<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_07_1327232</id>
	<title>2010 Bug Plagues Germany</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1262872020000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>krou writes <i>"According the Guardian, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/06/2010-bug-millions-germans">some 30 million chip and pin cards in Germany have been affected by a programming failure</a>, which saw the microchips in cards unable to recognize the year change. The bug has left millions of credit and debit card users unable to withdraw money or make purchases, and has stranded many on holiday. French card manufacturer Gemalto accepted responsibility for the fault, 'which it is estimated will cost &euro;300m (&pound;270m) to rectify.' They claim cards in other countries made by Gemalto are unaffected."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>krou writes " According the Guardian , some 30 million chip and pin cards in Germany have been affected by a programming failure , which saw the microchips in cards unable to recognize the year change .
The bug has left millions of credit and debit card users unable to withdraw money or make purchases , and has stranded many on holiday .
French card manufacturer Gemalto accepted responsibility for the fault , 'which it is estimated will cost    300m (   270m ) to rectify .
' They claim cards in other countries made by Gemalto are unaffected .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>krou writes "According the Guardian, some 30 million chip and pin cards in Germany have been affected by a programming failure, which saw the microchips in cards unable to recognize the year change.
The bug has left millions of credit and debit card users unable to withdraw money or make purchases, and has stranded many on holiday.
French card manufacturer Gemalto accepted responsibility for the fault, 'which it is estimated will cost €300m (£270m) to rectify.
' They claim cards in other countries made by Gemalto are unaffected.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684024</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>The Flymaster</author>
	<datestamp>1262886360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What time was it one second after 915148800? Unix time hardly solves all problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What time was it one second after 915148800 ?
Unix time hardly solves all problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What time was it one second after 915148800?
Unix time hardly solves all problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724</id>
	<title>They had to Queue?</title>
	<author>HiChris!</author>
	<datestamp>1262876100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Although some cash machines were quickly reconfigured to override the 2010 problem, many bank customers were forced to queue to withdraw cash over the counter. Germany's economics minister, Rainer Br&#252;derle, urged banks to 'ensure that credit and bank cards function without problem as soon as possible, or to replace them immediately'."

My gosh standing in line to get money is so 1980</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Although some cash machines were quickly reconfigured to override the 2010 problem , many bank customers were forced to queue to withdraw cash over the counter .
Germany 's economics minister , Rainer Br   derle , urged banks to 'ensure that credit and bank cards function without problem as soon as possible , or to replace them immediately' .
" My gosh standing in line to get money is so 1980</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Although some cash machines were quickly reconfigured to override the 2010 problem, many bank customers were forced to queue to withdraw cash over the counter.
Germany's economics minister, Rainer Brüderle, urged banks to 'ensure that credit and bank cards function without problem as soon as possible, or to replace them immediately'.
"

My gosh standing in line to get money is so 1980</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681924</id>
	<title>Re:Revenge at last</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1262877420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfair. Mice bathe way more often.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfair .
Mice bathe way more often .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfair.
Mice bathe way more often.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685944</id>
	<title>It's the Year 200A</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262894220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally time to release C++0x?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally time to release C + + 0x ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally time to release C++0x?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683818</id>
	<title>Yup, Symantec even has a Y2010 bug...</title>
	<author>MufasaZX</author>
	<datestamp>1262885640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Starting on 1/1/2010 Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager v11, the software that pulls down updates from Symantec and pushes them out to all the client systems, started repeatedly downloading the same virus def over and over and stashing them in randomly named temp folders on the C drive at the rate of about 1GB/hour.  Party.  Lots of folks on the Symantec support forms are experiencing the issue.  Purging the temp folders and upgrading to the recently released v11 RU5 fixes the problem, but those without current support contracts to get the updates would be kinda screwed...<br>
<br>
-c</htmltext>
<tokenext>Starting on 1/1/2010 Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager v11 , the software that pulls down updates from Symantec and pushes them out to all the client systems , started repeatedly downloading the same virus def over and over and stashing them in randomly named temp folders on the C drive at the rate of about 1GB/hour .
Party. Lots of folks on the Symantec support forms are experiencing the issue .
Purging the temp folders and upgrading to the recently released v11 RU5 fixes the problem , but those without current support contracts to get the updates would be kinda screwed.. . -c</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Starting on 1/1/2010 Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager v11, the software that pulls down updates from Symantec and pushes them out to all the client systems, started repeatedly downloading the same virus def over and over and stashing them in randomly named temp folders on the C drive at the rate of about 1GB/hour.
Party.  Lots of folks on the Symantec support forms are experiencing the issue.
Purging the temp folders and upgrading to the recently released v11 RU5 fixes the problem, but those without current support contracts to get the updates would be kinda screwed...

-c</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682040</id>
	<title>Re:They had to Queue?</title>
	<author>Rogerborg</author>
	<datestamp>1262878020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed. However, the number of actual humans available to hand out cash - and the amount of cash that they have available to hand out - are at reduced 2010 levels.

</p><p>I suspect that you wouldn't be so sanguine if mommy sent you out from the basement to get cash, and you were stuck at the back of the queue and wondering if you were going to be able to withdraw enough for your next bag of weed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed .
However , the number of actual humans available to hand out cash - and the amount of cash that they have available to hand out - are at reduced 2010 levels .
I suspect that you would n't be so sanguine if mommy sent you out from the basement to get cash , and you were stuck at the back of the queue and wondering if you were going to be able to withdraw enough for your next bag of weed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed.
However, the number of actual humans available to hand out cash - and the amount of cash that they have available to hand out - are at reduced 2010 levels.
I suspect that you wouldn't be so sanguine if mommy sent you out from the basement to get cash, and you were stuck at the back of the queue and wondering if you were going to be able to withdraw enough for your next bag of weed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685174</id>
	<title>Re:Unix epoch does not have to end in 2038</title>
	<author>Rolgar</author>
	<datestamp>1262890920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10\_64bit.html" title="adobe.com">Here it is.</a> [adobe.com] Unfortunately, I think there is plenty of non compatible hardware out there that will be running 32-bit Linux for a while.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here it is .
[ adobe.com ] Unfortunately , I think there is plenty of non compatible hardware out there that will be running 32-bit Linux for a while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here it is.
[adobe.com] Unfortunately, I think there is plenty of non compatible hardware out there that will be running 32-bit Linux for a while.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685236</id>
	<title>Problems in Asia too?</title>
	<author>Dionysus</author>
	<datestamp>1262891220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just got back from a trip in Asia (Vietnam and stopover in Thailand) and had problems using my creditcard.  Wondering if it was related?  (Only brought one creditcard so had problems at some stores and the airport in Bankok)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just got back from a trip in Asia ( Vietnam and stopover in Thailand ) and had problems using my creditcard .
Wondering if it was related ?
( Only brought one creditcard so had problems at some stores and the airport in Bankok )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just got back from a trip in Asia (Vietnam and stopover in Thailand) and had problems using my creditcard.
Wondering if it was related?
(Only brought one creditcard so had problems at some stores and the airport in Bankok)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682806</id>
	<title>Suppression of costs via minimizing testing.</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1262881800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know the exact nature of the bug, but I know that in the current economic crisis, managers first and foremost look for minimizing costs. This has laid to reductions in personnel, and ultimately in testing problems: not enough people to test the software and the people that are assigned the testing job are not experienced enough to do it properly.</p><p>I experienced this personally: I worked all throughout 2009 on a project that should have been ended by the end of 2008, because the contractor has laid off several people and they were unable to fully come out with a good specification and testing of their system. Most of the errors became apparent through the testing done by us, the subcontractor. The contractor was French, by the way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know the exact nature of the bug , but I know that in the current economic crisis , managers first and foremost look for minimizing costs .
This has laid to reductions in personnel , and ultimately in testing problems : not enough people to test the software and the people that are assigned the testing job are not experienced enough to do it properly.I experienced this personally : I worked all throughout 2009 on a project that should have been ended by the end of 2008 , because the contractor has laid off several people and they were unable to fully come out with a good specification and testing of their system .
Most of the errors became apparent through the testing done by us , the subcontractor .
The contractor was French , by the way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know the exact nature of the bug, but I know that in the current economic crisis, managers first and foremost look for minimizing costs.
This has laid to reductions in personnel, and ultimately in testing problems: not enough people to test the software and the people that are assigned the testing job are not experienced enough to do it properly.I experienced this personally: I worked all throughout 2009 on a project that should have been ended by the end of 2008, because the contractor has laid off several people and they were unable to fully come out with a good specification and testing of their system.
Most of the errors became apparent through the testing done by us, the subcontractor.
The contractor was French, by the way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30687316</id>
	<title>By not hitting you</title>
	<author>Estragib</author>
	<datestamp>1262857740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I guess it hits you when you are least expecting.</p></div><p>Shouldn't that be, "It hits you when you are <em>most</em> expecting it"?</p><p>I'd reckon the unnecessary checks and public panic to have been much more expensive than EUR 300m.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it hits you when you are least expecting.Should n't that be , " It hits you when you are most expecting it " ? I 'd reckon the unnecessary checks and public panic to have been much more expensive than EUR 300m .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it hits you when you are least expecting.Shouldn't that be, "It hits you when you are most expecting it"?I'd reckon the unnecessary checks and public panic to have been much more expensive than EUR 300m.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681700</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683192</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>bickerdyke</author>
	<datestamp>1262883180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it's a freakin' integer</p></div><p>How would you know?</p><p>All you have is a blob of bytes. It's about how you interpret them. Even if you store Unix epoch in your Datastore: Who prevents 3rd party software to mis-interpret it as windows-timestamp? Or Bitmap?And thats what happened here. A byte wasn't interpreted as integer, but as BCD number. (or other way round) And no one noticed, as it worked well as long as 0x03 = 00000011 = (BCD)03 = 0000 0011</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's a freakin ' integerHow would you know ? All you have is a blob of bytes .
It 's about how you interpret them .
Even if you store Unix epoch in your Datastore : Who prevents 3rd party software to mis-interpret it as windows-timestamp ?
Or Bitmap ? And thats what happened here .
A byte was n't interpreted as integer , but as BCD number .
( or other way round ) And no one noticed , as it worked well as long as 0x03 = 00000011 = ( BCD ) 03 = 0000 0011</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's a freakin' integerHow would you know?All you have is a blob of bytes.
It's about how you interpret them.
Even if you store Unix epoch in your Datastore: Who prevents 3rd party software to mis-interpret it as windows-timestamp?
Or Bitmap?And thats what happened here.
A byte wasn't interpreted as integer, but as BCD number.
(or other way round) And no one noticed, as it worked well as long as 0x03 = 00000011 = (BCD)03 = 0000 0011
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30689652</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1262871600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What OS now days doesn't have a 64 bit time()?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What OS now days does n't have a 64 bit time ( ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What OS now days doesn't have a 64 bit time()?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681956</id>
	<title>Re:They had to Queue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262877600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Queue the stack jokes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Queue the stack jokes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Queue the stack jokes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30688692</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>gilgongo</author>
	<datestamp>1262864340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In just about any language (C, Java,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, Perl, PHP, SQL...) there are (built-in) libraries available that do time correctly. If you're unsure on how to store time, Unix epoch is just about the simplest way to store it (it's a freakin' integer), it's universally recognizable and accepted and very easy to calculate with and if you need more precision just make it a floating point number and add numbers after the comma.</p></div><p>It's human nature. You're a coder. You're writing code all day, solving problems, come up with solutions, you have pride in your work and you like to do it. Using somebody else's code to handle the thorny (and fun!) issue of dates is, well, no fun. So you don't do it. You roll your own.</p><p>And you screw it up.</p><p>If I had a fiver for every time I've been boggle-eyed seeing people sinking valuable time into writing complex bespoke solutions to issues that could be handled by just calling a couple of methods on an totally common, free library I'd be a rich man by now. Don't get me wrong, I'm not calling all coders retards - they're just proud.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In just about any language ( C , Java , .NET , Perl , PHP , SQL... ) there are ( built-in ) libraries available that do time correctly .
If you 're unsure on how to store time , Unix epoch is just about the simplest way to store it ( it 's a freakin ' integer ) , it 's universally recognizable and accepted and very easy to calculate with and if you need more precision just make it a floating point number and add numbers after the comma.It 's human nature .
You 're a coder .
You 're writing code all day , solving problems , come up with solutions , you have pride in your work and you like to do it .
Using somebody else 's code to handle the thorny ( and fun !
) issue of dates is , well , no fun .
So you do n't do it .
You roll your own.And you screw it up.If I had a fiver for every time I 've been boggle-eyed seeing people sinking valuable time into writing complex bespoke solutions to issues that could be handled by just calling a couple of methods on an totally common , free library I 'd be a rich man by now .
Do n't get me wrong , I 'm not calling all coders retards - they 're just proud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In just about any language (C, Java, .NET, Perl, PHP, SQL...) there are (built-in) libraries available that do time correctly.
If you're unsure on how to store time, Unix epoch is just about the simplest way to store it (it's a freakin' integer), it's universally recognizable and accepted and very easy to calculate with and if you need more precision just make it a floating point number and add numbers after the comma.It's human nature.
You're a coder.
You're writing code all day, solving problems, come up with solutions, you have pride in your work and you like to do it.
Using somebody else's code to handle the thorny (and fun!
) issue of dates is, well, no fun.
So you don't do it.
You roll your own.And you screw it up.If I had a fiver for every time I've been boggle-eyed seeing people sinking valuable time into writing complex bespoke solutions to issues that could be handled by just calling a couple of methods on an totally common, free library I'd be a rich man by now.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not calling all coders retards - they're just proud.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684834</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder how that is compared to the loss from</title>
	<author>boule75</author>
	<datestamp>1262889480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The estimated cost relates only to the "no-workaround" option, if all the cards were to be replaced.<br><br>By the way : Symantec Endpoint Protection is affected by a 2010 bug too. SNAC users are not happy.<br>http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/ent-security.nsf/docid/2010010308571348</htmltext>
<tokenext>The estimated cost relates only to the " no-workaround " option , if all the cards were to be replaced.By the way : Symantec Endpoint Protection is affected by a 2010 bug too .
SNAC users are not happy.http : //service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/ent-security.nsf/docid/2010010308571348</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The estimated cost relates only to the "no-workaround" option, if all the cards were to be replaced.By the way : Symantec Endpoint Protection is affected by a 2010 bug too.
SNAC users are not happy.http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/ent-security.nsf/docid/2010010308571348</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681700</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683972</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>rubycodez</author>
	<datestamp>1262886180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ah, but your happy-go-lucky thinking is exactly what causes problems.  Where do your nifty libraries get the time ultimately...from hardware battery backed clocks, which have all manner of time issues and limitations, some even only use 16 bits or less to get time from some esoteric epoch date which might be the year the thing was designed, or the year 2000 or 1970 or 1969 and some month/day.</p><p>Your GNU goodness suddenly turns to shit in those cases.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ah , but your happy-go-lucky thinking is exactly what causes problems .
Where do your nifty libraries get the time ultimately...from hardware battery backed clocks , which have all manner of time issues and limitations , some even only use 16 bits or less to get time from some esoteric epoch date which might be the year the thing was designed , or the year 2000 or 1970 or 1969 and some month/day.Your GNU goodness suddenly turns to shit in those cases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ah, but your happy-go-lucky thinking is exactly what causes problems.
Where do your nifty libraries get the time ultimately...from hardware battery backed clocks, which have all manner of time issues and limitations, some even only use 16 bits or less to get time from some esoteric epoch date which might be the year the thing was designed, or the year 2000 or 1970 or 1969 and some month/day.Your GNU goodness suddenly turns to shit in those cases.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683214</id>
	<title>Wow!</title>
	<author>Linuxmonger</author>
	<datestamp>1262883300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, somebody stood up, said it was their fault, and took responsibility - what a rare moment in the business world. I offer my gratitude and wish them well on what will undoubtedly be a perilous journey.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , somebody stood up , said it was their fault , and took responsibility - what a rare moment in the business world .
I offer my gratitude and wish them well on what will undoubtedly be a perilous journey .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, somebody stood up, said it was their fault, and took responsibility - what a rare moment in the business world.
I offer my gratitude and wish them well on what will undoubtedly be a perilous journey.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681980</id>
	<title>Easy solution . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262877780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> . . . use the magnetic strip.
</p><p>I just saw a clip on a German news channel showing a chick covering the chip on her card with a piece of clear adhesive tape.  Apparently this forces a dual card reader to use the strip.  But I wasn't listening, so I'm working, you know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
use the magnetic strip .
I just saw a clip on a German news channel showing a chick covering the chip on her card with a piece of clear adhesive tape .
Apparently this forces a dual card reader to use the strip .
But I was n't listening , so I 'm working , you know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> .
. .
use the magnetic strip.
I just saw a clip on a German news channel showing a chick covering the chip on her card with a piece of clear adhesive tape.
Apparently this forces a dual card reader to use the strip.
But I wasn't listening, so I'm working, you know.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682206</id>
	<title>This won't be fixed quickly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262878740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Gemalto accepted responsibility for the fault, 'which it is estimated will cost &euro;300m (&pound;270m) to rectify.'</p> </div><p>I hope that money isn't in a German bank...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gemalto accepted responsibility for the fault , 'which it is estimated will cost    300m (   270m ) to rectify .
' I hope that money is n't in a German bank.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gemalto accepted responsibility for the fault, 'which it is estimated will cost €300m (£270m) to rectify.
' I hope that money isn't in a German bank...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681784</id>
	<title>Re:They had to Queue?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262876520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, as in "wait in line" if you're British.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , as in " wait in line " if you 're British .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, as in "wait in line" if you're British.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682352</id>
	<title>Great day for Skimmers</title>
	<author>mseeger</author>
	<datestamp>1262879520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem lies in the advanced security mechanisms (EMV chip). The fix (currently) is to disable advanced security features (either by disabling the chip by taping it or in POS device). I can already hear the Skimmers jubilating. They will profit greatly...<br>Another problem will be that a lot of people will become wary of security features.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem lies in the advanced security mechanisms ( EMV chip ) .
The fix ( currently ) is to disable advanced security features ( either by disabling the chip by taping it or in POS device ) .
I can already hear the Skimmers jubilating .
They will profit greatly...Another problem will be that a lot of people will become wary of security features .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem lies in the advanced security mechanisms (EMV chip).
The fix (currently) is to disable advanced security features (either by disabling the chip by taping it or in POS device).
I can already hear the Skimmers jubilating.
They will profit greatly...Another problem will be that a lot of people will become wary of security features.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685126</id>
	<title>OpenVMS native time is pretty foolproof.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262890740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hi,</p><p>As an unrepentant OpenVMS fan, I have had to do some system programming dealing with<br>date/time issues.  The native timekeeping uses 64 bit integers and midnight preceding<br>November 17, 1858 as the epoch.  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVMS#Timekeeping" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVMS#Timekeeping</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Although it takes a bit of trouble converting these dates to human readable form,<br>it rules out any rollover errors until July, 31 31086 02:48:05.47.</p><p>Perhaps we should standardize on this?</p><p>Bob Dobbs</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi,As an unrepentant OpenVMS fan , I have had to do some system programming dealing withdate/time issues .
The native timekeeping uses 64 bit integers and midnight precedingNovember 17 , 1858 as the epoch .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVMS # Timekeeping [ wikipedia.org ] Although it takes a bit of trouble converting these dates to human readable form,it rules out any rollover errors until July , 31 31086 02 : 48 : 05.47.Perhaps we should standardize on this ? Bob Dobbs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi,As an unrepentant OpenVMS fan, I have had to do some system programming dealing withdate/time issues.
The native timekeeping uses 64 bit integers and midnight precedingNovember 17, 1858 as the epoch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVMS#Timekeeping [wikipedia.org]Although it takes a bit of trouble converting these dates to human readable form,it rules out any rollover errors until July, 31 31086 02:48:05.47.Perhaps we should standardize on this?Bob Dobbs</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>guruevi</author>
	<datestamp>1262878200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My question is, why the f*** so many systems have issues with their clocks. In just about any language (C, Java,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, Perl, PHP, SQL...) there are (built-in) libraries available that do time correctly. If you're unsure on how to store time, Unix epoch is just about the simplest way to store it (it's a freakin' integer), it's universally recognizable and accepted and very easy to calculate with and if you need more precision just make it a floating point number and add numbers after the comma.</p><p>I see way too many implementations where people build their own libraries to convert a string into a date format, calculate with it and back. On embedded systems it's even worse. Some hope to save some storage space and speed by building custom functions to store a time format (eg. 2010-01-07 10:50:59 pm) into an integer (201001071050591) and back simply by stripping some characters and implementing the storage part in assembler. When they decide to export to other states/countries however they now have to implement a conversion for timezones and daylight savings time and the code becomes hopelessly buggy and bloated - usually too late to fix it since they already have it out in the field. While they could've just saved time (and storage space) by just storing it as 1278024659 using an (initially) somewhat larger library.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My question is , why the f * * * so many systems have issues with their clocks .
In just about any language ( C , Java , .NET , Perl , PHP , SQL... ) there are ( built-in ) libraries available that do time correctly .
If you 're unsure on how to store time , Unix epoch is just about the simplest way to store it ( it 's a freakin ' integer ) , it 's universally recognizable and accepted and very easy to calculate with and if you need more precision just make it a floating point number and add numbers after the comma.I see way too many implementations where people build their own libraries to convert a string into a date format , calculate with it and back .
On embedded systems it 's even worse .
Some hope to save some storage space and speed by building custom functions to store a time format ( eg .
2010-01-07 10 : 50 : 59 pm ) into an integer ( 201001071050591 ) and back simply by stripping some characters and implementing the storage part in assembler .
When they decide to export to other states/countries however they now have to implement a conversion for timezones and daylight savings time and the code becomes hopelessly buggy and bloated - usually too late to fix it since they already have it out in the field .
While they could 've just saved time ( and storage space ) by just storing it as 1278024659 using an ( initially ) somewhat larger library .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My question is, why the f*** so many systems have issues with their clocks.
In just about any language (C, Java, .NET, Perl, PHP, SQL...) there are (built-in) libraries available that do time correctly.
If you're unsure on how to store time, Unix epoch is just about the simplest way to store it (it's a freakin' integer), it's universally recognizable and accepted and very easy to calculate with and if you need more precision just make it a floating point number and add numbers after the comma.I see way too many implementations where people build their own libraries to convert a string into a date format, calculate with it and back.
On embedded systems it's even worse.
Some hope to save some storage space and speed by building custom functions to store a time format (eg.
2010-01-07 10:50:59 pm) into an integer (201001071050591) and back simply by stripping some characters and implementing the storage part in assembler.
When they decide to export to other states/countries however they now have to implement a conversion for timezones and daylight savings time and the code becomes hopelessly buggy and bloated - usually too late to fix it since they already have it out in the field.
While they could've just saved time (and storage space) by just storing it as 1278024659 using an (initially) somewhat larger library.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685634</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262892960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's the 'master race' we're talking about here. Of course, irony will always bite these fools in the ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's the 'master race ' we 're talking about here .
Of course , irony will always bite these fools in the ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's the 'master race' we're talking about here.
Of course, irony will always bite these fools in the ass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682346</id>
	<title>Understandable really</title>
	<author>Chrisq</author>
	<datestamp>1262879460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean, who in the year 2000 could have predicted that a one day the <i>important</i> digit would roll over from 0, 1, 2,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... 9, and back to 0 again? Especially when you are so busy eating cheese and contemplating surrender.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , who in the year 2000 could have predicted that a one day the important digit would roll over from 0 , 1 , 2 , ... 9 , and back to 0 again ?
Especially when you are so busy eating cheese and contemplating surrender .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, who in the year 2000 could have predicted that a one day the important digit would roll over from 0, 1, 2, ... 9, and back to 0 again?
Especially when you are so busy eating cheese and contemplating surrender.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683476</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>Nicolay77</author>
	<datestamp>1262884260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Databases.</p><p>IT doesn't matter if a C program can use fancy algorithms.</p><p>It all depends on the format used to store the data in a DB. Blame the old DBAs from these systems, not the programmers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Databases.IT does n't matter if a C program can use fancy algorithms.It all depends on the format used to store the data in a DB .
Blame the old DBAs from these systems , not the programmers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Databases.IT doesn't matter if a C program can use fancy algorithms.It all depends on the format used to store the data in a DB.
Blame the old DBAs from these systems, not the programmers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30703666</id>
	<title>Latin in sig is incorrect</title>
	<author>SpammersAreScum</author>
	<datestamp>1262964120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That should be "viditur", not "vidutar"; Latin verbs don't end in -ar, but (deponent) ones do end in -ur. And, as you might guess from the "vidi" prefix, "appears" would be a more literal translation than "sounds".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That should be " viditur " , not " vidutar " ; Latin verbs do n't end in -ar , but ( deponent ) ones do end in -ur .
And , as you might guess from the " vidi " prefix , " appears " would be a more literal translation than " sounds " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That should be "viditur", not "vidutar"; Latin verbs don't end in -ar, but (deponent) ones do end in -ur.
And, as you might guess from the "vidi" prefix, "appears" would be a more literal translation than "sounds".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682070</id>
	<title>Re:Revenge at last</title>
	<author>judugrovee</author>
	<datestamp>1262878140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>65 years - you know, that's pretty fast... considering that they are french. <br>
And regarding the subtleness, the plan is almost heroic... for a french.<br>
<br>
Actually, I would like to have another nationality, cause right know, telling you that I'm German looks like as if I'm racist... <br>
Understand me, people! I couldn't get money since January 1st! We are eating our shoes over here!!! It's all desperation which brings me so far! Waargh!!!<br>
<br>
You had your revenge, please upload the <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100107-706342.html?mod=WSJ\_World\_MIDDLEHeadlinesEurope" title="wsj.com" rel="nofollow">Patch</a> [wsj.com]!!!<br>
D&#233;livrez-nous!<br>
<br>
"'a'a'aaa, Jaques, zey are crawling on zeir knees. 'ave you 'eard zem lamenting?"<br>
"Bien s&#251;r, zey are sherman."</htmltext>
<tokenext>65 years - you know , that 's pretty fast... considering that they are french .
And regarding the subtleness , the plan is almost heroic... for a french .
Actually , I would like to have another nationality , cause right know , telling you that I 'm German looks like as if I 'm racist.. . Understand me , people !
I could n't get money since January 1st !
We are eating our shoes over here ! ! !
It 's all desperation which brings me so far !
Waargh ! ! ! You had your revenge , please upload the Patch [ wsj.com ] ! ! !
D   livrez-nous ! " 'a'a'aaa , Jaques , zey are crawling on zeir knees .
'ave you 'eard zem lamenting ?
" " Bien s   r , zey are sherman .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>65 years - you know, that's pretty fast... considering that they are french.
And regarding the subtleness, the plan is almost heroic... for a french.
Actually, I would like to have another nationality, cause right know, telling you that I'm German looks like as if I'm racist... 
Understand me, people!
I couldn't get money since January 1st!
We are eating our shoes over here!!!
It's all desperation which brings me so far!
Waargh!!!

You had your revenge, please upload the Patch [wsj.com]!!!
Délivrez-nous!

"'a'a'aaa, Jaques, zey are crawling on zeir knees.
'ave you 'eard zem lamenting?
"
"Bien sûr, zey are sherman.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685046</id>
	<title>Re:Easy solution . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262890380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who would have thought that one day the magstripe will actually help us instead of always getting read out by criminals<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who would have thought that one day the magstripe will actually help us instead of always getting read out by criminals : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who would have thought that one day the magstripe will actually help us instead of always getting read out by criminals :D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681980</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684492</id>
	<title>Re:Unix epoch does not have to end in 2038</title>
	<author>PitaBred</author>
	<datestamp>1262888100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...we don't? So what is it that I'm using? The <a href="http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10\_64bit.html" title="adobe.com">Adobe alpha 64bit Linux Flash release</a> [adobe.com] really is quite stable and works well for me. It's the only platform to actually have 64bit Flash, IIRC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...we do n't ?
So what is it that I 'm using ?
The Adobe alpha 64bit Linux Flash release [ adobe.com ] really is quite stable and works well for me .
It 's the only platform to actually have 64bit Flash , IIRC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...we don't?
So what is it that I'm using?
The Adobe alpha 64bit Linux Flash release [adobe.com] really is quite stable and works well for me.
It's the only platform to actually have 64bit Flash, IIRC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682892</id>
	<title>Unix epoch does not have to end in 2038</title>
	<author>Chemisor</author>
	<datestamp>1262882040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2038 is only the limit on 32bit platforms. On a 64bit platform time\_t is 64bits, which will last "forever". We are already significantly on the way to switching to 64bit-only CPU operation, and I'm going to bet that by 2038 we'll switch completely, if only to avoid the end of time. Heck, if you could only have a working 64bit flash plugin on Linux, all Linux users would go 64bit already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2038 is only the limit on 32bit platforms .
On a 64bit platform time \ _t is 64bits , which will last " forever " .
We are already significantly on the way to switching to 64bit-only CPU operation , and I 'm going to bet that by 2038 we 'll switch completely , if only to avoid the end of time .
Heck , if you could only have a working 64bit flash plugin on Linux , all Linux users would go 64bit already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2038 is only the limit on 32bit platforms.
On a 64bit platform time\_t is 64bits, which will last "forever".
We are already significantly on the way to switching to 64bit-only CPU operation, and I'm going to bet that by 2038 we'll switch completely, if only to avoid the end of time.
Heck, if you could only have a working 64bit flash plugin on Linux, all Linux users would go 64bit already.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30686440</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262896980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Planck units since the Big Bang is the only way! Let's see: ~5.4E-44 seconds per unit, ~1.37E10 years since the Big Bang ~= 2.53E53 decimal = 2A4359FEF2C78D94A50F53B75B35AA648000000000000 hex, which should take about 180 bits to store.</p></div><p>Apart from the fact that 1.85E43 plank time/second * 86400 second/day * 365 day/year * 1.37E10 years is about 8E60 decimal that would take 200 bits.<br>You see how difficult is to deal with dates? Not even Plank unit can help if you are dumb.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Planck units since the Big Bang is the only way !
Let 's see : ~ 5.4E-44 seconds per unit , ~ 1.37E10 years since the Big Bang ~ = 2.53E53 decimal = 2A4359FEF2C78D94A50F53B75B35AA648000000000000 hex , which should take about 180 bits to store.Apart from the fact that 1.85E43 plank time/second * 86400 second/day * 365 day/year * 1.37E10 years is about 8E60 decimal that would take 200 bits.You see how difficult is to deal with dates ?
Not even Plank unit can help if you are dumb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Planck units since the Big Bang is the only way!
Let's see: ~5.4E-44 seconds per unit, ~1.37E10 years since the Big Bang ~= 2.53E53 decimal = 2A4359FEF2C78D94A50F53B75B35AA648000000000000 hex, which should take about 180 bits to store.Apart from the fact that 1.85E43 plank time/second * 86400 second/day * 365 day/year * 1.37E10 years is about 8E60 decimal that would take 200 bits.You see how difficult is to deal with dates?
Not even Plank unit can help if you are dumb.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720</id>
	<title>2010</title>
	<author>s31523</author>
	<datestamp>1262876100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who would have thought 2010 was going to be a big deal.  We just had a 2010 programming problem at work.  Everything worked great in December then in January our software simulation stopped sending the correct time to our hardware.  Turns out the simulation handles 2010 incorrectly.  We now have to set our PC clocks to 2009 until the team gets a fix out.  I bet we see more of this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who would have thought 2010 was going to be a big deal .
We just had a 2010 programming problem at work .
Everything worked great in December then in January our software simulation stopped sending the correct time to our hardware .
Turns out the simulation handles 2010 incorrectly .
We now have to set our PC clocks to 2009 until the team gets a fix out .
I bet we see more of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who would have thought 2010 was going to be a big deal.
We just had a 2010 programming problem at work.
Everything worked great in December then in January our software simulation stopped sending the correct time to our hardware.
Turns out the simulation handles 2010 incorrectly.
We now have to set our PC clocks to 2009 until the team gets a fix out.
I bet we see more of this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30689118</id>
	<title>Re:Easy solution . . .</title>
	<author>\_merlin</author>
	<datestamp>1262867040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't work.  At least in Australia, if you swipe a chip'n'PIN card on a POS terminal, it will just tell you to insert it so it can read the chip.  There may be a magic code to override this, but you'd need a service manual for each device to find out how to do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't work .
At least in Australia , if you swipe a chip'n'PIN card on a POS terminal , it will just tell you to insert it so it can read the chip .
There may be a magic code to override this , but you 'd need a service manual for each device to find out how to do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't work.
At least in Australia, if you swipe a chip'n'PIN card on a POS terminal, it will just tell you to insert it so it can read the chip.
There may be a magic code to override this, but you'd need a service manual for each device to find out how to do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681980</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30692378</id>
	<title>Re:Understandable really</title>
	<author>True Grit</author>
	<datestamp>1262948940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and contemplating surrender.</p></div><p>Good thing they didn't do that in 1781, otherwise you and I would still be having to bow to royalty...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and contemplating surrender.Good thing they did n't do that in 1781 , otherwise you and I would still be having to bow to royalty.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and contemplating surrender.Good thing they didn't do that in 1781, otherwise you and I would still be having to bow to royalty...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681700</id>
	<title>I wonder how that is compared to the loss from Y2K</title>
	<author>mapkinase</author>
	<datestamp>1262875980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>from TOA</p><blockquote><div><p>A French card manufacturer, Gemalto, admitted today it was to blame for the failure, which it is estimated will cost 300m (&pound;270m) to rectify.</p></div></blockquote><p>I wonder how does it compare to the losses from Y2K bug... I know it is hard to compare, because there was an unspecified money loss as part of unnecessary checks, difference in scale, anticipation and efforts to fix before manifestation.</p><p>I guess it hits you when you are least expecting.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>from TOAA French card manufacturer , Gemalto , admitted today it was to blame for the failure , which it is estimated will cost 300m (   270m ) to rectify.I wonder how does it compare to the losses from Y2K bug... I know it is hard to compare , because there was an unspecified money loss as part of unnecessary checks , difference in scale , anticipation and efforts to fix before manifestation.I guess it hits you when you are least expecting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from TOAA French card manufacturer, Gemalto, admitted today it was to blame for the failure, which it is estimated will cost 300m (£270m) to rectify.I wonder how does it compare to the losses from Y2K bug... I know it is hard to compare, because there was an unspecified money loss as part of unnecessary checks, difference in scale, anticipation and efforts to fix before manifestation.I guess it hits you when you are least expecting.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681636</id>
	<title>FIRST NIGGEr</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262875680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>OOk Ook eek eek oo-oo Ah AA!</htmltext>
<tokenext>OOk Ook eek eek oo-oo Ah AA !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OOk Ook eek eek oo-oo Ah AA!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30688090</id>
	<title>I think I got stung by this too.</title>
	<author>AbRASiON</author>
	<datestamp>1262861640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My bank called me 4 days ago and told me my card was 'compromised' and Mastercard had contacted Bankwest (Australia) to inform them of a list of cards with 'security issues'. It never occured to me this might be the same issue as the 2010 / 2016 one.<br>Traditionally when your bank calls you and offers a card swap over, it's a pretty quick process, however it's been 4 days and nothing so I'm thinking it's quite possible they got stung too.<br>Looks like it according to this too.<br><a href="http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/welcome-to-2016-eftpos-glitch-spreads-20100105-lqus.html?comments=19" title="brisbanetimes.com.au">http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/welcome-to-2016-eftpos-glitch-spreads-20100105-lqus.html?comments=19</a> [brisbanetimes.com.au]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My bank called me 4 days ago and told me my card was 'compromised ' and Mastercard had contacted Bankwest ( Australia ) to inform them of a list of cards with 'security issues' .
It never occured to me this might be the same issue as the 2010 / 2016 one.Traditionally when your bank calls you and offers a card swap over , it 's a pretty quick process , however it 's been 4 days and nothing so I 'm thinking it 's quite possible they got stung too.Looks like it according to this too.http : //www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/welcome-to-2016-eftpos-glitch-spreads-20100105-lqus.html ? comments = 19 [ brisbanetimes.com.au ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My bank called me 4 days ago and told me my card was 'compromised' and Mastercard had contacted Bankwest (Australia) to inform them of a list of cards with 'security issues'.
It never occured to me this might be the same issue as the 2010 / 2016 one.Traditionally when your bank calls you and offers a card swap over, it's a pretty quick process, however it's been 4 days and nothing so I'm thinking it's quite possible they got stung too.Looks like it according to this too.http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/welcome-to-2016-eftpos-glitch-spreads-20100105-lqus.html?comments=19 [brisbanetimes.com.au]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682004</id>
	<title>2-digit years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262877840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is just an "Up yours" to everyone who, after Y2K, decided "But now we won't have to worry about 4 digit years for another hundred years, so let's just use two digit years. What could be the harm?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just an " Up yours " to everyone who , after Y2K , decided " But now we wo n't have to worry about 4 digit years for another hundred years , so let 's just use two digit years .
What could be the harm ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just an "Up yours" to everyone who, after Y2K, decided "But now we won't have to worry about 4 digit years for another hundred years, so let's just use two digit years.
What could be the harm?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30687442</id>
	<title>Those who don't learn from the past.</title>
	<author>Drethon</author>
	<datestamp>1262858340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Um yeah...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um yeah.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um yeah...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30692008</id>
	<title>This is not Y2K</title>
	<author>dfuess</author>
	<datestamp>1262944020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The date jumped from 09 to 16 when the digits went from 09 tp 10. So what programmer in his right mind interprets any part of a date in HEX? Y2K was caused by programmers seeking to save space. This bug was caused by a programmer interpreting the last two digits as HEX! This was just a bonehead mistake not a space saving measure. So I really do not understand all the comparisons to Y2K. Just because they were errors in date fields does not make them the same at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The date jumped from 09 to 16 when the digits went from 09 tp 10 .
So what programmer in his right mind interprets any part of a date in HEX ?
Y2K was caused by programmers seeking to save space .
This bug was caused by a programmer interpreting the last two digits as HEX !
This was just a bonehead mistake not a space saving measure .
So I really do not understand all the comparisons to Y2K .
Just because they were errors in date fields does not make them the same at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The date jumped from 09 to 16 when the digits went from 09 tp 10.
So what programmer in his right mind interprets any part of a date in HEX?
Y2K was caused by programmers seeking to save space.
This bug was caused by a programmer interpreting the last two digits as HEX!
This was just a bonehead mistake not a space saving measure.
So I really do not understand all the comparisons to Y2K.
Just because they were errors in date fields does not make them the same at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683366</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>DeadCatX2</author>
	<datestamp>1262883840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Leap years; did you know that leap years are every 4 years, except every one hundred years, except every four hundred years?  (that's why 2000 was a leap year, but 2100 won't be)</p><p>Leap seconds.</p><p>Localization.</p><p>The libraries themselves have a storage size vs. resolution trade-off, so even Unix will have an <a href="http://xkcd.com/376/" title="xkcd.com">Epoch Fail!</a> [xkcd.com] in just a few dozen years.</p><p>The new NTP protocol is supposed to have 128 bit timestamps.  64-bit fractional second, 64-bit whole second.  This is allegedly small enough to resolve the amount of time it takes a photon to pass an electron at the speed of light, while large enough to provide unambiguous time representation until the universe goes dim.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Leap years ; did you know that leap years are every 4 years , except every one hundred years , except every four hundred years ?
( that 's why 2000 was a leap year , but 2100 wo n't be ) Leap seconds.Localization.The libraries themselves have a storage size vs. resolution trade-off , so even Unix will have an Epoch Fail !
[ xkcd.com ] in just a few dozen years.The new NTP protocol is supposed to have 128 bit timestamps .
64-bit fractional second , 64-bit whole second .
This is allegedly small enough to resolve the amount of time it takes a photon to pass an electron at the speed of light , while large enough to provide unambiguous time representation until the universe goes dim .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Leap years; did you know that leap years are every 4 years, except every one hundred years, except every four hundred years?
(that's why 2000 was a leap year, but 2100 won't be)Leap seconds.Localization.The libraries themselves have a storage size vs. resolution trade-off, so even Unix will have an Epoch Fail!
[xkcd.com] in just a few dozen years.The new NTP protocol is supposed to have 128 bit timestamps.
64-bit fractional second, 64-bit whole second.
This is allegedly small enough to resolve the amount of time it takes a photon to pass an electron at the speed of light, while large enough to provide unambiguous time representation until the universe goes dim.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683520</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My phone (HTC Touch Pro 2) or something with my service provider (Telus) has had an issue making all incoming text messages appear as though they are coming from the year 2016.<br>It's not a huge groundbreaking deal that stops me from using my phone, but any text messages I send appear to have been sent before my post new years recieved texts, making it hard to sort through and read conversations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My phone ( HTC Touch Pro 2 ) or something with my service provider ( Telus ) has had an issue making all incoming text messages appear as though they are coming from the year 2016.It 's not a huge groundbreaking deal that stops me from using my phone , but any text messages I send appear to have been sent before my post new years recieved texts , making it hard to sort through and read conversations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My phone (HTC Touch Pro 2) or something with my service provider (Telus) has had an issue making all incoming text messages appear as though they are coming from the year 2016.It's not a huge groundbreaking deal that stops me from using my phone, but any text messages I send appear to have been sent before my post new years recieved texts, making it hard to sort through and read conversations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683356</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1262883840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just another case of a PHB sticking his nose where it doesn't belong.</p><p>If someone above you on the food chain is telling you HOW to do your job, that's micromanaging, especially when you know more than they do about what you are doing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just another case of a PHB sticking his nose where it does n't belong.If someone above you on the food chain is telling you HOW to do your job , that 's micromanaging , especially when you know more than they do about what you are doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just another case of a PHB sticking his nose where it doesn't belong.If someone above you on the food chain is telling you HOW to do your job, that's micromanaging, especially when you know more than they do about what you are doing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682988</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>l0b0</author>
	<datestamp>1262882400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Planck units since the Big Bang is the only way! Let's see: ~5.4E-44 seconds per unit, ~1.37E10 years since the Big Bang ~= 2.53E53 decimal = 2A4359FEF2C78D94A50F53B75B35AA648000000000000 hex, which should take about 180 bits to store.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Planck units since the Big Bang is the only way !
Let 's see : ~ 5.4E-44 seconds per unit , ~ 1.37E10 years since the Big Bang ~ = 2.53E53 decimal = 2A4359FEF2C78D94A50F53B75B35AA648000000000000 hex , which should take about 180 bits to store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Planck units since the Big Bang is the only way!
Let's see: ~5.4E-44 seconds per unit, ~1.37E10 years since the Big Bang ~= 2.53E53 decimal = 2A4359FEF2C78D94A50F53B75B35AA648000000000000 hex, which should take about 180 bits to store.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683514</id>
	<title>I seriously do not get it.</title>
	<author>jhoegl</author>
	<datestamp>1262884440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How does code get written to misinterpret a date?  Why does code do anything to the date except to display the date or to poll data based on the date and the some how read a "10" as... "OMG MOTHERFUCKIN SNAKES ON A MOTHERFUCKIN PLANE"?

Srsly, any examples out there?  I am sure this isnt some big conspiracy, but I just cant imagine code that would shut down entire systems based on a date.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does code get written to misinterpret a date ?
Why does code do anything to the date except to display the date or to poll data based on the date and the some how read a " 10 " as... " OMG MOTHERFUCKIN SNAKES ON A MOTHERFUCKIN PLANE " ?
Srsly , any examples out there ?
I am sure this isnt some big conspiracy , but I just cant imagine code that would shut down entire systems based on a date .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does code get written to misinterpret a date?
Why does code do anything to the date except to display the date or to poll data based on the date and the some how read a "10" as... "OMG MOTHERFUCKIN SNAKES ON A MOTHERFUCKIN PLANE"?
Srsly, any examples out there?
I am sure this isnt some big conspiracy, but I just cant imagine code that would shut down entire systems based on a date.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684876</id>
	<title>Re:Revenge at last</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262889660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>But they still kept the timezone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But they still kept the timezone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But they still kept the timezone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682800</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262881800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is exactly where open source shines: Clone just the date/time/calendar part of the (GNU) standard library, and patch it so it works with your needs. Then either offer this back to GNU, and continue to clone every release. Or just use updates of the library, to carefully apply applicable patches to your fork of that part.</p><p>You avoid rolling your own custom solution (with all the huge traps inside date/time calculations), and you avoid having to depend on someone else (since you forked it, and can choose to ignore the original and its updates).</p><p>Sounds like a great deal to me.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is exactly where open source shines : Clone just the date/time/calendar part of the ( GNU ) standard library , and patch it so it works with your needs .
Then either offer this back to GNU , and continue to clone every release .
Or just use updates of the library , to carefully apply applicable patches to your fork of that part.You avoid rolling your own custom solution ( with all the huge traps inside date/time calculations ) , and you avoid having to depend on someone else ( since you forked it , and can choose to ignore the original and its updates ) .Sounds like a great deal to me .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is exactly where open source shines: Clone just the date/time/calendar part of the (GNU) standard library, and patch it so it works with your needs.
Then either offer this back to GNU, and continue to clone every release.
Or just use updates of the library, to carefully apply applicable patches to your fork of that part.You avoid rolling your own custom solution (with all the huge traps inside date/time calculations), and you avoid having to depend on someone else (since you forked it, and can choose to ignore the original and its updates).Sounds like a great deal to me.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683296</id>
	<title>Re:They had to Queue?</title>
	<author>bickerdyke</author>
	<datestamp>1262883600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Germany's economics minister, Rainer Br&#252;derle, urged banks to 'ensure that credit and bank cards function without problem as soon as possible, or to replace them immediately'."</p></div><p>With almost the same words as the german secretary of consumer protection.</p><p>If I were working in IT for a bank, my answer would be a press release "What exactly is it this stupid tart thinks we're busy with right now?"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Germany 's economics minister , Rainer Br   derle , urged banks to 'ensure that credit and bank cards function without problem as soon as possible , or to replace them immediately' .
" With almost the same words as the german secretary of consumer protection.If I were working in IT for a bank , my answer would be a press release " What exactly is it this stupid tart thinks we 're busy with right now ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Germany's economics minister, Rainer Brüderle, urged banks to 'ensure that credit and bank cards function without problem as soon as possible, or to replace them immediately'.
"With almost the same words as the german secretary of consumer protection.If I were working in IT for a bank, my answer would be a press release "What exactly is it this stupid tart thinks we're busy with right now?
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684086</id>
	<title>Re:Revenge at last</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262886600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And like mice(*), the Frenchies have a love of cheese.</p><p>(*) yes, we all know that mice will not eat cheese if you throw some in their cage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And like mice ( * ) , the Frenchies have a love of cheese .
( * ) yes , we all know that mice will not eat cheese if you throw some in their cage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And like mice(*), the Frenchies have a love of cheese.
(*) yes, we all know that mice will not eat cheese if you throw some in their cage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30686500</id>
	<title>Bad data format specification</title>
	<author>SplashMyBandit</author>
	<datestamp>1262897160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I still see bad date formats specified in many projects I work on (not from me of course). People are still in love with entering two digit years and compressing things to shave off a bit here and there. This might make sense for high-volume data entry but for regular applications it is a vile practice. You then have to start guessing what century people mean and what the date offset is  (is it 1970? 1979? 1990? 2000?). Things like date of births get very complicated since some people live past 100 and you don't know what century they belong to. All because they've broken the most fundamental rule of software systems, which is (wait for it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....):<p>
Don't lose information.</p><p>
If you have information (a four digit year) then don't throw it away (store as a two digit, or one digit [hex] year). Don't ask the user for a two digit year since it doesn't have enough information to compose a four-digit year without some (risky) guessing.</p><p>
Every time I see a two digit year specified for software I want to scream, "DIDN"T YOU LEARN *ANYTHING* FROM Y2K!".</p><p>
Fortunately there is a solution. It is the ISO 8601 specification for representing dates in text format. It simply says use something like:<br>
2010-01-08</p><p>
You don't have to use this in the user interface, just use it everywhere else dates are represented as strings. This format also sorts properly using regular alphabetic string sorting and is internationalized (unlike dd-mm-yy or the crufty US system of mm-dd-yy). Hope this helps some of you developers, architects and analysts out there. Two digit dates are the plague and anyone using them should be stripped of their license to practice in IT (what? there's no license to practice IT? no wonder so many bad design decisions are made!). Use ISO 8601 for date strings and most of your date problems will disappear.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still see bad date formats specified in many projects I work on ( not from me of course ) .
People are still in love with entering two digit years and compressing things to shave off a bit here and there .
This might make sense for high-volume data entry but for regular applications it is a vile practice .
You then have to start guessing what century people mean and what the date offset is ( is it 1970 ?
1979 ? 1990 ?
2000 ? ) . Things like date of births get very complicated since some people live past 100 and you do n't know what century they belong to .
All because they 've broken the most fundamental rule of software systems , which is ( wait for it .... ) : Do n't lose information .
If you have information ( a four digit year ) then do n't throw it away ( store as a two digit , or one digit [ hex ] year ) .
Do n't ask the user for a two digit year since it does n't have enough information to compose a four-digit year without some ( risky ) guessing .
Every time I see a two digit year specified for software I want to scream , " DIDN " T YOU LEARN * ANYTHING * FROM Y2K ! " .
Fortunately there is a solution .
It is the ISO 8601 specification for representing dates in text format .
It simply says use something like : 2010-01-08 You do n't have to use this in the user interface , just use it everywhere else dates are represented as strings .
This format also sorts properly using regular alphabetic string sorting and is internationalized ( unlike dd-mm-yy or the crufty US system of mm-dd-yy ) .
Hope this helps some of you developers , architects and analysts out there .
Two digit dates are the plague and anyone using them should be stripped of their license to practice in IT ( what ?
there 's no license to practice IT ?
no wonder so many bad design decisions are made ! ) .
Use ISO 8601 for date strings and most of your date problems will disappear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still see bad date formats specified in many projects I work on (not from me of course).
People are still in love with entering two digit years and compressing things to shave off a bit here and there.
This might make sense for high-volume data entry but for regular applications it is a vile practice.
You then have to start guessing what century people mean and what the date offset is  (is it 1970?
1979? 1990?
2000?). Things like date of births get very complicated since some people live past 100 and you don't know what century they belong to.
All because they've broken the most fundamental rule of software systems, which is (wait for it ....):
Don't lose information.
If you have information (a four digit year) then don't throw it away (store as a two digit, or one digit [hex] year).
Don't ask the user for a two digit year since it doesn't have enough information to compose a four-digit year without some (risky) guessing.
Every time I see a two digit year specified for software I want to scream, "DIDN"T YOU LEARN *ANYTHING* FROM Y2K!".
Fortunately there is a solution.
It is the ISO 8601 specification for representing dates in text format.
It simply says use something like:
2010-01-08
You don't have to use this in the user interface, just use it everywhere else dates are represented as strings.
This format also sorts properly using regular alphabetic string sorting and is internationalized (unlike dd-mm-yy or the crufty US system of mm-dd-yy).
Hope this helps some of you developers, architects and analysts out there.
Two digit dates are the plague and anyone using them should be stripped of their license to practice in IT (what?
there's no license to practice IT?
no wonder so many bad design decisions are made!).
Use ISO 8601 for date strings and most of your date problems will disappear.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30686428</id>
	<title>two digit year of birth</title>
	<author>formfeed</author>
	<datestamp>1262896920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would suggest to just switch to a one-byte storage format, this way we all can live up to 255 years, before insurance companies send us stupid letters intended for families with young children. <br>
But then again, if anyone ever makes it to 127, she might turn -128 the next year.
If only there were a solution to this problem..</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would suggest to just switch to a one-byte storage format , this way we all can live up to 255 years , before insurance companies send us stupid letters intended for families with young children .
But then again , if anyone ever makes it to 127 , she might turn -128 the next year .
If only there were a solution to this problem. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would suggest to just switch to a one-byte storage format, this way we all can live up to 255 years, before insurance companies send us stupid letters intended for families with young children.
But then again, if anyone ever makes it to 127, she might turn -128 the next year.
If only there were a solution to this problem..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683048</id>
	<title>Re:Understandable really</title>
	<author>nyctopterus</author>
	<datestamp>1262882640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jeez, enough with the stupid surrender monkey shit. Honestly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jeez , enough with the stupid surrender monkey shit .
Honestly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jeez, enough with the stupid surrender monkey shit.
Honestly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682856</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>Rufty</author>
	<datestamp>1262881920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Premature optimization is the root of (most) evil.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Premature optimization is the root of ( most ) evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Premature optimization is the root of (most) evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682156</id>
	<title>Re:Revenge at last</title>
	<author>LSD-OBS</author>
	<datestamp>1262878500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Taco has fixed it. We can get back on topic now. As you were.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Taco has fixed it .
We can get back on topic now .
As you were .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Taco has fixed it.
We can get back on topic now.
As you were.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683196</id>
	<title>Re:They had to Queue?</title>
	<author>nospam007</author>
	<datestamp>1262883240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>many bank customers were forced to queue to withdraw cash over the counter.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>Local news reported that since only the chip on the cards were wrong, you'd simple had to cover the pins with some adhesive tape to force the machine to read the magnetic strip instead.</p><p>OTOH another point of attack is now widely known to the planet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>many bank customers were forced to queue to withdraw cash over the counter .
Local news reported that since only the chip on the cards were wrong , you 'd simple had to cover the pins with some adhesive tape to force the machine to read the magnetic strip instead.OTOH another point of attack is now widely known to the planet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> many bank customers were forced to queue to withdraw cash over the counter.
Local news reported that since only the chip on the cards were wrong, you'd simple had to cover the pins with some adhesive tape to force the machine to read the magnetic strip instead.OTOH another point of attack is now widely known to the planet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684368</id>
	<title>Re:Revenge at last</title>
	<author>antek9</author>
	<datestamp>1262887560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, setting aside that amount of money in order to reimburse the future victims of your 'revenge' would take some time, now wouldn't it? I don't know about you, but if that was some great French strategy I'd file it under 'epic fail'.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)<br> <br>No wonder they can't win a war on their own behalf. Oops, there, I said it... On a more serious note: if subtlety would win wars the world would be quite different from what it is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , setting aside that amount of money in order to reimburse the future victims of your 'revenge ' would take some time , now would n't it ?
I do n't know about you , but if that was some great French strategy I 'd file it under 'epic fail' .
; ) No wonder they ca n't win a war on their own behalf .
Oops , there , I said it... On a more serious note : if subtlety would win wars the world would be quite different from what it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, setting aside that amount of money in order to reimburse the future victims of your 'revenge' would take some time, now wouldn't it?
I don't know about you, but if that was some great French strategy I'd file it under 'epic fail'.
;) No wonder they can't win a war on their own behalf.
Oops, there, I said it... On a more serious note: if subtlety would win wars the world would be quite different from what it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683340</id>
	<title>problems indeed</title>
	<author>Golden\_Rider</author>
	<datestamp>1262883780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My card is working fine, but my parents had this problem today - both my mother's and my father's card did not work at the ATM with (for them) cryptic error messages, so they had to get money over the counter. What's most annoying about this is that when they got home, they checked their online banking website to see if there were any news there and saw that even though my mom's card got rejected at the ATM, it still showed the 100 euros she wanted to get at the ATM as having been withdrawn, even though she did not receive any cash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My card is working fine , but my parents had this problem today - both my mother 's and my father 's card did not work at the ATM with ( for them ) cryptic error messages , so they had to get money over the counter .
What 's most annoying about this is that when they got home , they checked their online banking website to see if there were any news there and saw that even though my mom 's card got rejected at the ATM , it still showed the 100 euros she wanted to get at the ATM as having been withdrawn , even though she did not receive any cash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My card is working fine, but my parents had this problem today - both my mother's and my father's card did not work at the ATM with (for them) cryptic error messages, so they had to get money over the counter.
What's most annoying about this is that when they got home, they checked their online banking website to see if there were any news there and saw that even though my mom's card got rejected at the ATM, it still showed the 100 euros she wanted to get at the ATM as having been withdrawn, even though she did not receive any cash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682460</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>Rockoon</author>
	<datestamp>1262880180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think most of the time they are building their own conversions to date formats because they have to. Those standard libraries are great when the date is in a standard format, but multinationals deal with nearly every variation of date encoding known to man.<br>
<br>
1-digit years, 2-digit years, 4-digits years, month-before-day, month-after-day, year-first, year-last, decimal-seperators, slash-seperators, dhash-seperators, space-seperators, a-mix-of-seperators, without-day-of-week, with-day-of-week, with-day-of-week-abbreviated, without-english-month, with-english-month, with-month-abbreviation, and all words in many languages.. and different variations on abbreviations..<br>
<br>
Even if these guys leverage the standard libraries as much as they can, its still non-trivial to do it correctly. Multinationals arent dealing with data in a single format.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think most of the time they are building their own conversions to date formats because they have to .
Those standard libraries are great when the date is in a standard format , but multinationals deal with nearly every variation of date encoding known to man .
1-digit years , 2-digit years , 4-digits years , month-before-day , month-after-day , year-first , year-last , decimal-seperators , slash-seperators , dhash-seperators , space-seperators , a-mix-of-seperators , without-day-of-week , with-day-of-week , with-day-of-week-abbreviated , without-english-month , with-english-month , with-month-abbreviation , and all words in many languages.. and different variations on abbreviations. . Even if these guys leverage the standard libraries as much as they can , its still non-trivial to do it correctly .
Multinationals arent dealing with data in a single format .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think most of the time they are building their own conversions to date formats because they have to.
Those standard libraries are great when the date is in a standard format, but multinationals deal with nearly every variation of date encoding known to man.
1-digit years, 2-digit years, 4-digits years, month-before-day, month-after-day, year-first, year-last, decimal-seperators, slash-seperators, dhash-seperators, space-seperators, a-mix-of-seperators, without-day-of-week, with-day-of-week, with-day-of-week-abbreviated, without-english-month, with-english-month, with-month-abbreviation, and all words in many languages.. and different variations on abbreviations..

Even if these guys leverage the standard libraries as much as they can, its still non-trivial to do it correctly.
Multinationals arent dealing with data in a single format.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684002</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>hrimhari</author>
	<datestamp>1262886300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which integer are you referring to? 2-byte or 4-byte? Signed or unsigned? Have you checked how close our dear *nix based systems are to the signed threshold lately? Hint: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year\_2038\_problem" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">28 years.</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which integer are you referring to ?
2-byte or 4-byte ?
Signed or unsigned ?
Have you checked how close our dear * nix based systems are to the signed threshold lately ?
Hint : 28 years .
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which integer are you referring to?
2-byte or 4-byte?
Signed or unsigned?
Have you checked how close our dear *nix based systems are to the signed threshold lately?
Hint: 28 years.
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682304</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262879220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Better make sure you use 'double', not 'float' then, or only use (shorter) time differences, otherwise you won't have more precision, just non-integers...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Better make sure you use 'double ' , not 'float ' then , or only use ( shorter ) time differences , otherwise you wo n't have more precision , just non-integers.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better make sure you use 'double', not 'float' then, or only use (shorter) time differences, otherwise you won't have more precision, just non-integers...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682076</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>edmicman</author>
	<datestamp>1262878140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2 weeks before the new year I found in our legacy code multiple "Y2K10" bugs.  We're a health insurance company, and this is for a major national client who is sending us data with a 2-digit year format.  There is code all over the place that is making assumptions about how to treat those dates, but it's faulty logic.  We've fixed what we've found, but have no way of doing a complete audit so we're just going to have to fix them as issues arise.  I love the clusterf*ck  that is my job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2 weeks before the new year I found in our legacy code multiple " Y2K10 " bugs .
We 're a health insurance company , and this is for a major national client who is sending us data with a 2-digit year format .
There is code all over the place that is making assumptions about how to treat those dates , but it 's faulty logic .
We 've fixed what we 've found , but have no way of doing a complete audit so we 're just going to have to fix them as issues arise .
I love the clusterf * ck that is my job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2 weeks before the new year I found in our legacy code multiple "Y2K10" bugs.
We're a health insurance company, and this is for a major national client who is sending us data with a 2-digit year format.
There is code all over the place that is making assumptions about how to treat those dates, but it's faulty logic.
We've fixed what we've found, but have no way of doing a complete audit so we're just going to have to fix them as issues arise.
I love the clusterf*ck  that is my job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682522</id>
	<title>Security problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262880480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hear people going on about how using the magnet strip is horrible and a security problem. But I don't get it.</p><p>People say, the bad guys can easily copy the magnet strip, but not the chip, so taping over the chip is insecure, since it forces use of the insecure magnet strip. Now, what's to stop the bad guys from just copying the magnet strip anyway? ATMs and other card readers seem to work just fine with chipless cards, so having no secure chip on the card should be no problem for them.</p><p>Could anybody explain?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear people going on about how using the magnet strip is horrible and a security problem .
But I do n't get it.People say , the bad guys can easily copy the magnet strip , but not the chip , so taping over the chip is insecure , since it forces use of the insecure magnet strip .
Now , what 's to stop the bad guys from just copying the magnet strip anyway ?
ATMs and other card readers seem to work just fine with chipless cards , so having no secure chip on the card should be no problem for them.Could anybody explain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear people going on about how using the magnet strip is horrible and a security problem.
But I don't get it.People say, the bad guys can easily copy the magnet strip, but not the chip, so taping over the chip is insecure, since it forces use of the insecure magnet strip.
Now, what's to stop the bad guys from just copying the magnet strip anyway?
ATMs and other card readers seem to work just fine with chipless cards, so having no secure chip on the card should be no problem for them.Could anybody explain?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30694584</id>
	<title>Retrieval? Information? Noooo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262967000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an account with a German bank.</p><p>Today - a working week after the issue became apparent - there's still nothing on their website, their call center has no idea what to do and even more senior staff can't tell me if my cards are affected.</p><p>My experience here http://youmustbefromaway.blogspot.com/2010/01/y201k.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an account with a German bank.Today - a working week after the issue became apparent - there 's still nothing on their website , their call center has no idea what to do and even more senior staff ca n't tell me if my cards are affected.My experience here http : //youmustbefromaway.blogspot.com/2010/01/y201k.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an account with a German bank.Today - a working week after the issue became apparent - there's still nothing on their website, their call center has no idea what to do and even more senior staff can't tell me if my cards are affected.My experience here http://youmustbefromaway.blogspot.com/2010/01/y201k.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681716</id>
	<title>I fart in your general direction.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262876040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It may have taken more than 50 years, but the French finally have their revenge over WWII.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It may have taken more than 50 years , but the French finally have their revenge over WWII .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It may have taken more than 50 years, but the French finally have their revenge over WWII.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682536</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>edesio</author>
	<datestamp>1262880600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A major bank (Banco Real of Santander Group) in Brazil had a problem on New Years Day: its ATMs would not accept 2010-01-04 (Monday) as a working day. But accept current day (on 2010-01-01) as valid and then send a message stating the transaction would be schedule for 2010-01-04!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A major bank ( Banco Real of Santander Group ) in Brazil had a problem on New Years Day : its ATMs would not accept 2010-01-04 ( Monday ) as a working day .
But accept current day ( on 2010-01-01 ) as valid and then send a message stating the transaction would be schedule for 2010-01-04 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A major bank (Banco Real of Santander Group) in Brazil had a problem on New Years Day: its ATMs would not accept 2010-01-04 (Monday) as a working day.
But accept current day (on 2010-01-01) as valid and then send a message stating the transaction would be schedule for 2010-01-04!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726</id>
	<title>Revenge at last</title>
	<author>egandalf</author>
	<datestamp>1262876100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>It only took 65 years, but they finally got their revenge for those invasions. Subtle, the french are, very subtle and patient. Like mice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It only took 65 years , but they finally got their revenge for those invasions .
Subtle , the french are , very subtle and patient .
Like mice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It only took 65 years, but they finally got their revenge for those invasions.
Subtle, the french are, very subtle and patient.
Like mice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681884</id>
	<title>Re:They had to Queue?</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1262877060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The trouble is less in having to do it the old way than in having to do it the old way <i>without notice and in an environment that has shifted toward the new way</i>.<br> <br>

Back when ATMs and POS electronics were uncommon, everyone knew well in advance that they would have to go get cash in order to make purchases, and do so during banking hours. Inconvenient; but everybody knows the score and the system is set up to work that way. If things suddenly shift back, you get a whole bunch of people, many whose first warning is probably some sort of cryptic error at a payment terminal, either stuck outside of banking hours, or swarming the few bank clerks that haven't been replaced by ATMs. Substantially more inconvenient now than it was then.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The trouble is less in having to do it the old way than in having to do it the old way without notice and in an environment that has shifted toward the new way .
Back when ATMs and POS electronics were uncommon , everyone knew well in advance that they would have to go get cash in order to make purchases , and do so during banking hours .
Inconvenient ; but everybody knows the score and the system is set up to work that way .
If things suddenly shift back , you get a whole bunch of people , many whose first warning is probably some sort of cryptic error at a payment terminal , either stuck outside of banking hours , or swarming the few bank clerks that have n't been replaced by ATMs .
Substantially more inconvenient now than it was then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The trouble is less in having to do it the old way than in having to do it the old way without notice and in an environment that has shifted toward the new way.
Back when ATMs and POS electronics were uncommon, everyone knew well in advance that they would have to go get cash in order to make purchases, and do so during banking hours.
Inconvenient; but everybody knows the score and the system is set up to work that way.
If things suddenly shift back, you get a whole bunch of people, many whose first warning is probably some sort of cryptic error at a payment terminal, either stuck outside of banking hours, or swarming the few bank clerks that haven't been replaced by ATMs.
Substantially more inconvenient now than it was then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682188</id>
	<title>How big is a country factory?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262878620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>They claim cards in other countries made by Gemalto are unaffected.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They claim cards in other countries made by Gemalto are unaffected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They claim cards in other countries made by Gemalto are unaffected.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30686826</id>
	<title>Re:Unix epoch does not have to end in 2038</title>
	<author>kamochan</author>
	<datestamp>1262855460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...switching to 64bit-only...if only to avoid the end of time.</p></div><p>This has to be the coolest reason for 64-bitness, ever!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...switching to 64bit-only...if only to avoid the end of time.This has to be the coolest reason for 64-bitness , ever !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...switching to 64bit-only...if only to avoid the end of time.This has to be the coolest reason for 64-bitness, ever!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681916</id>
	<title>Re:There are fees for using tellers at some banks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262877300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even worse, some banks charge you a fee if you wait in line for a teller rather than use an ATM for withdraws.  Hopefully they waived the fee in this case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even worse , some banks charge you a fee if you wait in line for a teller rather than use an ATM for withdraws .
Hopefully they waived the fee in this case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even worse, some banks charge you a fee if you wait in line for a teller rather than use an ATM for withdraws.
Hopefully they waived the fee in this case.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30691570</id>
	<title>Re:Suppression of costs via minimizing testing.</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1262981820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The question is if this is actually a bug that testing would have caught. The problem is that you can't test \_everything\_. So what you do is come up with a few scenarios, and you try to at least test the happy flow and the corner cases that you think might cause problems. For numbers, that's usually things like 0, 1, -1, 2^n for various values of n, -2^n for various values of n, and, in the case of years, probably things like 2000, 2100, and past dates if your system has to deal with those (1979, 1969, and 1899 might be interesting). The numbers 2010 and 10 are not usually problematic and not usually tested. Perhaps that will change now, but, really, who would have thought 2010 would be a problem?</p><p>What would have caught this bug, I think, is not testing, but code review. For this bug to occur at all, the code must have done some pretty funky year handling. That would definitely have raised my eyebrows and prompted further investigation, especially with Y2K still in mind. I can't guarantee that the bug would have been found by code review (after all, it's easy to overlook bugs in code), but I do give more of a chance to code review than to testing, in this case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The question is if this is actually a bug that testing would have caught .
The problem is that you ca n't test \ _everything \ _ .
So what you do is come up with a few scenarios , and you try to at least test the happy flow and the corner cases that you think might cause problems .
For numbers , that 's usually things like 0 , 1 , -1 , 2 ^ n for various values of n , -2 ^ n for various values of n , and , in the case of years , probably things like 2000 , 2100 , and past dates if your system has to deal with those ( 1979 , 1969 , and 1899 might be interesting ) .
The numbers 2010 and 10 are not usually problematic and not usually tested .
Perhaps that will change now , but , really , who would have thought 2010 would be a problem ? What would have caught this bug , I think , is not testing , but code review .
For this bug to occur at all , the code must have done some pretty funky year handling .
That would definitely have raised my eyebrows and prompted further investigation , especially with Y2K still in mind .
I ca n't guarantee that the bug would have been found by code review ( after all , it 's easy to overlook bugs in code ) , but I do give more of a chance to code review than to testing , in this case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The question is if this is actually a bug that testing would have caught.
The problem is that you can't test \_everything\_.
So what you do is come up with a few scenarios, and you try to at least test the happy flow and the corner cases that you think might cause problems.
For numbers, that's usually things like 0, 1, -1, 2^n for various values of n, -2^n for various values of n, and, in the case of years, probably things like 2000, 2100, and past dates if your system has to deal with those (1979, 1969, and 1899 might be interesting).
The numbers 2010 and 10 are not usually problematic and not usually tested.
Perhaps that will change now, but, really, who would have thought 2010 would be a problem?What would have caught this bug, I think, is not testing, but code review.
For this bug to occur at all, the code must have done some pretty funky year handling.
That would definitely have raised my eyebrows and prompted further investigation, especially with Y2K still in mind.
I can't guarantee that the bug would have been found by code review (after all, it's easy to overlook bugs in code), but I do give more of a chance to code review than to testing, in this case.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682854</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder how that is compared to the loss from</title>
	<author>Talderas</author>
	<datestamp>1262881920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>May this serve as a reminder for why French goods suck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>May this serve as a reminder for why French goods suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>May this serve as a reminder for why French goods suck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681700</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388</id>
	<title>Re:2010</title>
	<author>digitig</author>
	<datestamp>1262879760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My question is, why the f*** so many systems have issues with their clocks. In just about any language (C, Java,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, Perl, PHP, SQL...) there are (built-in) libraries available that do time correctly. If you're unsure on how to store time, Unix epoch is just about the simplest way to store it (it's a freakin' integer), it's universally recognizable and accepted and very easy to calculate with and if you need more precision just make it a floating point number and add numbers after the comma.</p></div><p>Partly because of ignorance of the libraries, but partly because the built-in libraries simply <em>don't</em> do time correctly. Unix epoch? Rolls over in 2038, so it's no use for dealing with 49 or 99 year land-leases (or the 999 year lease I held on one property). I know somebody who worked on software dealing with mineral exploration rights who had just this problem: Unix epoch simply got it wrong for the timescales involved (and he wasn't allowed to use 3rd party libraries because management perceived that as a support issue). What was he to do but roll his own?
And it's <em>very much</em> because people think it's simple, without looking at the actual issues.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My question is , why the f * * * so many systems have issues with their clocks .
In just about any language ( C , Java , .NET , Perl , PHP , SQL... ) there are ( built-in ) libraries available that do time correctly .
If you 're unsure on how to store time , Unix epoch is just about the simplest way to store it ( it 's a freakin ' integer ) , it 's universally recognizable and accepted and very easy to calculate with and if you need more precision just make it a floating point number and add numbers after the comma.Partly because of ignorance of the libraries , but partly because the built-in libraries simply do n't do time correctly .
Unix epoch ?
Rolls over in 2038 , so it 's no use for dealing with 49 or 99 year land-leases ( or the 999 year lease I held on one property ) .
I know somebody who worked on software dealing with mineral exploration rights who had just this problem : Unix epoch simply got it wrong for the timescales involved ( and he was n't allowed to use 3rd party libraries because management perceived that as a support issue ) .
What was he to do but roll his own ?
And it 's very much because people think it 's simple , without looking at the actual issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My question is, why the f*** so many systems have issues with their clocks.
In just about any language (C, Java, .NET, Perl, PHP, SQL...) there are (built-in) libraries available that do time correctly.
If you're unsure on how to store time, Unix epoch is just about the simplest way to store it (it's a freakin' integer), it's universally recognizable and accepted and very easy to calculate with and if you need more precision just make it a floating point number and add numbers after the comma.Partly because of ignorance of the libraries, but partly because the built-in libraries simply don't do time correctly.
Unix epoch?
Rolls over in 2038, so it's no use for dealing with 49 or 99 year land-leases (or the 999 year lease I held on one property).
I know somebody who worked on software dealing with mineral exploration rights who had just this problem: Unix epoch simply got it wrong for the timescales involved (and he wasn't allowed to use 3rd party libraries because management perceived that as a support issue).
What was he to do but roll his own?
And it's very much because people think it's simple, without looking at the actual issues.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684654</id>
	<title>Re:Unix epoch does not have to end in 2038</title>
	<author>ArsenneLupin</author>
	<datestamp>1262888820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Heck, if you could only have a working 64bit flash plugin on Linux, all Linux users would go 64bit already.</p></div><p>The flash plugin is not the only binary thing missing on 64 bit Linux.... and it's quite ironic to see this kind of comment after an article about <a href="https://www.luxtrust.lu/faq/middleware/middleware" title="luxtrust.lu">Gemalto</a> [luxtrust.lu].</p><p>
These people would rather give you a blowjob than recompile their Linux driver on a 64 bit CPU!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Heck , if you could only have a working 64bit flash plugin on Linux , all Linux users would go 64bit already.The flash plugin is not the only binary thing missing on 64 bit Linux.... and it 's quite ironic to see this kind of comment after an article about Gemalto [ luxtrust.lu ] .
These people would rather give you a blowjob than recompile their Linux driver on a 64 bit CPU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heck, if you could only have a working 64bit flash plugin on Linux, all Linux users would go 64bit already.The flash plugin is not the only binary thing missing on 64 bit Linux.... and it's quite ironic to see this kind of comment after an article about Gemalto [luxtrust.lu].
These people would rather give you a blowjob than recompile their Linux driver on a 64 bit CPU!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683362</id>
	<title>Re:Understandable really</title>
	<author>Dr. Hok</author>
	<datestamp>1262883840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I mean, who in the year 2000 could have predicted that a one day the <i>important</i> digit would roll over from 0, 1, 2,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... 9, and back to 0 again?</p></div><p>I don't know the details but my guess is that the chip expects year-2000 in BCD (which is traditionally used in trade IIRC), but the machine provides it in plain binary. So the chip fails to dig bit pattern 1100.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Especially when you are so busy eating cheese and contemplating surrender.</p></div><p>You must be referring to the fact that they refused to join the 'coalition of the willing'. IMHO this beats celebrating victory (remember MISSION ACCOMPLISHED?) in a war even before it starts to get real nasty.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , who in the year 2000 could have predicted that a one day the important digit would roll over from 0 , 1 , 2 , ... 9 , and back to 0 again ? I do n't know the details but my guess is that the chip expects year-2000 in BCD ( which is traditionally used in trade IIRC ) , but the machine provides it in plain binary .
So the chip fails to dig bit pattern 1100.Especially when you are so busy eating cheese and contemplating surrender.You must be referring to the fact that they refused to join the 'coalition of the willing' .
IMHO this beats celebrating victory ( remember MISSION ACCOMPLISHED ?
) in a war even before it starts to get real nasty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, who in the year 2000 could have predicted that a one day the important digit would roll over from 0, 1, 2, ... 9, and back to 0 again?I don't know the details but my guess is that the chip expects year-2000 in BCD (which is traditionally used in trade IIRC), but the machine provides it in plain binary.
So the chip fails to dig bit pattern 1100.Especially when you are so busy eating cheese and contemplating surrender.You must be referring to the fact that they refused to join the 'coalition of the willing'.
IMHO this beats celebrating victory (remember MISSION ACCOMPLISHED?
) in a war even before it starts to get real nasty.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682346</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30686428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30689652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30689118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30691570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30688692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30687316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30692378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30686826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30703666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30686440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1327232_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681716
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30689118
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682076
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30686428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682090
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30688692
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682388
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30689652
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682892
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30686826
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684654
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684492
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30685174
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683356
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682800
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683972
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682988
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30686440
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30703666
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683192
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683476
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682460
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682304
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684024
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683366
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30691570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682188
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30692378
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684368
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30683296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682004
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1327232.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30681700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30687316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30684834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1327232.30682854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
