<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_19_1312217</id>
	<title>Google To Suspend Mobile Phone Launch In China</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1263909120000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader tips news that Google has decided to <a href="http://in.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idINIndia-45511720100119?sp=true">delay the launch of two mobile phones</a> in China after the recent censorship conflict with the Chinese government. The phones were developed with Samsung and Motorola, and both of them run Android. A related article in BusinessWeek wonders whether Google's new stance on censorship will <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2010/tc20100118\_760688.htm">halt the progress Android is making in China</a>, the world's largest mobile market. "The country was well on its way to helping Google exploit Android. Chinese handset makers such as Huawei and ZTE have been some of the earliest supporters of the upstart operating system. China Mobile already sells its own version of an Android-based phone system called OPhone. Motorola is making a big push into the Chinese market with smartphones based on the Android OS. And China's Lenovo has developed numerous Android-based products, including the LePhone. Any undue pressure from the establishment would mean that most of these companies would have to abandon Android in favor of other mobile operating environments."</htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader tips news that Google has decided to delay the launch of two mobile phones in China after the recent censorship conflict with the Chinese government .
The phones were developed with Samsung and Motorola , and both of them run Android .
A related article in BusinessWeek wonders whether Google 's new stance on censorship will halt the progress Android is making in China , the world 's largest mobile market .
" The country was well on its way to helping Google exploit Android .
Chinese handset makers such as Huawei and ZTE have been some of the earliest supporters of the upstart operating system .
China Mobile already sells its own version of an Android-based phone system called OPhone .
Motorola is making a big push into the Chinese market with smartphones based on the Android OS .
And China 's Lenovo has developed numerous Android-based products , including the LePhone .
Any undue pressure from the establishment would mean that most of these companies would have to abandon Android in favor of other mobile operating environments .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader tips news that Google has decided to delay the launch of two mobile phones in China after the recent censorship conflict with the Chinese government.
The phones were developed with Samsung and Motorola, and both of them run Android.
A related article in BusinessWeek wonders whether Google's new stance on censorship will halt the progress Android is making in China, the world's largest mobile market.
"The country was well on its way to helping Google exploit Android.
Chinese handset makers such as Huawei and ZTE have been some of the earliest supporters of the upstart operating system.
China Mobile already sells its own version of an Android-based phone system called OPhone.
Motorola is making a big push into the Chinese market with smartphones based on the Android OS.
And China's Lenovo has developed numerous Android-based products, including the LePhone.
Any undue pressure from the establishment would mean that most of these companies would have to abandon Android in favor of other mobile operating environments.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820880</id>
	<title>Re:Gibson was right</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1263924000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Corporations don't have armies.</p><p>Or rather, not yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporations do n't have armies.Or rather , not yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporations don't have armies.Or rather, not yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819300</id>
	<title>Re:Google is Bluffing</title>
	<author>Yamata no Orochi</author>
	<datestamp>1263917160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uncle Sam-urai?</p><p>Really?</p><p>Samurai aren't even Chinese. Where's the -1 Ignorant?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uncle Sam-urai ? Really ? Samurai are n't even Chinese .
Where 's the -1 Ignorant ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uncle Sam-urai?Really?Samurai aren't even Chinese.
Where's the -1 Ignorant?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818974</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting fact</title>
	<author>iamsolidsnk</author>
	<datestamp>1263915540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.cn site was hosted in Florida at the time of The Incident and supposed compromising of Gmail accounts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the .cn site was hosted in Florida at the time of The Incident and supposed compromising of Gmail accounts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the .cn site was hosted in Florida at the time of The Incident and supposed compromising of Gmail accounts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820164</id>
	<title>This comes on top of Avatar in China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263920820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://news.google.com/news?q=avatarchina&amp;oe=utf-8&amp;rls=com.ubuntu:en-US:unofficial&amp;client=firefox-a&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;hl=en&amp;tab=wn" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">Apparently, China is now extremely limiting the Avatar run in China.</a> [google.com] Depending on whose version you believe, it is either due to China saying that it competes too much with their local films, or it is too close to home with the protests against the gov. for taking land for commercial buildings. Basically, we have a trade war starting in which SOME companies are having enough of the Chinese gov running rough shod on them, while the Chinese gov. continues to ignore their legal agreements to get into the WTO, and then to stay in there as well.<br> <br>Time to drop their MFN with America and hopefully with the west.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently , China is now extremely limiting the Avatar run in China .
[ google.com ] Depending on whose version you believe , it is either due to China saying that it competes too much with their local films , or it is too close to home with the protests against the gov .
for taking land for commercial buildings .
Basically , we have a trade war starting in which SOME companies are having enough of the Chinese gov running rough shod on them , while the Chinese gov .
continues to ignore their legal agreements to get into the WTO , and then to stay in there as well .
Time to drop their MFN with America and hopefully with the west .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently, China is now extremely limiting the Avatar run in China.
[google.com] Depending on whose version you believe, it is either due to China saying that it competes too much with their local films, or it is too close to home with the protests against the gov.
for taking land for commercial buildings.
Basically, we have a trade war starting in which SOME companies are having enough of the Chinese gov running rough shod on them, while the Chinese gov.
continues to ignore their legal agreements to get into the WTO, and then to stay in there as well.
Time to drop their MFN with America and hopefully with the west.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818892</id>
	<title>China is not the largest market in the world!</title>
	<author>dublinclontarf</author>
	<datestamp>1263915060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, 1.3Billion seems like a lot, but 1/2 are peasants and most earn a pittence. See here <a href="http://my.telegraph.co.uk/dublinclontarf/blog/2010/01/15/china,\_the\_worlds\_largest\_market" title="telegraph.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://my.telegraph.co.uk/dublinclontarf/blog/2010/01/15/china,\_the\_worlds\_largest\_market</a> [telegraph.co.uk].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , 1.3Billion seems like a lot , but 1/2 are peasants and most earn a pittence .
See here http : //my.telegraph.co.uk/dublinclontarf/blog/2010/01/15/china , \ _the \ _worlds \ _largest \ _market [ telegraph.co.uk ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, 1.3Billion seems like a lot, but 1/2 are peasants and most earn a pittence.
See here http://my.telegraph.co.uk/dublinclontarf/blog/2010/01/15/china,\_the\_worlds\_largest\_market [telegraph.co.uk].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819240</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>jrumney</author>
	<datestamp>1263916860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world
</p><p>
In the words of <b>an individual</b> who did have enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world in the past;

<i>Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.</i> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world In the words of an individual who did have enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world in the past ; Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world

In the words of an individual who did have enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world in the past;

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612</id>
	<title>in Japan...</title>
	<author>FuckingNickName</author>
	<datestamp>1263913260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>40 years ago, "made in Japan" meant a cheap, cheerful, somewhat unreliable clone. They had the technology to manufacture, but not the skill to manufacture reliably, nor the smarts to create. Then they became the cloning heroes, making faithful and reliable Western designs... and today, they innovate.</p><p>China is currently at stage 2.5, building whatever the West can throw at it, and making gradual improvements. What do you think will happen when they develop an intellectual property economy to rival the West?</p><p>Enjoy your hubris, Google, as Microsoft once enjoyed its level of control.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>40 years ago , " made in Japan " meant a cheap , cheerful , somewhat unreliable clone .
They had the technology to manufacture , but not the skill to manufacture reliably , nor the smarts to create .
Then they became the cloning heroes , making faithful and reliable Western designs... and today , they innovate.China is currently at stage 2.5 , building whatever the West can throw at it , and making gradual improvements .
What do you think will happen when they develop an intellectual property economy to rival the West ? Enjoy your hubris , Google , as Microsoft once enjoyed its level of control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>40 years ago, "made in Japan" meant a cheap, cheerful, somewhat unreliable clone.
They had the technology to manufacture, but not the skill to manufacture reliably, nor the smarts to create.
Then they became the cloning heroes, making faithful and reliable Western designs... and today, they innovate.China is currently at stage 2.5, building whatever the West can throw at it, and making gradual improvements.
What do you think will happen when they develop an intellectual property economy to rival the West?Enjoy your hubris, Google, as Microsoft once enjoyed its level of control.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819206</id>
	<title>Android with no facebook/twitter</title>
	<author>sam0737</author>
	<datestamp>1263916680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Think of the GFW!<br>What's the point to have an Android if the facebook and twitter integration is not working? Like all Phone book, contact list, live photo uploading etc not working?<br>I think the price should be 50\% cheaper without these!</p><p>I wonder when will proxy supports come in...I am living in China, and I have handful of proxies that let me go over the GFW. But is there a configuration hook for that?</p><p>Or could I do something like hack the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/hosts, and setup a Apache Proxy/Squid or whatsoever at somewhere to route the traffics? Were Android as open as that?<br>Until they have a configuration knob, or there is a plugin for that...I am not buying Android or subscribing 3G plan for that matter while I still live in Mainland China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Think of the GFW ! What 's the point to have an Android if the facebook and twitter integration is not working ?
Like all Phone book , contact list , live photo uploading etc not working ? I think the price should be 50 \ % cheaper without these ! I wonder when will proxy supports come in...I am living in China , and I have handful of proxies that let me go over the GFW .
But is there a configuration hook for that ? Or could I do something like hack the /etc/hosts , and setup a Apache Proxy/Squid or whatsoever at somewhere to route the traffics ?
Were Android as open as that ? Until they have a configuration knob , or there is a plugin for that...I am not buying Android or subscribing 3G plan for that matter while I still live in Mainland China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think of the GFW!What's the point to have an Android if the facebook and twitter integration is not working?
Like all Phone book, contact list, live photo uploading etc not working?I think the price should be 50\% cheaper without these!I wonder when will proxy supports come in...I am living in China, and I have handful of proxies that let me go over the GFW.
But is there a configuration hook for that?Or could I do something like hack the /etc/hosts, and setup a Apache Proxy/Squid or whatsoever at somewhere to route the traffics?
Were Android as open as that?Until they have a configuration knob, or there is a plugin for that...I am not buying Android or subscribing 3G plan for that matter while I still live in Mainland China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820270</id>
	<title>Re:More should follow their example.</title>
	<author>TorKlingberg</author>
	<datestamp>1263921240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If we are going to have China-bashing comments, could we at least have intelligent ones? That is, based on any kind of knowledge and not just xenophobia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If we are going to have China-bashing comments , could we at least have intelligent ones ?
That is , based on any kind of knowledge and not just xenophobia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we are going to have China-bashing comments, could we at least have intelligent ones?
That is, based on any kind of knowledge and not just xenophobia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819088</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818888</id>
	<title>after the recent censorship conflict</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263915060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; after the recent censorship conflict with the Chinese government<br>I thought it was a corporate espionage issue? Maybe the author's brain short-circuited... China = censorship.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; after the recent censorship conflict with the Chinese governmentI thought it was a corporate espionage issue ?
Maybe the author 's brain short-circuited... China = censorship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; after the recent censorship conflict with the Chinese governmentI thought it was a corporate espionage issue?
Maybe the author's brain short-circuited... China = censorship.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818644</id>
	<title>Backing themselves into corner</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263913440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google is positioning itself so that their only two options will be to tuck their tail between their legs and do China's bidding or pull out and lose all the invested capital.  China will not back down they will never let themselves appear weak.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google is positioning itself so that their only two options will be to tuck their tail between their legs and do China 's bidding or pull out and lose all the invested capital .
China will not back down they will never let themselves appear weak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google is positioning itself so that their only two options will be to tuck their tail between their legs and do China's bidding or pull out and lose all the invested capital.
China will not back down they will never let themselves appear weak.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818822</id>
	<title>An interesting fact</title>
	<author>BhaKi</author>
	<datestamp>1263914640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know if this is a new finding. I've noticed this today:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>rms@susebox:~&gt; geoiplookup www.google.cn</p><p>GeoIP Country Edition: US, United States</p></div><p>I expected it to be hosted in China.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if this is a new finding .
I 've noticed this today : rms @ susebox : ~ &gt; geoiplookup www.google.cnGeoIP Country Edition : US , United StatesI expected it to be hosted in China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if this is a new finding.
I've noticed this today:rms@susebox:~&gt; geoiplookup www.google.cnGeoIP Country Edition: US, United StatesI expected it to be hosted in China.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820830</id>
	<title>Re:in Japan...</title>
	<author>Arthur Grumbine</author>
	<datestamp>1263923760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know why this is currently modded OT. Although I believe that China's socio-politico-economic situation is very different (and less conducive to capitalism and the innovation that comes with some form of intellectual property protection) from Japan's circa 1970, I still find your observation about the similarity in the stages of each of their industrial/commercial progress to be interesting. Hopefully some mods will come along to rectify your current moderation and consequently encourage discussion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know why this is currently modded OT .
Although I believe that China 's socio-politico-economic situation is very different ( and less conducive to capitalism and the innovation that comes with some form of intellectual property protection ) from Japan 's circa 1970 , I still find your observation about the similarity in the stages of each of their industrial/commercial progress to be interesting .
Hopefully some mods will come along to rectify your current moderation and consequently encourage discussion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know why this is currently modded OT.
Although I believe that China's socio-politico-economic situation is very different (and less conducive to capitalism and the innovation that comes with some form of intellectual property protection) from Japan's circa 1970, I still find your observation about the similarity in the stages of each of their industrial/commercial progress to be interesting.
Hopefully some mods will come along to rectify your current moderation and consequently encourage discussion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818994</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>Tharsis</author>
	<datestamp>1263915600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That really depends on your point of view. It's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world. Sure, to our (western) point of view it makes a lot of sense to try to give citizens the freedom to express their opinion, but they ARE trying to infringe upon the sovereignty of a country. A country cannot work if they have to change their laws according to the wishes of a company.<br>I cannot vote for Google, so they do not rule.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That really depends on your point of view .
It 's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world .
Sure , to our ( western ) point of view it makes a lot of sense to try to give citizens the freedom to express their opinion , but they ARE trying to infringe upon the sovereignty of a country .
A country can not work if they have to change their laws according to the wishes of a company.I can not vote for Google , so they do not rule .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That really depends on your point of view.
It's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world.
Sure, to our (western) point of view it makes a lot of sense to try to give citizens the freedom to express their opinion, but they ARE trying to infringe upon the sovereignty of a country.
A country cannot work if they have to change their laws according to the wishes of a company.I cannot vote for Google, so they do not rule.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821324</id>
	<title>It's still made in China</title>
	<author>richardkelleher</author>
	<datestamp>1263925800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now if they would just move the manufacturing to another country.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now if they would just move the manufacturing to another country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now if they would just move the manufacturing to another country.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819506</id>
	<title>What's it really matter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263918180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think it matters if Google pulls out completely, China will just pirate the phone and it's software like they do everything else!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think it matters if Google pulls out completely , China will just pirate the phone and it 's software like they do everything else !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think it matters if Google pulls out completely, China will just pirate the phone and it's software like they do everything else!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30823558</id>
	<title>Chinese Technology Imitation / Innovation.</title>
	<author>djdavetrouble</author>
	<datestamp>1263934320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kylin" title="wikipedia.org">What </a> [wikipedia.org] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red\_Flag\_Linux" title="wikipedia.org">if </a> [wikipedia.org] <a href="http://clonedroidphone.com/" title="clonedroidphone.com"> everything</a> [clonedroidphone.com] <a href="http://www.dealextreme.com/search.dx/search.android" title="dealextreme.com"> was</a> [dealextreme.com] <a href="http://www.ismashphone.com/2009/12/21-android-devices-just-a-start-for-android-domination.html" title="ismashphone.com"> not stolen?</a> [ismashphone.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What [ wikipedia.org ] if [ wikipedia.org ] everything [ clonedroidphone.com ] was [ dealextreme.com ] not stolen ?
[ ismashphone.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What  [wikipedia.org] if  [wikipedia.org]  everything [clonedroidphone.com]  was [dealextreme.com]  not stolen?
[ismashphone.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820406</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>orlanz</author>
	<datestamp>1263921840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world.</p></div><p>Come on, is it really that scary?  I mean we got the farm, auto, finance, telco, and security industries doing this every day over here and we are more scared of the mythical terrorist.  Its about time one of our industries (search) starts poking at someone else left with a spine... even if they end up losing a finger.</p><p>I think we are all making this seem FAR bigger than it actually is.  A company has reassessed the risk profile of an environment and found it to be not suitable to justify continuing operations.  Said company is looking at mitigating some of the risk.  If it doesn't work out, the company will revisit the \_idea\_ of discontinuing operations.  Losing China will not be that big a deal to Google as the environment was against it in the first place.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world.Come on , is it really that scary ?
I mean we got the farm , auto , finance , telco , and security industries doing this every day over here and we are more scared of the mythical terrorist .
Its about time one of our industries ( search ) starts poking at someone else left with a spine... even if they end up losing a finger.I think we are all making this seem FAR bigger than it actually is .
A company has reassessed the risk profile of an environment and found it to be not suitable to justify continuing operations .
Said company is looking at mitigating some of the risk .
If it does n't work out , the company will revisit the \ _idea \ _ of discontinuing operations .
Losing China will not be that big a deal to Google as the environment was against it in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world.Come on, is it really that scary?
I mean we got the farm, auto, finance, telco, and security industries doing this every day over here and we are more scared of the mythical terrorist.
Its about time one of our industries (search) starts poking at someone else left with a spine... even if they end up losing a finger.I think we are all making this seem FAR bigger than it actually is.
A company has reassessed the risk profile of an environment and found it to be not suitable to justify continuing operations.
Said company is looking at mitigating some of the risk.
If it doesn't work out, the company will revisit the \_idea\_ of discontinuing operations.
Losing China will not be that big a deal to Google as the environment was against it in the first place.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818750</id>
	<title>Re:in Japan...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263914100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pointing out the strength of the Chinese in the world economy and making comparisons to other far Eastern nations in recent history is not off topic. This isn't a question of withdrawing from some random authoritarian state which needs Google investment and expertise, this is about getting into a spat with the largest manufacturing centre in the world, without which we wouldn't all have the cheap PCs and mobile devices that give Google such a market.</p><p>Consider where China could be in the next 20 or 30 years if it starts to adopt Western discipline in intellectual property. It has already got this far without abandoning many of its restrictive principles. Moreover, great advancement has been achieved in many centralised states... never mind, this would be implying that the Google capitalistic hero of the day is not inevitably going to win for life, so I'm fighting a losing battle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pointing out the strength of the Chinese in the world economy and making comparisons to other far Eastern nations in recent history is not off topic .
This is n't a question of withdrawing from some random authoritarian state which needs Google investment and expertise , this is about getting into a spat with the largest manufacturing centre in the world , without which we would n't all have the cheap PCs and mobile devices that give Google such a market.Consider where China could be in the next 20 or 30 years if it starts to adopt Western discipline in intellectual property .
It has already got this far without abandoning many of its restrictive principles .
Moreover , great advancement has been achieved in many centralised states... never mind , this would be implying that the Google capitalistic hero of the day is not inevitably going to win for life , so I 'm fighting a losing battle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pointing out the strength of the Chinese in the world economy and making comparisons to other far Eastern nations in recent history is not off topic.
This isn't a question of withdrawing from some random authoritarian state which needs Google investment and expertise, this is about getting into a spat with the largest manufacturing centre in the world, without which we wouldn't all have the cheap PCs and mobile devices that give Google such a market.Consider where China could be in the next 20 or 30 years if it starts to adopt Western discipline in intellectual property.
It has already got this far without abandoning many of its restrictive principles.
Moreover, great advancement has been achieved in many centralised states... never mind, this would be implying that the Google capitalistic hero of the day is not inevitably going to win for life, so I'm fighting a losing battle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819004</id>
	<title>Re:An interesting fact</title>
	<author>msu320</author>
	<datestamp>1263915660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>your probably missing the fact that google uses tech that changes the result of a dns query based on your IP.

It's similar to the stuff akami uses, and it helps reduce the effect on latency.

most likely the servers you're connecting to are mirrors.</htmltext>
<tokenext>your probably missing the fact that google uses tech that changes the result of a dns query based on your IP .
It 's similar to the stuff akami uses , and it helps reduce the effect on latency .
most likely the servers you 're connecting to are mirrors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>your probably missing the fact that google uses tech that changes the result of a dns query based on your IP.
It's similar to the stuff akami uses, and it helps reduce the effect on latency.
most likely the servers you're connecting to are mirrors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30826112</id>
	<title>Re:in Japan...</title>
	<author>FuckingNickName</author>
	<datestamp>1263902880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When someone makes a move<br>Of which we don't approve,<br>Who is it that always intervenes?<br>U.N. and O.A.S.,<br>They have their place, I guess,<br><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\_mwfULpr6bE" title="youtube.com">But first send the Marines</a> [youtube.com]!</p><p>We'll send them all we've got,<br>John Wayne and Randolph Scott,<br>Remember those exciting fighting scenes?<br>To the shores of Tripoli,<br>But not to Mississippoli,</p><p>What do we do? We send the Marines!<br>For might makes right,<br>And till they've seen the light,<br><b>They've got to be protected,<br>All their rights respected,<br>'Till somebody we like can be elected.</b></p><p>Members of the corps<br>All hate the thought of war,<br>They'd rather kill them off by peaceful means.<br>Stop calling it aggression,<br>O we hate that expression.<br>We only want the world to know<br>That we support the status quo.<br>They love us everywhere we go,<br>So when in doubt,<br>Send the Marines!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When someone makes a moveOf which we do n't approve,Who is it that always intervenes ? U.N .
and O.A.S.,They have their place , I guess,But first send the Marines [ youtube.com ] ! We 'll send them all we 've got,John Wayne and Randolph Scott,Remember those exciting fighting scenes ? To the shores of Tripoli,But not to Mississippoli,What do we do ?
We send the Marines ! For might makes right,And till they 've seen the light,They 've got to be protected,All their rights respected,'Till somebody we like can be elected.Members of the corpsAll hate the thought of war,They 'd rather kill them off by peaceful means.Stop calling it aggression,O we hate that expression.We only want the world to knowThat we support the status quo.They love us everywhere we go,So when in doubt,Send the Marines !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When someone makes a moveOf which we don't approve,Who is it that always intervenes?U.N.
and O.A.S.,They have their place, I guess,But first send the Marines [youtube.com]!We'll send them all we've got,John Wayne and Randolph Scott,Remember those exciting fighting scenes?To the shores of Tripoli,But not to Mississippoli,What do we do?
We send the Marines!For might makes right,And till they've seen the light,They've got to be protected,All their rights respected,'Till somebody we like can be elected.Members of the corpsAll hate the thought of war,They'd rather kill them off by peaceful means.Stop calling it aggression,O we hate that expression.We only want the world to knowThat we support the status quo.They love us everywhere we go,So when in doubt,Send the Marines!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820648</id>
	<title>Re:Backing themselves into corner</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1263923160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China might never openly back down, but China also might not openly censer Google.  If China merely blocks all undesirable sites that Google links, well that's how Google finds the list actually, then Chinese citizens see how much they're being censored, but Google also becomes a less useful search engine.  To make their search most relevant, Google might minimize the number of blocked sites and/or report those sites as blocked down on the bottom of the page.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China might never openly back down , but China also might not openly censer Google .
If China merely blocks all undesirable sites that Google links , well that 's how Google finds the list actually , then Chinese citizens see how much they 're being censored , but Google also becomes a less useful search engine .
To make their search most relevant , Google might minimize the number of blocked sites and/or report those sites as blocked down on the bottom of the page .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China might never openly back down, but China also might not openly censer Google.
If China merely blocks all undesirable sites that Google links, well that's how Google finds the list actually, then Chinese citizens see how much they're being censored, but Google also becomes a less useful search engine.
To make their search most relevant, Google might minimize the number of blocked sites and/or report those sites as blocked down on the bottom of the page.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820338</id>
	<title>Re:More should follow their example.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263921540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I call fallacy of idealizing the past here. China has been a manufacturing powerhouse since the 1970s. So 40 years now.  So you are saying you want to bring back American factories and conditions from the 1960s?  That time in manufacturing was best known for lawsuits, strikes, poor quality control, union corruption, and overall fucktardness.</p><p>The reality is our economy (or any for that matter) doesnt work if we paid factory workers 55k a year with benefits. As far as "exploiting" the workforce: Are you willing to pay 2 to 3x the price of your goods for the sake of a factory worker's wellbeing? Well, what do you expect to pay them? Their wages are competitive for the demand of their skills.  The guy in the US making 10 dollars an hour on the lathe isnt too different than the guy making 2 dollars an hour in China, when you compare purchasing power of that money in those countries.</p><p>Look, Im not some super free-market guy, but using loaded language like "exploited" and pretending that manufacturing in the past was some kind of ideal job is just being disingenuous.  The invisible hand of the market controls a lot of this and the largest part of that hand is you and me demanding cheap prices for good like cars, computers, phones, etc.  The boogeyman is you and me, not necessarily some big government entity holding everyone down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I call fallacy of idealizing the past here .
China has been a manufacturing powerhouse since the 1970s .
So 40 years now .
So you are saying you want to bring back American factories and conditions from the 1960s ?
That time in manufacturing was best known for lawsuits , strikes , poor quality control , union corruption , and overall fucktardness.The reality is our economy ( or any for that matter ) doesnt work if we paid factory workers 55k a year with benefits .
As far as " exploiting " the workforce : Are you willing to pay 2 to 3x the price of your goods for the sake of a factory worker 's wellbeing ?
Well , what do you expect to pay them ?
Their wages are competitive for the demand of their skills .
The guy in the US making 10 dollars an hour on the lathe isnt too different than the guy making 2 dollars an hour in China , when you compare purchasing power of that money in those countries.Look , Im not some super free-market guy , but using loaded language like " exploited " and pretending that manufacturing in the past was some kind of ideal job is just being disingenuous .
The invisible hand of the market controls a lot of this and the largest part of that hand is you and me demanding cheap prices for good like cars , computers , phones , etc .
The boogeyman is you and me , not necessarily some big government entity holding everyone down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I call fallacy of idealizing the past here.
China has been a manufacturing powerhouse since the 1970s.
So 40 years now.
So you are saying you want to bring back American factories and conditions from the 1960s?
That time in manufacturing was best known for lawsuits, strikes, poor quality control, union corruption, and overall fucktardness.The reality is our economy (or any for that matter) doesnt work if we paid factory workers 55k a year with benefits.
As far as "exploiting" the workforce: Are you willing to pay 2 to 3x the price of your goods for the sake of a factory worker's wellbeing?
Well, what do you expect to pay them?
Their wages are competitive for the demand of their skills.
The guy in the US making 10 dollars an hour on the lathe isnt too different than the guy making 2 dollars an hour in China, when you compare purchasing power of that money in those countries.Look, Im not some super free-market guy, but using loaded language like "exploited" and pretending that manufacturing in the past was some kind of ideal job is just being disingenuous.
The invisible hand of the market controls a lot of this and the largest part of that hand is you and me demanding cheap prices for good like cars, computers, phones, etc.
The boogeyman is you and me, not necessarily some big government entity holding everyone down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819088</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819372</id>
	<title>Re:in Japan...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263917520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What happens when they build an intellectual property economy based on nothing but stolen intellectual property, you ask?  It is inevitable, but that doesn't mean Google has to like it.  They are smart to keep their treasure to themselves; the more they expose by doing business in China, the more will just get stolen and used against them.  China has expressed no interest in protecting IP rights, why should Google just roll over and say 'well it will happen eventually, why not sacrifice all my IP in the mean time?'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What happens when they build an intellectual property economy based on nothing but stolen intellectual property , you ask ?
It is inevitable , but that does n't mean Google has to like it .
They are smart to keep their treasure to themselves ; the more they expose by doing business in China , the more will just get stolen and used against them .
China has expressed no interest in protecting IP rights , why should Google just roll over and say 'well it will happen eventually , why not sacrifice all my IP in the mean time ?
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What happens when they build an intellectual property economy based on nothing but stolen intellectual property, you ask?
It is inevitable, but that doesn't mean Google has to like it.
They are smart to keep their treasure to themselves; the more they expose by doing business in China, the more will just get stolen and used against them.
China has expressed no interest in protecting IP rights, why should Google just roll over and say 'well it will happen eventually, why not sacrifice all my IP in the mean time?
'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818928</id>
	<title>Phones are life in China</title>
	<author>adosch</author>
	<datestamp>1263915300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's definitely a good thing that Google held off launch in China; Asian companies are the central hub for embedded technologies, although I think the U.S. gets the brunt of garbage technological imports, but the Chinese population long ago adopted and integrated cell phone usage into their daily lives bigtime.  They've been power-using phones long before anyone in the U.S. started promoting it.  PDA's where always a big thing, but until the iPhone and Blackberry craze of 2008-2009, we didn't see anything like that virally spread, phone wise.  TFA is right; China probably has something total to their population and market that rival very well with the Android and why move away from that?  It's not to say China's techies or phone enthusiasts would shy away from trying something new, but like I said, they've been integrating phone usage into their lives for a lot longer than we in the U.S. have nation-wide.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's definitely a good thing that Google held off launch in China ; Asian companies are the central hub for embedded technologies , although I think the U.S. gets the brunt of garbage technological imports , but the Chinese population long ago adopted and integrated cell phone usage into their daily lives bigtime .
They 've been power-using phones long before anyone in the U.S. started promoting it .
PDA 's where always a big thing , but until the iPhone and Blackberry craze of 2008-2009 , we did n't see anything like that virally spread , phone wise .
TFA is right ; China probably has something total to their population and market that rival very well with the Android and why move away from that ?
It 's not to say China 's techies or phone enthusiasts would shy away from trying something new , but like I said , they 've been integrating phone usage into their lives for a lot longer than we in the U.S. have nation-wide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's definitely a good thing that Google held off launch in China; Asian companies are the central hub for embedded technologies, although I think the U.S. gets the brunt of garbage technological imports, but the Chinese population long ago adopted and integrated cell phone usage into their daily lives bigtime.
They've been power-using phones long before anyone in the U.S. started promoting it.
PDA's where always a big thing, but until the iPhone and Blackberry craze of 2008-2009, we didn't see anything like that virally spread, phone wise.
TFA is right; China probably has something total to their population and market that rival very well with the Android and why move away from that?
It's not to say China's techies or phone enthusiasts would shy away from trying something new, but like I said, they've been integrating phone usage into their lives for a lot longer than we in the U.S. have nation-wide.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821462</id>
	<title>Re:Google is Bluffing</title>
	<author>KlomDark</author>
	<datestamp>1263926400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, yes, yes, you fucking Asia-snob, Samurai are not Chinese, but it still works... STFU.</p><p>It still works cause most of our uneducated masses couldn't tell the difference between the two.</p><p>China? Yah, that's the capital of Japan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , yes , yes , you fucking Asia-snob , Samurai are not Chinese , but it still works... STFU.It still works cause most of our uneducated masses could n't tell the difference between the two.China ?
Yah , that 's the capital of Japan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, yes, yes, you fucking Asia-snob, Samurai are not Chinese, but it still works... STFU.It still works cause most of our uneducated masses couldn't tell the difference between the two.China?
Yah, that's the capital of Japan.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818708</id>
	<title>Dumb question</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1263913860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are the android phones manufactured in China ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are the android phones manufactured in China ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are the android phones manufactured in China ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30825944</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1263901920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That really depends on your point of view. It's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world. Sure, to our (western) point of view it makes a lot of sense to try to give citizens the freedom to express their opinion, but they ARE trying to infringe upon the sovereignty of a country. <b>A country cannot work if they have to change their laws according to the wishes of a company.</b><br>I cannot vote for Google, so they do not rule.</p></div><p>HAHAHAHAHAHA!!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>Do you live in the US? Many of your laws were lobbied for by multi-national corporations. Your copyright laws are the result of the big entertainment companies demanding extensions. Your oil companies control innovation of electric vehicles (They had electric cars decades ago, and companies like GM even sold some -\_- ) and apparently some people feel they control <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1515238&amp;cid=30816860" title="slashdot.org">city design</a> [slashdot.org] too. And more and more over the counter drugs are becoming "dangerous medications". Down there you need a prescription to get two particularly strong painkillers, but up here (Canada) you can walk into any drug store and pick up a 300+ pill bottle, pay with cash, and they don't even need your name.</p><p>Recently I was watching a documentary on nutrition. It was detailing stuff like calcium absorption going down throughout your lifespan - but also that calcium sucks harmful stuff out of food, so is best taken with a meal. It went over the necessity of CoQ10 when taking many drugs, to avoid them leeching stuff out of your body. What I found most interesting was when it mentioned a lot of vitamin supplements are considered drugs in the US. What you can buy at a healthfood store here might require a doctor's prescription and expensive pills down there.</p><p>So yeah, the US is the posterchild for a country changing their laws according to the wishes of companies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That really depends on your point of view .
It 's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world .
Sure , to our ( western ) point of view it makes a lot of sense to try to give citizens the freedom to express their opinion , but they ARE trying to infringe upon the sovereignty of a country .
A country can not work if they have to change their laws according to the wishes of a company.I can not vote for Google , so they do not rule.HAHAHAHAHAHA ! !
...Do you live in the US ?
Many of your laws were lobbied for by multi-national corporations .
Your copyright laws are the result of the big entertainment companies demanding extensions .
Your oil companies control innovation of electric vehicles ( They had electric cars decades ago , and companies like GM even sold some - \ _- ) and apparently some people feel they control city design [ slashdot.org ] too .
And more and more over the counter drugs are becoming " dangerous medications " .
Down there you need a prescription to get two particularly strong painkillers , but up here ( Canada ) you can walk into any drug store and pick up a 300 + pill bottle , pay with cash , and they do n't even need your name.Recently I was watching a documentary on nutrition .
It was detailing stuff like calcium absorption going down throughout your lifespan - but also that calcium sucks harmful stuff out of food , so is best taken with a meal .
It went over the necessity of CoQ10 when taking many drugs , to avoid them leeching stuff out of your body .
What I found most interesting was when it mentioned a lot of vitamin supplements are considered drugs in the US .
What you can buy at a healthfood store here might require a doctor 's prescription and expensive pills down there.So yeah , the US is the posterchild for a country changing their laws according to the wishes of companies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That really depends on your point of view.
It's actually a pretty scary idea that google thinks it has enough power to change the governing policy of one of the biggest countries in the world.
Sure, to our (western) point of view it makes a lot of sense to try to give citizens the freedom to express their opinion, but they ARE trying to infringe upon the sovereignty of a country.
A country cannot work if they have to change their laws according to the wishes of a company.I cannot vote for Google, so they do not rule.HAHAHAHAHAHA!!
...Do you live in the US?
Many of your laws were lobbied for by multi-national corporations.
Your copyright laws are the result of the big entertainment companies demanding extensions.
Your oil companies control innovation of electric vehicles (They had electric cars decades ago, and companies like GM even sold some -\_- ) and apparently some people feel they control city design [slashdot.org] too.
And more and more over the counter drugs are becoming "dangerous medications".
Down there you need a prescription to get two particularly strong painkillers, but up here (Canada) you can walk into any drug store and pick up a 300+ pill bottle, pay with cash, and they don't even need your name.Recently I was watching a documentary on nutrition.
It was detailing stuff like calcium absorption going down throughout your lifespan - but also that calcium sucks harmful stuff out of food, so is best taken with a meal.
It went over the necessity of CoQ10 when taking many drugs, to avoid them leeching stuff out of your body.
What I found most interesting was when it mentioned a lot of vitamin supplements are considered drugs in the US.
What you can buy at a healthfood store here might require a doctor's prescription and expensive pills down there.So yeah, the US is the posterchild for a country changing their laws according to the wishes of companies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30827936</id>
	<title>Re:in Japan...</title>
	<author>tftp</author>
	<datestamp>1263918060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
To add to <i>shutdown</i>'s comment:
</p><p>
<i>The PRC will certainly be a major player in the years to come, but unless they can work out their human rights abuses and their stance on things like Tibet they're only setting themselves up to pop [...]</i>
</p><p>
The majority of population of any country can't possibly care less about "human rights abuses" unless it involves them personally. In 1938 Stalin had millions of regular people arrested, taken out of their beds at night and sent to Gulag - and even then "the masses" did nothing. So a government can safely abuse human rights of a small group of people, as long as the large group of people is OK with that, or just doesn't care.
</p><p>
And with regard to Tibet, it's something that Chinese and Tibetans will eventually work out. However from purely economic POV Tibet, being situated mostly in mountains, needs China more than China needs Tibet. Per <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet#Economy" title="wikipedia.org">Wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org], China invests a lot of money into the economy of Tibet - something that independent Tibet wouldn't be able to do (not without selling most of its mineral rights to foreigners, at least.) And from the military POV, one must be insane to think that China will let Tibet to go free, because the very next moment the new government of Tibet, properly bribed, allows some other, big and rich country to install missiles and other war machines right on Chinese border. Chinese government knows that well, having Taiwan as an example. That just isn't going to happen.
</p><p>
So none of these issues present any danger to the PRC's government. There is only one process that does - the economy. As long as China is getting richer, everyone is happy as a clam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To add to shutdown 's comment : The PRC will certainly be a major player in the years to come , but unless they can work out their human rights abuses and their stance on things like Tibet they 're only setting themselves up to pop [ ... ] The majority of population of any country ca n't possibly care less about " human rights abuses " unless it involves them personally .
In 1938 Stalin had millions of regular people arrested , taken out of their beds at night and sent to Gulag - and even then " the masses " did nothing .
So a government can safely abuse human rights of a small group of people , as long as the large group of people is OK with that , or just does n't care .
And with regard to Tibet , it 's something that Chinese and Tibetans will eventually work out .
However from purely economic POV Tibet , being situated mostly in mountains , needs China more than China needs Tibet .
Per Wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ] , China invests a lot of money into the economy of Tibet - something that independent Tibet would n't be able to do ( not without selling most of its mineral rights to foreigners , at least .
) And from the military POV , one must be insane to think that China will let Tibet to go free , because the very next moment the new government of Tibet , properly bribed , allows some other , big and rich country to install missiles and other war machines right on Chinese border .
Chinese government knows that well , having Taiwan as an example .
That just is n't going to happen .
So none of these issues present any danger to the PRC 's government .
There is only one process that does - the economy .
As long as China is getting richer , everyone is happy as a clam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
To add to shutdown's comment:

The PRC will certainly be a major player in the years to come, but unless they can work out their human rights abuses and their stance on things like Tibet they're only setting themselves up to pop [...]

The majority of population of any country can't possibly care less about "human rights abuses" unless it involves them personally.
In 1938 Stalin had millions of regular people arrested, taken out of their beds at night and sent to Gulag - and even then "the masses" did nothing.
So a government can safely abuse human rights of a small group of people, as long as the large group of people is OK with that, or just doesn't care.
And with regard to Tibet, it's something that Chinese and Tibetans will eventually work out.
However from purely economic POV Tibet, being situated mostly in mountains, needs China more than China needs Tibet.
Per Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], China invests a lot of money into the economy of Tibet - something that independent Tibet wouldn't be able to do (not without selling most of its mineral rights to foreigners, at least.
) And from the military POV, one must be insane to think that China will let Tibet to go free, because the very next moment the new government of Tibet, properly bribed, allows some other, big and rich country to install missiles and other war machines right on Chinese border.
Chinese government knows that well, having Taiwan as an example.
That just isn't going to happen.
So none of these issues present any danger to the PRC's government.
There is only one process that does - the economy.
As long as China is getting richer, everyone is happy as a clam.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818664</id>
	<title>That'll teach those Commies a lesson</title>
	<author>axl917</author>
	<datestamp>1263913620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surely this will bring about regime change if the Chinese are forced to, er, buy someone else's cellphone.</p><p>Yea.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surely this will bring about regime change if the Chinese are forced to , er , buy someone else 's cellphone.Yea .
: /</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surely this will bring about regime change if the Chinese are forced to, er, buy someone else's cellphone.Yea.
:/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820838</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>KlomDark</author>
	<datestamp>1263923820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Makes no sense? Are you serious?</p><p>Yes, Matilda, there really ARE things more important than money... Societal survival, making sure your kids aren't enslaved, many things are more important than market share, and the inhumane corporations of the world are just starting to realize that.</p><p>Try not acting like a mindless virus (Breed &amp; Eat, Breed &amp; Eat,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..., until your environment is destroyed), instead act like a self-aware lifeform that knows the secret to longevity is to not consume all, but to maintain a balance.</p><p>Making money from bad people/governments leads to bad money in your pocket, sucking your lifeforce while you dive to the bottom of the abyss.</p><p>Wake up! Before it's too late. Do not worship money for money's sake, if you must worship it, then worship it for it's power to enable good things to happen when handled by the wise.</p><p>Did you exchange a walk-on part in the war, for a lead role in a cage? [Floyd]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Makes no sense ?
Are you serious ? Yes , Matilda , there really ARE things more important than money... Societal survival , making sure your kids are n't enslaved , many things are more important than market share , and the inhumane corporations of the world are just starting to realize that.Try not acting like a mindless virus ( Breed &amp; Eat , Breed &amp; Eat , ... , until your environment is destroyed ) , instead act like a self-aware lifeform that knows the secret to longevity is to not consume all , but to maintain a balance.Making money from bad people/governments leads to bad money in your pocket , sucking your lifeforce while you dive to the bottom of the abyss.Wake up !
Before it 's too late .
Do not worship money for money 's sake , if you must worship it , then worship it for it 's power to enable good things to happen when handled by the wise.Did you exchange a walk-on part in the war , for a lead role in a cage ?
[ Floyd ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Makes no sense?
Are you serious?Yes, Matilda, there really ARE things more important than money... Societal survival, making sure your kids aren't enslaved, many things are more important than market share, and the inhumane corporations of the world are just starting to realize that.Try not acting like a mindless virus (Breed &amp; Eat, Breed &amp; Eat, ..., until your environment is destroyed), instead act like a self-aware lifeform that knows the secret to longevity is to not consume all, but to maintain a balance.Making money from bad people/governments leads to bad money in your pocket, sucking your lifeforce while you dive to the bottom of the abyss.Wake up!
Before it's too late.
Do not worship money for money's sake, if you must worship it, then worship it for it's power to enable good things to happen when handled by the wise.Did you exchange a walk-on part in the war, for a lead role in a cage?
[Floyd]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820146</id>
	<title>hardball?</title>
	<author>poached</author>
	<datestamp>1263920760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read somewhere that google's china market accounts for 2\% of their revenue.  I was in Shanghai when the news broke and I read it in their papers.  I don't think there is a big uproar about their departure.  Most people can use baidu for search but maps and gmail will be harder to replace.  Google actually has less market share than baidu in China, which is surprising.  Maybe they are not used to playing catchup in their own business.  Maybe the Chinese government is secretly (or not) favoring baidu and hacking google causing google to feel the market is a lost cause, and fighting an uphill battle with ball and chains tied around the ankles doesn't help.  I think it's a bluff from google to tell the chinese government to stop the bullshit and let them operate equally.  I don't think they are going to give up the market to Microsoft and others that easily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read somewhere that google 's china market accounts for 2 \ % of their revenue .
I was in Shanghai when the news broke and I read it in their papers .
I do n't think there is a big uproar about their departure .
Most people can use baidu for search but maps and gmail will be harder to replace .
Google actually has less market share than baidu in China , which is surprising .
Maybe they are not used to playing catchup in their own business .
Maybe the Chinese government is secretly ( or not ) favoring baidu and hacking google causing google to feel the market is a lost cause , and fighting an uphill battle with ball and chains tied around the ankles does n't help .
I think it 's a bluff from google to tell the chinese government to stop the bullshit and let them operate equally .
I do n't think they are going to give up the market to Microsoft and others that easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read somewhere that google's china market accounts for 2\% of their revenue.
I was in Shanghai when the news broke and I read it in their papers.
I don't think there is a big uproar about their departure.
Most people can use baidu for search but maps and gmail will be harder to replace.
Google actually has less market share than baidu in China, which is surprising.
Maybe they are not used to playing catchup in their own business.
Maybe the Chinese government is secretly (or not) favoring baidu and hacking google causing google to feel the market is a lost cause, and fighting an uphill battle with ball and chains tied around the ankles doesn't help.
I think it's a bluff from google to tell the chinese government to stop the bullshit and let them operate equally.
I don't think they are going to give up the market to Microsoft and others that easily.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821764</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1263927840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or you could get past the 'faceless corporation' meme and investigate what the actual people in charge of the company were thinking.  According to <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704675104575001281662251848.html" title="wsj.com">this article,</a> [wsj.com] Eric Schmidt (the CEO) was strongly in favor of doing business in China. He's primarily a businessman, he sees the monetary potential, and he argued they could do good there.<br> <br>
Sergey Brin, who was born in the former USSR, has more personal feelings about censorship and human rights issues.  He was never entirely in favor of doing business in China, but went along with it.  When this happened, he wanted to stop doing business in China.<br> <br>
Estimates are that Google makes $300 million to $600 million in China, so while it's not going to break the bank, they are taking a hit from this.  If they wanted to do the financially intelligent thing, they would keep operations in China (if they really have concerns about intellectual property, they can keep all that in the US and segregate their employees in China from the US).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or you could get past the 'faceless corporation ' meme and investigate what the actual people in charge of the company were thinking .
According to this article , [ wsj.com ] Eric Schmidt ( the CEO ) was strongly in favor of doing business in China .
He 's primarily a businessman , he sees the monetary potential , and he argued they could do good there .
Sergey Brin , who was born in the former USSR , has more personal feelings about censorship and human rights issues .
He was never entirely in favor of doing business in China , but went along with it .
When this happened , he wanted to stop doing business in China .
Estimates are that Google makes $ 300 million to $ 600 million in China , so while it 's not going to break the bank , they are taking a hit from this .
If they wanted to do the financially intelligent thing , they would keep operations in China ( if they really have concerns about intellectual property , they can keep all that in the US and segregate their employees in China from the US ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or you could get past the 'faceless corporation' meme and investigate what the actual people in charge of the company were thinking.
According to this article, [wsj.com] Eric Schmidt (the CEO) was strongly in favor of doing business in China.
He's primarily a businessman, he sees the monetary potential, and he argued they could do good there.
Sergey Brin, who was born in the former USSR, has more personal feelings about censorship and human rights issues.
He was never entirely in favor of doing business in China, but went along with it.
When this happened, he wanted to stop doing business in China.
Estimates are that Google makes $300 million to $600 million in China, so while it's not going to break the bank, they are taking a hit from this.
If they wanted to do the financially intelligent thing, they would keep operations in China (if they really have concerns about intellectual property, they can keep all that in the US and segregate their employees in China from the US).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820622</id>
	<title>Not made in China?</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1263922980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Uhmmm, the Android phone is manufactured where?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Uhmmm , the Android phone is manufactured where ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uhmmm, the Android phone is manufactured where?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820172</id>
	<title>The Whole Taco</title>
	<author>b4upoo</author>
	<datestamp>1263920880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>             Considering the Chinese government's horrid violations of basic human rights I feel that we should ban all commerce with China. We need an official stamp for such nations such as "Hater of Humanity". By applying an official stamp to such nations we could enlist other nations in total economic embargoes. That would surely slap China hard enough to get them to comply with modern nations sense of fairness to its citizens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering the Chinese government 's horrid violations of basic human rights I feel that we should ban all commerce with China .
We need an official stamp for such nations such as " Hater of Humanity " .
By applying an official stamp to such nations we could enlist other nations in total economic embargoes .
That would surely slap China hard enough to get them to comply with modern nations sense of fairness to its citizens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>             Considering the Chinese government's horrid violations of basic human rights I feel that we should ban all commerce with China.
We need an official stamp for such nations such as "Hater of Humanity".
By applying an official stamp to such nations we could enlist other nations in total economic embargoes.
That would surely slap China hard enough to get them to comply with modern nations sense of fairness to its citizens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819248</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263916860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's beyond my imagination, why Google will hold it. If they get people to use more google phones, they will have more control over the information than the Chinese government. If it's a matter of overpowering something, then they should in fact release it and do it in such way that they could mess several businesses there and gain more power.<br> <br>
Unluckily, Google is not such an evil company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's beyond my imagination , why Google will hold it .
If they get people to use more google phones , they will have more control over the information than the Chinese government .
If it 's a matter of overpowering something , then they should in fact release it and do it in such way that they could mess several businesses there and gain more power .
Unluckily , Google is not such an evil company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's beyond my imagination, why Google will hold it.
If they get people to use more google phones, they will have more control over the information than the Chinese government.
If it's a matter of overpowering something, then they should in fact release it and do it in such way that they could mess several businesses there and gain more power.
Unluckily, Google is not such an evil company.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819210</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>bhtooefr</author>
	<datestamp>1263916680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A country cannot work if they have to change their laws according to the wishes of a company.</p></div><p>Which is why the US is in the decline it's in, but that's another story.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A country can not work if they have to change their laws according to the wishes of a company.Which is why the US is in the decline it 's in , but that 's another story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A country cannot work if they have to change their laws according to the wishes of a company.Which is why the US is in the decline it's in, but that's another story.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818994</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819074</id>
	<title>Re:Google is Bluffing</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1263915960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think that Google can't accept that their own offices in China are spied on by the government. It is this issue that makes them consider to get out of China but before living, they wanted to do a last PR shot by uncensoring their search results (btw, 48h later, google.cn was filtered from China). They acknowledge that the CCP will not accept the fact that any foreign company can make profits on their territory. Google is just pulling out. With style.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that Google ca n't accept that their own offices in China are spied on by the government .
It is this issue that makes them consider to get out of China but before living , they wanted to do a last PR shot by uncensoring their search results ( btw , 48h later , google.cn was filtered from China ) .
They acknowledge that the CCP will not accept the fact that any foreign company can make profits on their territory .
Google is just pulling out .
With style .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that Google can't accept that their own offices in China are spied on by the government.
It is this issue that makes them consider to get out of China but before living, they wanted to do a last PR shot by uncensoring their search results (btw, 48h later, google.cn was filtered from China).
They acknowledge that the CCP will not accept the fact that any foreign company can make profits on their territory.
Google is just pulling out.
With style.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819200</id>
	<title>Re: and lose intellectual property</title>
	<author>js3</author>
	<datestamp>1263916620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I live near alcatel, and about 90\% of their workers are Indians or Chinese. China is digging their heels into large techie companies in the west.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I live near alcatel , and about 90 \ % of their workers are Indians or Chinese .
China is digging their heels into large techie companies in the west .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live near alcatel, and about 90\% of their workers are Indians or Chinese.
China is digging their heels into large techie companies in the west.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818760</id>
	<title>Re:in Japan...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263914160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Missed a step: US invasion and installation of democratic government.</p><p>The PRC will certainly be a major player in the years to come, but unless they can work out their human rights abuses and their stance on things like Tibet they're only setting themselves up to pop like the USSR (or worse).</p><p>You can't expect to educate AND oppress the plebs at the same time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Missed a step : US invasion and installation of democratic government.The PRC will certainly be a major player in the years to come , but unless they can work out their human rights abuses and their stance on things like Tibet they 're only setting themselves up to pop like the USSR ( or worse ) .You ca n't expect to educate AND oppress the plebs at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Missed a step: US invasion and installation of democratic government.The PRC will certainly be a major player in the years to come, but unless they can work out their human rights abuses and their stance on things like Tibet they're only setting themselves up to pop like the USSR (or worse).You can't expect to educate AND oppress the plebs at the same time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819890</id>
	<title>Re:in Japan...</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1263919800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"China is currently at stage 2.5, building whatever the West can throw at it, and making gradual improvements. "</p><p>Citations?  What have they improved?  Examples, or it ain't so.  There is NOTHING that China makes that I can't buy "Made in" India, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea, Pakistan, Italy, Germany, France, Canada, Brazil, or SOMEPLACE, better made.  The ONLY thing China seems to have the corner on is CHEAP LABOR, and CHEAP PRODUCTS.  They've not improved one damned thing that has been handed to them.</p><p>Why do people make such idiot comments, and launch me into yet another rant?</p><p>China has 1/4 the world's population, and I think they have the largest land mass of any country in the world. But, all of it together is worth about as much as the frigging Rhine Valley, or maybe the Missourri River Valley, or - I quit.  Figure it out for yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" China is currently at stage 2.5 , building whatever the West can throw at it , and making gradual improvements .
" Citations ? What have they improved ?
Examples , or it ai n't so .
There is NOTHING that China makes that I ca n't buy " Made in " India , Taiwan , Hong Kong , Korea , Pakistan , Italy , Germany , France , Canada , Brazil , or SOMEPLACE , better made .
The ONLY thing China seems to have the corner on is CHEAP LABOR , and CHEAP PRODUCTS .
They 've not improved one damned thing that has been handed to them.Why do people make such idiot comments , and launch me into yet another rant ? China has 1/4 the world 's population , and I think they have the largest land mass of any country in the world .
But , all of it together is worth about as much as the frigging Rhine Valley , or maybe the Missourri River Valley , or - I quit .
Figure it out for yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"China is currently at stage 2.5, building whatever the West can throw at it, and making gradual improvements.
"Citations?  What have they improved?
Examples, or it ain't so.
There is NOTHING that China makes that I can't buy "Made in" India, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea, Pakistan, Italy, Germany, France, Canada, Brazil, or SOMEPLACE, better made.
The ONLY thing China seems to have the corner on is CHEAP LABOR, and CHEAP PRODUCTS.
They've not improved one damned thing that has been handed to them.Why do people make such idiot comments, and launch me into yet another rant?China has 1/4 the world's population, and I think they have the largest land mass of any country in the world.
But, all of it together is worth about as much as the frigging Rhine Valley, or maybe the Missourri River Valley, or - I quit.
Figure it out for yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30829486</id>
	<title>I will support Google in any way i can now...</title>
	<author>twoHats</author>
	<datestamp>1263980880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google have taken a strong stance to reverse the bad rep they were starting to get. unlike Apple, which became the Evil Corporation Junior to M$, Google is becoming one of the few who will give up some profit to make a statement of conscience!  I Salute them, which is a damn rare thing to get to do these days!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google have taken a strong stance to reverse the bad rep they were starting to get .
unlike Apple , which became the Evil Corporation Junior to M $ , Google is becoming one of the few who will give up some profit to make a statement of conscience !
I Salute them , which is a damn rare thing to get to do these days !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google have taken a strong stance to reverse the bad rep they were starting to get.
unlike Apple, which became the Evil Corporation Junior to M$, Google is becoming one of the few who will give up some profit to make a statement of conscience!
I Salute them, which is a damn rare thing to get to do these days!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819030</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>krou</author>
	<datestamp>1263915720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, before we get on the love-Google bandwagon, it's equally possible that the threat of trade secrets/code being stolen, which could be passed on to a Chinese competitor, combined with Google's less than stellar market share in China, is a cost that far outweighs any possible gains by hanging on hoping the Chinese government throws them a few scraps. So, in order to turn a bad situation around, they state they're doing it because they object to the bad bad Chinese government, which helps in the PR department, and also applies pressure on Google's competitors like Bing/Yahoo etc. to do something similar.</p><p>China may have the potential to be the biggest market in the world, but they're inherently protectionist, and actively protect local industry first. Nothing is going to change that until China is the most powerful economy on earth, at which point they may adopt the "free market" because they'll be in a position of dominance to ensure they always win. The British did it this way, and so did the Americans, I don't see why China should behave any different.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , before we get on the love-Google bandwagon , it 's equally possible that the threat of trade secrets/code being stolen , which could be passed on to a Chinese competitor , combined with Google 's less than stellar market share in China , is a cost that far outweighs any possible gains by hanging on hoping the Chinese government throws them a few scraps .
So , in order to turn a bad situation around , they state they 're doing it because they object to the bad bad Chinese government , which helps in the PR department , and also applies pressure on Google 's competitors like Bing/Yahoo etc .
to do something similar.China may have the potential to be the biggest market in the world , but they 're inherently protectionist , and actively protect local industry first .
Nothing is going to change that until China is the most powerful economy on earth , at which point they may adopt the " free market " because they 'll be in a position of dominance to ensure they always win .
The British did it this way , and so did the Americans , I do n't see why China should behave any different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, before we get on the love-Google bandwagon, it's equally possible that the threat of trade secrets/code being stolen, which could be passed on to a Chinese competitor, combined with Google's less than stellar market share in China, is a cost that far outweighs any possible gains by hanging on hoping the Chinese government throws them a few scraps.
So, in order to turn a bad situation around, they state they're doing it because they object to the bad bad Chinese government, which helps in the PR department, and also applies pressure on Google's competitors like Bing/Yahoo etc.
to do something similar.China may have the potential to be the biggest market in the world, but they're inherently protectionist, and actively protect local industry first.
Nothing is going to change that until China is the most powerful economy on earth, at which point they may adopt the "free market" because they'll be in a position of dominance to ensure they always win.
The British did it this way, and so did the Americans, I don't see why China should behave any different.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819076</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263915960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The decision to stop censoring was a direct result of Gmail-breakins. Now, you may believe Google got upset because the accounts included human rights activists, but I'd be more inclined to believe they just don't want their users to stop trusting their services and are trying to coerce the Chinese: would you trust your company emails with someone who gets hacked by the Chinese government regularly?</p><p>In other words, I don't see anything that proves Googles position on the good-evil axis: just business as usual.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The decision to stop censoring was a direct result of Gmail-breakins .
Now , you may believe Google got upset because the accounts included human rights activists , but I 'd be more inclined to believe they just do n't want their users to stop trusting their services and are trying to coerce the Chinese : would you trust your company emails with someone who gets hacked by the Chinese government regularly ? In other words , I do n't see anything that proves Googles position on the good-evil axis : just business as usual .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The decision to stop censoring was a direct result of Gmail-breakins.
Now, you may believe Google got upset because the accounts included human rights activists, but I'd be more inclined to believe they just don't want their users to stop trusting their services and are trying to coerce the Chinese: would you trust your company emails with someone who gets hacked by the Chinese government regularly?In other words, I don't see anything that proves Googles position on the good-evil axis: just business as usual.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821408</id>
	<title>Re:More should follow their example.</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1263926220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Are you willing to pay 2 to 3x the price of your goods for the sake of a factory worker's wellbeing?</p></div><p>Actually, yes, I am.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The invisible hand of the market controls a lot of this and the largest part of that hand is you and me demanding cheap prices for good like cars, computers, phones, etc. The boogeyman is you and me, not necessarily some big government entity holding everyone down.</p></div><p>It's true, but the problem here is that if one man stops buying cheap stuff, it doesn't really change anything so long as others keep doing so. The only way it can have an effect is when the majority, or at least a significant minority, do so. And, of course, people aren't willing to penalize themselves when they know this won't actually do anything useful, so everyone is waiting on everyone else.</p><p>And that is precisely why we have this thing called "government". If the majority of people can agree that buying cheap from countries where labor force is exploited (sorry, but this is a factual statement, and I see nothing wrong with using the word without quotes in this context) is evil, and that they wouldn't do that if they can be assured that no-one else would, so that this all would have some point, then those people vote for their representatives, and representatives put in place some regulations ensuring that. It could be straight regulating laws, it could be tariffs or fees to adjust the price ("unregulated labor fee" - how does that sound?) etc. So long as it gets the job done.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you willing to pay 2 to 3x the price of your goods for the sake of a factory worker 's wellbeing ? Actually , yes , I am.The invisible hand of the market controls a lot of this and the largest part of that hand is you and me demanding cheap prices for good like cars , computers , phones , etc .
The boogeyman is you and me , not necessarily some big government entity holding everyone down.It 's true , but the problem here is that if one man stops buying cheap stuff , it does n't really change anything so long as others keep doing so .
The only way it can have an effect is when the majority , or at least a significant minority , do so .
And , of course , people are n't willing to penalize themselves when they know this wo n't actually do anything useful , so everyone is waiting on everyone else.And that is precisely why we have this thing called " government " .
If the majority of people can agree that buying cheap from countries where labor force is exploited ( sorry , but this is a factual statement , and I see nothing wrong with using the word without quotes in this context ) is evil , and that they would n't do that if they can be assured that no-one else would , so that this all would have some point , then those people vote for their representatives , and representatives put in place some regulations ensuring that .
It could be straight regulating laws , it could be tariffs or fees to adjust the price ( " unregulated labor fee " - how does that sound ?
) etc .
So long as it gets the job done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you willing to pay 2 to 3x the price of your goods for the sake of a factory worker's wellbeing?Actually, yes, I am.The invisible hand of the market controls a lot of this and the largest part of that hand is you and me demanding cheap prices for good like cars, computers, phones, etc.
The boogeyman is you and me, not necessarily some big government entity holding everyone down.It's true, but the problem here is that if one man stops buying cheap stuff, it doesn't really change anything so long as others keep doing so.
The only way it can have an effect is when the majority, or at least a significant minority, do so.
And, of course, people aren't willing to penalize themselves when they know this won't actually do anything useful, so everyone is waiting on everyone else.And that is precisely why we have this thing called "government".
If the majority of people can agree that buying cheap from countries where labor force is exploited (sorry, but this is a factual statement, and I see nothing wrong with using the word without quotes in this context) is evil, and that they wouldn't do that if they can be assured that no-one else would, so that this all would have some point, then those people vote for their representatives, and representatives put in place some regulations ensuring that.
It could be straight regulating laws, it could be tariffs or fees to adjust the price ("unregulated labor fee" - how does that sound?
) etc.
So long as it gets the job done.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818818</id>
	<title>Gibson was right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263914580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now we can see the first open conflict between private corporation and a government.<br> <br>

Just wait for the first armed one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now we can see the first open conflict between private corporation and a government .
Just wait for the first armed one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now we can see the first open conflict between private corporation and a government.
Just wait for the first armed one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818710</id>
	<title>DEFEND CHINA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263913920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FOR UNCONDITIONAL MILITARY DEFENSE OF THE DEFORMED WORKERS STATES IN CHINA, CUBA, VIETNAM AND NORTH KOREA!</p><p>Defend, extend the Chinese revolution! For genuine soviet democracy -- for an internationalist Leninist-Trotskyist communist party! Oust the Stalinist bureaucrats who open the door to imperialist counterrevolution! "Socialism in one country" means capitalist counterrevolution -- for international socialist revolution!</p><p>Down with the hypocritical "human rights" campaign against China by the butchers of Baghdad and Kabul! No to the imperialist "democratic" drive toward war! Down with the Democrats and Republicans, parties of imperialist war and racism! Forge a revolutionary workers party! Reforge the Fourth International, world party of proletarian revolution! Workers of the world, unite!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FOR UNCONDITIONAL MILITARY DEFENSE OF THE DEFORMED WORKERS STATES IN CHINA , CUBA , VIETNAM AND NORTH KOREA ! Defend , extend the Chinese revolution !
For genuine soviet democracy -- for an internationalist Leninist-Trotskyist communist party !
Oust the Stalinist bureaucrats who open the door to imperialist counterrevolution !
" Socialism in one country " means capitalist counterrevolution -- for international socialist revolution ! Down with the hypocritical " human rights " campaign against China by the butchers of Baghdad and Kabul !
No to the imperialist " democratic " drive toward war !
Down with the Democrats and Republicans , parties of imperialist war and racism !
Forge a revolutionary workers party !
Reforge the Fourth International , world party of proletarian revolution !
Workers of the world , unite !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FOR UNCONDITIONAL MILITARY DEFENSE OF THE DEFORMED WORKERS STATES IN CHINA, CUBA, VIETNAM AND NORTH KOREA!Defend, extend the Chinese revolution!
For genuine soviet democracy -- for an internationalist Leninist-Trotskyist communist party!
Oust the Stalinist bureaucrats who open the door to imperialist counterrevolution!
"Socialism in one country" means capitalist counterrevolution -- for international socialist revolution!Down with the hypocritical "human rights" campaign against China by the butchers of Baghdad and Kabul!
No to the imperialist "democratic" drive toward war!
Down with the Democrats and Republicans, parties of imperialist war and racism!
Forge a revolutionary workers party!
Reforge the Fourth International, world party of proletarian revolution!
Workers of the world, unite!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819078</id>
	<title>Re:Gibson was right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263915960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like, you know, that whole EAST INDIA COMPANY CENTURIES AGO.  Maybe you've heard of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like , you know , that whole EAST INDIA COMPANY CENTURIES AGO .
Maybe you 've heard of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like, you know, that whole EAST INDIA COMPANY CENTURIES AGO.
Maybe you've heard of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821622</id>
	<title>Re:Google is Bluffing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263927120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can you tell the difference?</p><p>Um yeah you probably can.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you tell the difference ? Um yeah you probably can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you tell the difference?Um yeah you probably can.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818782</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263914280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, new google phones are produced under the codename Eno Suxen and rebranded in the US.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , new google phones are produced under the codename Eno Suxen and rebranded in the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, new google phones are produced under the codename Eno Suxen and rebranded in the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30822176</id>
	<title>Re:More should follow their example.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263929340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The world worked fine before China got industrialised and made all of our stuff using cheap labour and materials by exploiting the oppressed workforce.</p><p>Let's go back to home-grown industry and leave Chine to destroy themselves. Our respective economies could do with the business.</p></div><p>The world worked fine before USA got industrialised and made all of our stuff using cheap labour and materials by exploiting the oppressed workforce.</p><p>Let's go back to home-grown industry and leave USA to destroy themselves. Our respective economies could do with the business.</p><p>Yes, I live in Ye Old Europe. You guys used to do exactly the same things you now scorn China for doing: you had cheap and unorganised labor with bad working  and living conditions, with small chances of social climbing (and your work force is still cheaper and less unionised than in Europe, and with poorer working and living conditions, and miniscule chances of social climbing, for fucks sake: even most of the developing world have better living conditions than a large population within USA), very limited democracy (the rest of the world didn't stop evolving their societies in the 1780's), and you didn't stop pirating European designs and technology until the 1960's. Your local media is self-censoring and you US dwellers are to lazy to take in what  are reported from sources outside your country, despite less censored media being available through internet, TV  and radio broadcasts.</p><p>Yes, I'm bating, but you USians are so f-ing full of yourself.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The world worked fine before China got industrialised and made all of our stuff using cheap labour and materials by exploiting the oppressed workforce.Let 's go back to home-grown industry and leave Chine to destroy themselves .
Our respective economies could do with the business.The world worked fine before USA got industrialised and made all of our stuff using cheap labour and materials by exploiting the oppressed workforce.Let 's go back to home-grown industry and leave USA to destroy themselves .
Our respective economies could do with the business.Yes , I live in Ye Old Europe .
You guys used to do exactly the same things you now scorn China for doing : you had cheap and unorganised labor with bad working and living conditions , with small chances of social climbing ( and your work force is still cheaper and less unionised than in Europe , and with poorer working and living conditions , and miniscule chances of social climbing , for fucks sake : even most of the developing world have better living conditions than a large population within USA ) , very limited democracy ( the rest of the world did n't stop evolving their societies in the 1780 's ) , and you did n't stop pirating European designs and technology until the 1960 's .
Your local media is self-censoring and you US dwellers are to lazy to take in what are reported from sources outside your country , despite less censored media being available through internet , TV and radio broadcasts.Yes , I 'm bating , but you USians are so f-ing full of yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The world worked fine before China got industrialised and made all of our stuff using cheap labour and materials by exploiting the oppressed workforce.Let's go back to home-grown industry and leave Chine to destroy themselves.
Our respective economies could do with the business.The world worked fine before USA got industrialised and made all of our stuff using cheap labour and materials by exploiting the oppressed workforce.Let's go back to home-grown industry and leave USA to destroy themselves.
Our respective economies could do with the business.Yes, I live in Ye Old Europe.
You guys used to do exactly the same things you now scorn China for doing: you had cheap and unorganised labor with bad working  and living conditions, with small chances of social climbing (and your work force is still cheaper and less unionised than in Europe, and with poorer working and living conditions, and miniscule chances of social climbing, for fucks sake: even most of the developing world have better living conditions than a large population within USA), very limited democracy (the rest of the world didn't stop evolving their societies in the 1780's), and you didn't stop pirating European designs and technology until the 1960's.
Your local media is self-censoring and you US dwellers are to lazy to take in what  are reported from sources outside your country, despite less censored media being available through internet, TV  and radio broadcasts.Yes, I'm bating, but you USians are so f-ing full of yourself.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819088</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819612</id>
	<title>so this means Android is not an open OS?</title>
	<author>darkeye</author>
	<datestamp>1263918540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder why these companies need Google's approval to launch on these markets. After all, it's not Google but Motorola &amp; Samsung launching these phones. Android is supposed to be an open OS that you can just use if you want to.</p><p>Is this some sort of Google censorship scheme?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder why these companies need Google 's approval to launch on these markets .
After all , it 's not Google but Motorola &amp; Samsung launching these phones .
Android is supposed to be an open OS that you can just use if you want to.Is this some sort of Google censorship scheme ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder why these companies need Google's approval to launch on these markets.
After all, it's not Google but Motorola &amp; Samsung launching these phones.
Android is supposed to be an open OS that you can just use if you want to.Is this some sort of Google censorship scheme?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819298</id>
	<title>Not a bad idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263917100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's pretty much a given that an innovation marketed in China for any length of time will be copied, reverse-engineered, and mass-produced as a knock-off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's pretty much a given that an innovation marketed in China for any length of time will be copied , reverse-engineered , and mass-produced as a knock-off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's pretty much a given that an innovation marketed in China for any length of time will be copied, reverse-engineered, and mass-produced as a knock-off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648</id>
	<title>"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263913500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google knew well that the decision to pull their search engine out of China would affect their other business interests there. They aren't dumb - they knew it well. Here they gave something up (some access the biggest potential market in the world) in order to stick to their guns. Their mantra is becoming more than just words.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google knew well that the decision to pull their search engine out of China would affect their other business interests there .
They are n't dumb - they knew it well .
Here they gave something up ( some access the biggest potential market in the world ) in order to stick to their guns .
Their mantra is becoming more than just words .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google knew well that the decision to pull their search engine out of China would affect their other business interests there.
They aren't dumb - they knew it well.
Here they gave something up (some access the biggest potential market in the world) in order to stick to their guns.
Their mantra is becoming more than just words.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819262</id>
	<title>Re:in Japan...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263916920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here is the reason you are modded down (I have mod points, trust me I know).  You are completely ignoring the fact that the 'intellectual property economy' that they are headed for is the exact thing that google wants them to have today, and their lack of support for it is why they are on the brink of abandoning their business in china.  When a state government encourages IP theft and allows just enough freedom for individuals to be dangerous, but not enough for a true free market to emerge, there is no reason for a company who does play by the rules to hang around.</p><p>While I don't have much background in Japanese history, I think their lack of such a culture of corruption encouraged outside investment in both labor and technology.  China doesn't deserve outside investment if they are going to steal whatever they want anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is the reason you are modded down ( I have mod points , trust me I know ) .
You are completely ignoring the fact that the 'intellectual property economy ' that they are headed for is the exact thing that google wants them to have today , and their lack of support for it is why they are on the brink of abandoning their business in china .
When a state government encourages IP theft and allows just enough freedom for individuals to be dangerous , but not enough for a true free market to emerge , there is no reason for a company who does play by the rules to hang around.While I do n't have much background in Japanese history , I think their lack of such a culture of corruption encouraged outside investment in both labor and technology .
China does n't deserve outside investment if they are going to steal whatever they want anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is the reason you are modded down (I have mod points, trust me I know).
You are completely ignoring the fact that the 'intellectual property economy' that they are headed for is the exact thing that google wants them to have today, and their lack of support for it is why they are on the brink of abandoning their business in china.
When a state government encourages IP theft and allows just enough freedom for individuals to be dangerous, but not enough for a true free market to emerge, there is no reason for a company who does play by the rules to hang around.While I don't have much background in Japanese history, I think their lack of such a culture of corruption encouraged outside investment in both labor and technology.
China doesn't deserve outside investment if they are going to steal whatever they want anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818880</id>
	<title>Google is Bluffing</title>
	<author>BiggoronSword</author>
	<datestamp>1263915000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a good feeling Google is bluffing.  I think Google is making such a big stink about this to finally show the Chinese citizens that they're getting their shit pushed in by Uncle Sam-urai.  Even if China does call their bluff, I'm not sure if will actually do anything in terms of a revolt, but it sure puts a dent in the idea of The Great Firewall of China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a good feeling Google is bluffing .
I think Google is making such a big stink about this to finally show the Chinese citizens that they 're getting their shit pushed in by Uncle Sam-urai .
Even if China does call their bluff , I 'm not sure if will actually do anything in terms of a revolt , but it sure puts a dent in the idea of The Great Firewall of China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a good feeling Google is bluffing.
I think Google is making such a big stink about this to finally show the Chinese citizens that they're getting their shit pushed in by Uncle Sam-urai.
Even if China does call their bluff, I'm not sure if will actually do anything in terms of a revolt, but it sure puts a dent in the idea of The Great Firewall of China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818976</id>
	<title>i don't understand</title>
	<author>memnock</author>
	<datestamp>1263915540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>why this is being referred to as a "censorship conflict". Google didn't care about censorship last year. conveniently enough, they get hacked by China, then they care.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>why this is being referred to as a " censorship conflict " .
Google did n't care about censorship last year .
conveniently enough , they get hacked by China , then they care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why this is being referred to as a "censorship conflict".
Google didn't care about censorship last year.
conveniently enough, they get hacked by China, then they care.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819066</id>
	<title>Re:in Japan...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263915900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>enjoy your moderation. slashdotters fear China likes the US government fears Muslims. they tk r jerb on the shopfloor, and the same thing is beginning to happen in R&amp;D.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>enjoy your moderation .
slashdotters fear China likes the US government fears Muslims .
they tk r jerb on the shopfloor , and the same thing is beginning to happen in R&amp;D .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>enjoy your moderation.
slashdotters fear China likes the US government fears Muslims.
they tk r jerb on the shopfloor, and the same thing is beginning to happen in R&amp;D.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819878</id>
	<title>Re:More should follow their example.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263919740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes! Let's go back to India and Mexico for cheap labor; or domestically, the immigrant Italians, Chinese, and Jews (although Mexicans are the flavor of the month).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes !
Let 's go back to India and Mexico for cheap labor ; or domestically , the immigrant Italians , Chinese , and Jews ( although Mexicans are the flavor of the month ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes!
Let's go back to India and Mexico for cheap labor; or domestically, the immigrant Italians, Chinese, and Jews (although Mexicans are the flavor of the month).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819088</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821028</id>
	<title>I support Google on their stand</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263924540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We cannot let China bully us around stealing our intellectual properties Time for US corporation and Gov to wake up see all the IT jobs from MS,  IBM, Oracle, Dell, HP and Apple moved abroad. We have lost all manufacturing Jobs nothing I mean nothing is made here except weapons even they are sub'd out to some other countries Even our basic food comes from abroad. We have turned into a consuming society. I worked at Dell 10 years and saw the change coming rapidly last 5 yeas now all development is done in India or China. I dont want my Kids to work for Chinese company where they are ensalve and punished.</p><p>This ressesion is due to the fact we dont manufacture but just consume if this keeps going on not sure what will our kids have in next decade. We need to call our congressmen  and senate to pay attention and support google.</p><p>We love our freedom, democracy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.....not dictatorship  and corruption like china .</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We can not let China bully us around stealing our intellectual properties Time for US corporation and Gov to wake up see all the IT jobs from MS , IBM , Oracle , Dell , HP and Apple moved abroad .
We have lost all manufacturing Jobs nothing I mean nothing is made here except weapons even they are sub 'd out to some other countries Even our basic food comes from abroad .
We have turned into a consuming society .
I worked at Dell 10 years and saw the change coming rapidly last 5 yeas now all development is done in India or China .
I dont want my Kids to work for Chinese company where they are ensalve and punished.This ressesion is due to the fact we dont manufacture but just consume if this keeps going on not sure what will our kids have in next decade .
We need to call our congressmen and senate to pay attention and support google.We love our freedom , democracy .....not dictatorship and corruption like china .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We cannot let China bully us around stealing our intellectual properties Time for US corporation and Gov to wake up see all the IT jobs from MS,  IBM, Oracle, Dell, HP and Apple moved abroad.
We have lost all manufacturing Jobs nothing I mean nothing is made here except weapons even they are sub'd out to some other countries Even our basic food comes from abroad.
We have turned into a consuming society.
I worked at Dell 10 years and saw the change coming rapidly last 5 yeas now all development is done in India or China.
I dont want my Kids to work for Chinese company where they are ensalve and punished.This ressesion is due to the fact we dont manufacture but just consume if this keeps going on not sure what will our kids have in next decade.
We need to call our congressmen  and senate to pay attention and support google.We love our freedom, democracy .....not dictatorship  and corruption like china .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819438</id>
	<title>Re:Backing themselves into corner</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1263917880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Google is positioning itself so that their only two options will be to tuck their tail between their legs and do China's bidding or pull out and lose all the invested capital.  China will not back down they will never let themselves appear weak.</p></div><p>Google can afford to lose the investment. Until someone does make the sacrifice, everyone else is going to cave to China. When someone stands up to them, others will follow.</p><p>But not selling in China is no big deal. They're  make and sell what we won't sell them, even if they have to build it from pirated plans. What will make the difference is when someone refuses to buy from China. China will respond by shuttering, which will only propagate the intended cut-off: If you won't buy from us, we won't sell to you. Who's to suffer? Walmart shoppers?</p><p>The marketplace, taken as a whole, has much more power than any government. If it decides to act as a whole, either they'll win, or everyone will lose with China losing far more.</p><p>If Google doesn't do this, it'll be a long time before anyone does, if ever. So fuck China. If Google does this I'm prepared to back them by buying stock.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google is positioning itself so that their only two options will be to tuck their tail between their legs and do China 's bidding or pull out and lose all the invested capital .
China will not back down they will never let themselves appear weak.Google can afford to lose the investment .
Until someone does make the sacrifice , everyone else is going to cave to China .
When someone stands up to them , others will follow.But not selling in China is no big deal .
They 're make and sell what we wo n't sell them , even if they have to build it from pirated plans .
What will make the difference is when someone refuses to buy from China .
China will respond by shuttering , which will only propagate the intended cut-off : If you wo n't buy from us , we wo n't sell to you .
Who 's to suffer ?
Walmart shoppers ? The marketplace , taken as a whole , has much more power than any government .
If it decides to act as a whole , either they 'll win , or everyone will lose with China losing far more.If Google does n't do this , it 'll be a long time before anyone does , if ever .
So fuck China .
If Google does this I 'm prepared to back them by buying stock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google is positioning itself so that their only two options will be to tuck their tail between their legs and do China's bidding or pull out and lose all the invested capital.
China will not back down they will never let themselves appear weak.Google can afford to lose the investment.
Until someone does make the sacrifice, everyone else is going to cave to China.
When someone stands up to them, others will follow.But not selling in China is no big deal.
They're  make and sell what we won't sell them, even if they have to build it from pirated plans.
What will make the difference is when someone refuses to buy from China.
China will respond by shuttering, which will only propagate the intended cut-off: If you won't buy from us, we won't sell to you.
Who's to suffer?
Walmart shoppers?The marketplace, taken as a whole, has much more power than any government.
If it decides to act as a whole, either they'll win, or everyone will lose with China losing far more.If Google doesn't do this, it'll be a long time before anyone does, if ever.
So fuck China.
If Google does this I'm prepared to back them by buying stock.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819164</id>
	<title>Standing up to the China bully.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263916440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think that the delay of the launch of the Android based Google mobile phones is a good show of intentions from Google that they are willing make unified front against the bullying that China does to all the government and corporate players who are trying to enter the Chinese market.  I have a feeling that this event might be the beginning of a widespread rally of corporations and will hopefully spread to governments to stand up to Chinese tactics.  China knows that they have a huge growing market on their hands and they are trying to control and bully any and all companies trying to enter that market.  They are trying to keep a tight grip of control on the whole situation.</p><p>Since they know that their market is so in demand that nobody is willing to stand up to them and call them on their bullying.  They are pushing outwards with corporate espionage trying to grab as much research and information as possible from foreign firms to bring it in-house to try and jump-start local corporate and government interests ahead of the foreign companies who are coming in slowly to the market.  If they can successfully grab research on the Android based OS and Google phone you know that they will quickly try to bring something similar to that to market through one of their shell corporations and leverage counterfeit manufacturers to produce a similar product to try and capitalize on the mobile phone market ahead of Google and other companies.</p><p>China's foreign policy is to do anything to get ahead, including human rights violations, corporate espionage, and other underhanded practices and they only stop their actions once they are caught and exposed by someone bigger than them, and no even then.</p><p>I believe that Google would be foolish to abandon the Chinese market over this event, and I think that they will take some kind of action against China, but it will be short of fully pulling out of there in entirety.  I'm curious to see how this whole thing plays out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that the delay of the launch of the Android based Google mobile phones is a good show of intentions from Google that they are willing make unified front against the bullying that China does to all the government and corporate players who are trying to enter the Chinese market .
I have a feeling that this event might be the beginning of a widespread rally of corporations and will hopefully spread to governments to stand up to Chinese tactics .
China knows that they have a huge growing market on their hands and they are trying to control and bully any and all companies trying to enter that market .
They are trying to keep a tight grip of control on the whole situation.Since they know that their market is so in demand that nobody is willing to stand up to them and call them on their bullying .
They are pushing outwards with corporate espionage trying to grab as much research and information as possible from foreign firms to bring it in-house to try and jump-start local corporate and government interests ahead of the foreign companies who are coming in slowly to the market .
If they can successfully grab research on the Android based OS and Google phone you know that they will quickly try to bring something similar to that to market through one of their shell corporations and leverage counterfeit manufacturers to produce a similar product to try and capitalize on the mobile phone market ahead of Google and other companies.China 's foreign policy is to do anything to get ahead , including human rights violations , corporate espionage , and other underhanded practices and they only stop their actions once they are caught and exposed by someone bigger than them , and no even then.I believe that Google would be foolish to abandon the Chinese market over this event , and I think that they will take some kind of action against China , but it will be short of fully pulling out of there in entirety .
I 'm curious to see how this whole thing plays out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that the delay of the launch of the Android based Google mobile phones is a good show of intentions from Google that they are willing make unified front against the bullying that China does to all the government and corporate players who are trying to enter the Chinese market.
I have a feeling that this event might be the beginning of a widespread rally of corporations and will hopefully spread to governments to stand up to Chinese tactics.
China knows that they have a huge growing market on their hands and they are trying to control and bully any and all companies trying to enter that market.
They are trying to keep a tight grip of control on the whole situation.Since they know that their market is so in demand that nobody is willing to stand up to them and call them on their bullying.
They are pushing outwards with corporate espionage trying to grab as much research and information as possible from foreign firms to bring it in-house to try and jump-start local corporate and government interests ahead of the foreign companies who are coming in slowly to the market.
If they can successfully grab research on the Android based OS and Google phone you know that they will quickly try to bring something similar to that to market through one of their shell corporations and leverage counterfeit manufacturers to produce a similar product to try and capitalize on the mobile phone market ahead of Google and other companies.China's foreign policy is to do anything to get ahead, including human rights violations, corporate espionage, and other underhanded practices and they only stop their actions once they are caught and exposed by someone bigger than them, and no even then.I believe that Google would be foolish to abandon the Chinese market over this event, and I think that they will take some kind of action against China, but it will be short of fully pulling out of there in entirety.
I'm curious to see how this whole thing plays out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819088</id>
	<title>More should follow their example.</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1263916080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The world worked fine before China got industrialised and made all of our stuff using cheap labour and materials by exploiting the oppressed workforce.<br> <br>Let's go back to home-grown industry and leave China to destroy themselves. Our respective economies could do with the business.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The world worked fine before China got industrialised and made all of our stuff using cheap labour and materials by exploiting the oppressed workforce .
Let 's go back to home-grown industry and leave China to destroy themselves .
Our respective economies could do with the business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The world worked fine before China got industrialised and made all of our stuff using cheap labour and materials by exploiting the oppressed workforce.
Let's go back to home-grown industry and leave China to destroy themselves.
Our respective economies could do with the business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818650</id>
	<title>Yoink!....No Google for you China</title>
	<author>xgr3gx</author>
	<datestamp>1263913560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google should just say sorry China - you get no google anymore.<br>Although it's hard to say no to market where 100 Million ad impressions is a slow day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google should just say sorry China - you get no google anymore.Although it 's hard to say no to market where 100 Million ad impressions is a slow day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google should just say sorry China - you get no google anymore.Although it's hard to say no to market where 100 Million ad impressions is a slow day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821944</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1263928500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Their mantra is becoming more than just words.</p></div></blockquote><p>Maybe.  I'm more inclined to think they balanced possible profit on one side versus risk and the general pain in the ass factor on the other - and decided the game ain't worth the candle.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Their mantra is becoming more than just words.Maybe .
I 'm more inclined to think they balanced possible profit on one side versus risk and the general pain in the ass factor on the other - and decided the game ai n't worth the candle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their mantra is becoming more than just words.Maybe.
I'm more inclined to think they balanced possible profit on one side versus risk and the general pain in the ass factor on the other - and decided the game ain't worth the candle.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820418</id>
	<title>Re:"Don't be evil" is put to the test</title>
	<author>Sheik Yerbouti</author>
	<datestamp>1263921960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This makes no sense they had like what 30\% of search in China and 600MM a year in revenue. Yahoo Microsoft et al. have much much less than that and they see no need to walk away from China. They are the second largest search provider in China you don't walk away from that lightly and you don't run away when you are GAINING market share. So that's just tripe I can't see why people think this would be insightful at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This makes no sense they had like what 30 \ % of search in China and 600MM a year in revenue .
Yahoo Microsoft et al .
have much much less than that and they see no need to walk away from China .
They are the second largest search provider in China you do n't walk away from that lightly and you do n't run away when you are GAINING market share .
So that 's just tripe I ca n't see why people think this would be insightful at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This makes no sense they had like what 30\% of search in China and 600MM a year in revenue.
Yahoo Microsoft et al.
have much much less than that and they see no need to walk away from China.
They are the second largest search provider in China you don't walk away from that lightly and you don't run away when you are GAINING market share.
So that's just tripe I can't see why people think this would be insightful at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818754</id>
	<title>They have to be careful ...</title>
	<author>Chrisq</author>
	<datestamp>1263914100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They have to be careful. After all the android is open source and China certainly has the capability of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell\_phone\_industry\_in\_China" title="wikipedia.org">making their own mobile phones</a> [wikipedia.org]. If they don't sell in China, China could just make its own Android, and use the economies of scale to export it to the West too. This threat is a bit like a Scotsman saying he won't sell his whiskey in Nashville</htmltext>
<tokenext>They have to be careful .
After all the android is open source and China certainly has the capability of making their own mobile phones [ wikipedia.org ] .
If they do n't sell in China , China could just make its own Android , and use the economies of scale to export it to the West too .
This threat is a bit like a Scotsman saying he wo n't sell his whiskey in Nashville</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have to be careful.
After all the android is open source and China certainly has the capability of making their own mobile phones [wikipedia.org].
If they don't sell in China, China could just make its own Android, and use the economies of scale to export it to the West too.
This threat is a bit like a Scotsman saying he won't sell his whiskey in Nashville</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818768</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263914220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>of course, everything else is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>of course , everything else is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of course, everything else is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819130</id>
	<title>related topic: China ends Avatar showing</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1263916320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>China ended Avatar's run today, the largest grossing film ever in China. The governemnt complained there were too many foreign films in China and not enough native ones.</htmltext>
<tokenext>China ended Avatar 's run today , the largest grossing film ever in China .
The governemnt complained there were too many foreign films in China and not enough native ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China ended Avatar's run today, the largest grossing film ever in China.
The governemnt complained there were too many foreign films in China and not enough native ones.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30822146</id>
	<title>Bottom line</title>
	<author>jDeepbeep</author>
	<datestamp>1263929220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any government that even attempts to compromise my servers... is not a government I want to cater to any longer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any government that even attempts to compromise my servers... is not a government I want to cater to any longer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any government that even attempts to compromise my servers... is not a government I want to cater to any longer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30822860</id>
	<title>Re:They have to be careful ...</title>
	<author>jzhos</author>
	<datestamp>1263931440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't that the whole point of open source? Anyone can have access to it, and the source is not fully controlled by a single company?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that the whole point of open source ?
Anyone can have access to it , and the source is not fully controlled by a single company ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that the whole point of open source?
Anyone can have access to it, and the source is not fully controlled by a single company?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818754</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30826112
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30823558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30825944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30822860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30822176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30827936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_19_1312217_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820338
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30822176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819878
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818710
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818974
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819200
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819030
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820418
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818994
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820406
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819240
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819210
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30825944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821944
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30822860
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819078
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820648
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819130
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818664
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819372
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30823558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818760
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30827936
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30826112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818750
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818976
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819300
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821462
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30821622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30819074
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818892
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30820622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_19_1312217.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_19_1312217.30818782
</commentlist>
</conversation>
