:14:07 UTC on Tuesday, 19 January 2038.</p></div><p>Free pie gives you the shakes too?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I shudder thinking of what will happen come 03 : 14 : 07 UTC on Tuesday , 19 January 2038.Free pie gives you the shakes too ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I shudder thinking of what will happen come 03:14:07 UTC on Tuesday, 19 January 2038.Free pie gives you the shakes too?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670632</id>
	<title>Re:What's the main bug?</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1262797740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 2-digit year &ldquo;09&rdquo; (2009) is 0000 1001 in either binary or BCD. So when you reverse-engineer the BCD date field, you assume it&rsquo;s a binary number when in fact it&rsquo;s BCD (and you should have looked it up, instead of assuming this).</p><p>Then you get to year &ldquo;10&rdquo; (2010), which is 0001 0000 in BCD, not 0000 1010 as you expected. 0001 0000 is binary for decimal 16. Welcome to year 2016.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 2-digit year    09    ( 2009 ) is 0000 1001 in either binary or BCD .
So when you reverse-engineer the BCD date field , you assume it    s a binary number when in fact it    s BCD ( and you should have looked it up , instead of assuming this ) .Then you get to year    10    ( 2010 ) , which is 0001 0000 in BCD , not 0000 1010 as you expected .
0001 0000 is binary for decimal 16 .
Welcome to year 2016 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 2-digit year “09” (2009) is 0000 1001 in either binary or BCD.
So when you reverse-engineer the BCD date field, you assume it’s a binary number when in fact it’s BCD (and you should have looked it up, instead of assuming this).Then you get to year “10” (2010), which is 0001 0000 in BCD, not 0000 1010 as you expected.
0001 0000 is binary for decimal 16.
Welcome to year 2016.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669152</id>
	<title>Got hit by this one myself</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1262791620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SunPCi cards are essentially x86 PC blades designed to be plugged into a PCI slot on a Sun SPARC machine.  I use a SunPCi III in the Sun Blade 1500 (SPARC desktop) I have on my desk to run software I have to run that requires Windows.  This Monday, I fired it up and got told by the driver software that my system date was in the future because "I can't believe it's really" 2010 (the exact words of the error message!).  Looking at the Sun forum message traffic, apparently *everybody* with a SunPCi III card is getting this.  Sun's supposed to be working on a patch now.  Right now the only workaround is to set your system clock back to 2009 when you fire up the SunPCi card (you can set it back to correct after it starts).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SunPCi cards are essentially x86 PC blades designed to be plugged into a PCI slot on a Sun SPARC machine .
I use a SunPCi III in the Sun Blade 1500 ( SPARC desktop ) I have on my desk to run software I have to run that requires Windows .
This Monday , I fired it up and got told by the driver software that my system date was in the future because " I ca n't believe it 's really " 2010 ( the exact words of the error message ! ) .
Looking at the Sun forum message traffic , apparently * everybody * with a SunPCi III card is getting this .
Sun 's supposed to be working on a patch now .
Right now the only workaround is to set your system clock back to 2009 when you fire up the SunPCi card ( you can set it back to correct after it starts ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SunPCi cards are essentially x86 PC blades designed to be plugged into a PCI slot on a Sun SPARC machine.
I use a SunPCi III in the Sun Blade 1500 (SPARC desktop) I have on my desk to run software I have to run that requires Windows.
This Monday, I fired it up and got told by the driver software that my system date was in the future because "I can't believe it's really" 2010 (the exact words of the error message!).
Looking at the Sun forum message traffic, apparently *everybody* with a SunPCi III card is getting this.
Sun's supposed to be working on a patch now.
Right now the only workaround is to set your system clock back to 2009 when you fire up the SunPCi card (you can set it back to correct after it starts).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262809080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
100\% incompetence.
</p><p>
I would bet all the money I have that 99.99\% of these problems are caused by people not taking the time to learn the standard library of whatever programming language they're using.  For some reason there's a gut instinct among programmers that they have to write all date processing code themselves.  I can think of 4 separate occasions, off the top of my head, where I've replaced dozens of lines of sketchy, hand roled, date formatting code with a single call to <a href="http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=strftime&amp;apropos=0&amp;sektion=0&amp;manpath=FreeBSD+8.0-RELEASE&amp;format=html" title="freebsd.org">strftime.</a> [freebsd.org]
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>100 \ % incompetence .
I would bet all the money I have that 99.99 \ % of these problems are caused by people not taking the time to learn the standard library of whatever programming language they 're using .
For some reason there 's a gut instinct among programmers that they have to write all date processing code themselves .
I can think of 4 separate occasions , off the top of my head , where I 've replaced dozens of lines of sketchy , hand roled , date formatting code with a single call to strftime .
[ freebsd.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
100\% incompetence.
I would bet all the money I have that 99.99\% of these problems are caused by people not taking the time to learn the standard library of whatever programming language they're using.
For some reason there's a gut instinct among programmers that they have to write all date processing code themselves.
I can think of 4 separate occasions, off the top of my head, where I've replaced dozens of lines of sketchy, hand roled, date formatting code with a single call to strftime.
[freebsd.org]
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666644</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>Evil Shabazz</author>
	<datestamp>1262810040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>At the Bank of Germany, we're not happy until you're not happy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At the Bank of Germany , we 're not happy until you 're not happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the Bank of Germany, we're not happy until you're not happy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667420</id>
	<title>Another bug</title>
	<author>lagfest</author>
	<datestamp>1262776980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All the parking ticket dispensers in copenhagen also bugged out. <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&amp;prev=\_t&amp;hl=en&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;layout=1&amp;eotf=1&amp;u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fwww.berlingske.dk\%2Fkoebenhavn\%2Fparkeringsautomater-afviser-dankort&amp;sl=da&amp;tl=en" title="google.com">http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&amp;prev=\_t&amp;hl=en&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;layout=1&amp;eotf=1&amp;u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fwww.berlingske.dk\%2Fkoebenhavn\%2Fparkeringsautomater-afviser-dankort&amp;sl=da&amp;tl=en</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All the parking ticket dispensers in copenhagen also bugged out .
http : //translate.google.com/translate ? js = y&amp;prev = \ _t&amp;hl = en&amp;ie = UTF-8&amp;layout = 1&amp;eotf = 1&amp;u = http \ % 3A \ % 2F \ % 2Fwww.berlingske.dk \ % 2Fkoebenhavn \ % 2Fparkeringsautomater-afviser-dankort&amp;sl = da&amp;tl = en [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the parking ticket dispensers in copenhagen also bugged out.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&amp;prev=\_t&amp;hl=en&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;layout=1&amp;eotf=1&amp;u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fwww.berlingske.dk\%2Fkoebenhavn\%2Fparkeringsautomater-afviser-dankort&amp;sl=da&amp;tl=en [google.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670420</id>
	<title>Re:My ThinkPad had some trouble too.</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1262797080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd be more tempted to blame that on a failing CMOS battery than 2010.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be more tempted to blame that on a failing CMOS battery than 2010 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be more tempted to blame that on a failing CMOS battery than 2010.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667074</id>
	<title>What's the main bug?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262772720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"This is no coincidence, according to comments on sites discussing the issue. 2010 represented as a binary coded decimal is being interpreted by other devices as hexadecimal, which translates 2010 to 2016"</p><p>Last time I checked 2010 in binary was 11111011010 and 2016 in hex was 0x7E0.</p><p>Am I missing something?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" This is no coincidence , according to comments on sites discussing the issue .
2010 represented as a binary coded decimal is being interpreted by other devices as hexadecimal , which translates 2010 to 2016 " Last time I checked 2010 in binary was 11111011010 and 2016 in hex was 0x7E0.Am I missing something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This is no coincidence, according to comments on sites discussing the issue.
2010 represented as a binary coded decimal is being interpreted by other devices as hexadecimal, which translates 2010 to 2016"Last time I checked 2010 in binary was 11111011010 and 2016 in hex was 0x7E0.Am I missing something?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668282</id>
	<title>Perpetual calendar anyone ?</title>
	<author>slb</author>
	<datestamp>1262785980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Incredible that we're still keeping this outdated Gregorian Calendar instead of a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World\_Calendar" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Perpetual Calendar</a> [wikipedia.org] that would solve all these idiotic fiddling with complicated date mechanisms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Incredible that we 're still keeping this outdated Gregorian Calendar instead of a Perpetual Calendar [ wikipedia.org ] that would solve all these idiotic fiddling with complicated date mechanisms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Incredible that we're still keeping this outdated Gregorian Calendar instead of a Perpetual Calendar [wikipedia.org] that would solve all these idiotic fiddling with complicated date mechanisms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666736</id>
	<title>Check your dates</title>
	<author>madsenj37</author>
	<datestamp>1262811420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Midnight, December 31, 2010 has not happened yet.  You must mean Midnight January 1, 2010.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Midnight , December 31 , 2010 has not happened yet .
You must mean Midnight January 1 , 2010 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Midnight, December 31, 2010 has not happened yet.
You must mean Midnight January 1, 2010.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666896</id>
	<title>So Y2K...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262770560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...was simply a rounding error?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...was simply a rounding error ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...was simply a rounding error?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669496</id>
	<title>I can't believe this.</title>
	<author>hallux.sinister</author>
	<datestamp>1262793240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How hard is it to use a 4 digit decimal to represent the year?  Watch this:  Decimal 2010.  This should work until 9999 A.D., by which time, I think it's safe to say, no computer hardware or software in use now will still be in use then.
<p>
Okay, admittedly, there may be a few machines still running *NIX but... but that's really a long, long, LONG way off.
<br>~Hal</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How hard is it to use a 4 digit decimal to represent the year ?
Watch this : Decimal 2010 .
This should work until 9999 A.D. , by which time , I think it 's safe to say , no computer hardware or software in use now will still be in use then .
Okay , admittedly , there may be a few machines still running * NIX but... but that 's really a long , long , LONG way off .
~ Hal</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How hard is it to use a 4 digit decimal to represent the year?
Watch this:  Decimal 2010.
This should work until 9999 A.D., by which time, I think it's safe to say, no computer hardware or software in use now will still be in use then.
Okay, admittedly, there may be a few machines still running *NIX but... but that's really a long, long, LONG way off.
~Hal</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669712</id>
	<title>Re:It's Y2K01</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262794380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, someone made the same comment <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1496100&amp;cid=30631940" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">here</a> [slashdot.org]. Some douche no doubt jacking off to hentai completely missed the boat and argued about EEs and context. Any time that you bring it up, these morons will shoot it down saying that you should get with the times and understand their terms (even if they deprecate solid, accepted ones widely in use). These are the same morons who actually consider "blogosphere" a word.</p><p>Captcha: winers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , someone made the same comment here [ slashdot.org ] .
Some douche no doubt jacking off to hentai completely missed the boat and argued about EEs and context .
Any time that you bring it up , these morons will shoot it down saying that you should get with the times and understand their terms ( even if they deprecate solid , accepted ones widely in use ) .
These are the same morons who actually consider " blogosphere " a word.Captcha : winers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, someone made the same comment here [slashdot.org].
Some douche no doubt jacking off to hentai completely missed the boat and argued about EEs and context.
Any time that you bring it up, these morons will shoot it down saying that you should get with the times and understand their terms (even if they deprecate solid, accepted ones widely in use).
These are the same morons who actually consider "blogosphere" a word.Captcha: winers</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667108</id>
	<title>What the hell?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262773140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this some kind of job security feature?</p><p>I mean, what idiot programs a number field to be ambiguously hexadecimal or decimal? Of <em>course</em> you'll be screwed as soon as you leave the single digits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this some kind of job security feature ? I mean , what idiot programs a number field to be ambiguously hexadecimal or decimal ?
Of course you 'll be screwed as soon as you leave the single digits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this some kind of job security feature?I mean, what idiot programs a number field to be ambiguously hexadecimal or decimal?
Of course you'll be screwed as soon as you leave the single digits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670364</id>
	<title>Re:idiocy? Incompetence?</title>
	<author>mangobrain</author>
	<datestamp>1262796780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But what moron would use BCD as a format for integer storage/transmission?  It might be easier to perform certain operations with, but as a storage format it's just unnecessarily wasteful.  Given that plain old binary can store greater ranges with the same number of bytes, I'm struggling to think of any reason why any protocol or file format needing a fixed width integer field should use BCD instead.</p><p>If you can present a modern valid use case, please do; but my current impression is that BCD smells of obsolescence.  (Needing to work with existing file formats/protocols doesn't count; whoever designed the format/protocol in the first place had better have a good reason for doing it that way.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But what moron would use BCD as a format for integer storage/transmission ?
It might be easier to perform certain operations with , but as a storage format it 's just unnecessarily wasteful .
Given that plain old binary can store greater ranges with the same number of bytes , I 'm struggling to think of any reason why any protocol or file format needing a fixed width integer field should use BCD instead.If you can present a modern valid use case , please do ; but my current impression is that BCD smells of obsolescence .
( Needing to work with existing file formats/protocols does n't count ; whoever designed the format/protocol in the first place had better have a good reason for doing it that way .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what moron would use BCD as a format for integer storage/transmission?
It might be easier to perform certain operations with, but as a storage format it's just unnecessarily wasteful.
Given that plain old binary can store greater ranges with the same number of bytes, I'm struggling to think of any reason why any protocol or file format needing a fixed width integer field should use BCD instead.If you can present a modern valid use case, please do; but my current impression is that BCD smells of obsolescence.
(Needing to work with existing file formats/protocols doesn't count; whoever designed the format/protocol in the first place had better have a good reason for doing it that way.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669866</id>
	<title>OK, OK, OK, OK.  Let me say this one thing.</title>
	<author>WheelDweller</author>
	<datestamp>1262795100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The unix idea of one-second-per-integer-count sure looks good now, doesn't it?  No wasting time with hex, no fiddling to learn how now+1,000,000 seconds would be....and all we have to do is enlarge the number incremented to continue the smooth operation.</p><p>Can't we all agree on any ONE thing, like this well-documented, clearly laid-out concept?  Doesn't 'simple' work well over time?</p><p>I'm just saying...inventing shorter-sighted, count-only-years plans are less than this, and they don't work that long. Let's agree one this one thing and never look back to Y2K again, aye?</p><p>PS: I'm well aware of unix apps the eschew system-time and invent calendars of their own. It's also what I'm talking about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The unix idea of one-second-per-integer-count sure looks good now , does n't it ?
No wasting time with hex , no fiddling to learn how now + 1,000,000 seconds would be....and all we have to do is enlarge the number incremented to continue the smooth operation.Ca n't we all agree on any ONE thing , like this well-documented , clearly laid-out concept ?
Does n't 'simple ' work well over time ? I 'm just saying...inventing shorter-sighted , count-only-years plans are less than this , and they do n't work that long .
Let 's agree one this one thing and never look back to Y2K again , aye ? PS : I 'm well aware of unix apps the eschew system-time and invent calendars of their own .
It 's also what I 'm talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The unix idea of one-second-per-integer-count sure looks good now, doesn't it?
No wasting time with hex, no fiddling to learn how now+1,000,000 seconds would be....and all we have to do is enlarge the number incremented to continue the smooth operation.Can't we all agree on any ONE thing, like this well-documented, clearly laid-out concept?
Doesn't 'simple' work well over time?I'm just saying...inventing shorter-sighted, count-only-years plans are less than this, and they don't work that long.
Let's agree one this one thing and never look back to Y2K again, aye?PS: I'm well aware of unix apps the eschew system-time and invent calendars of their own.
It's also what I'm talking about.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30671518</id>
	<title>Re:It's Y2K01</title>
	<author>vettemph</author>
	<datestamp>1262801100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My credit card ends in the digits 9090. I pronouce it "ninety ninety".<br>My wife says it is "nine oh nine oh", (...as in the Mork greeting) and gives the hand guesture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My credit card ends in the digits 9090 .
I pronouce it " ninety ninety " .My wife says it is " nine oh nine oh " , ( ...as in the Mork greeting ) and gives the hand guesture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My credit card ends in the digits 9090.
I pronouce it "ninety ninety".My wife says it is "nine oh nine oh", (...as in the Mork greeting) and gives the hand guesture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669398</id>
	<title>Symantec has a minor but annoying bug</title>
	<author>Nimey</author>
	<datestamp>1262792820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SEP11 has a rather stupid bug that causes it to not update its virus-definition datestamp past 20091231.  The definitions continue to be updated, but the program complains to the user that it's out of date, and so they panic and bother us until the dumbass Symantec engineers get around to fixing whatever the bug is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SEP11 has a rather stupid bug that causes it to not update its virus-definition datestamp past 20091231 .
The definitions continue to be updated , but the program complains to the user that it 's out of date , and so they panic and bother us until the dumbass Symantec engineers get around to fixing whatever the bug is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SEP11 has a rather stupid bug that causes it to not update its virus-definition datestamp past 20091231.
The definitions continue to be updated, but the program complains to the user that it's out of date, and so they panic and bother us until the dumbass Symantec engineers get around to fixing whatever the bug is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667882</id>
	<title>Im pissed!</title>
	<author>chucklebutte</author>
	<datestamp>1262782140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With all the shit we swallowed when they shoveled that Y2K shit down our throats and not a peep about this? No mass fucking hysteria? Seriously fuck you assholes that run the world!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With all the shit we swallowed when they shoveled that Y2K shit down our throats and not a peep about this ?
No mass fucking hysteria ?
Seriously fuck you assholes that run the world !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With all the shit we swallowed when they shoveled that Y2K shit down our throats and not a peep about this?
No mass fucking hysteria?
Seriously fuck you assholes that run the world!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30677044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30671310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30672238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30671518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30675422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30671260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30674968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30675832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30775876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_0343252_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668282
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669152
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30671310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668118
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666828
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30675832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666550
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30671260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666538
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667674
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670506
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669848
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670364
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670922
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30775876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666572
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667234
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30675422
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670576
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667218
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668622
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667450
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666552
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666644
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30674968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30671518
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668510
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667108
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30672238
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670632
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30677044
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30668756
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30669254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30670420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30667394
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_0343252.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_0343252.30666466
</commentlist>
</conversation>
